Pixel 9 Pro Fold vs. Oppo Find N5 Camera Comparison: Which Pictures Look Better?
Foldable phones like the Pixel 9 Pro Fold and Oppo Find N5 have redefined smartphone design. But ultimately, what most people just want to know: How good are the cameras?
I snapped photos on both book-style foldables to see how the cameras stack up. Each phone had its strengths, from sharpness to texture to life-like colors, and they took turns claiming the "winner" title.
In general, you won't find the best phone cameras on foldables because of their design. A thinner phone calls for a smaller sensor and lenses, meaning even the best foldable cameras will be a step behind those on regular candy bar devices like the Pixel 9 Pro XL or Galaxy S25 Ultra. Still, if you're set on buying a foldable, you'll at least want to ensure you're getting the best camera possible. That's where this comparison can help.
First, let's start off with some camera specs. The Pixel 9 Pro Fold has a 48-megapixel wide, 10.5-megapixel ultrawide and 10.8-megapixel 5x telephoto camera, along with two 10-megapixel selfie cameras, one for the inner screen and the other for the cover screen. It starts at $1,800.
Now Playing: Pixel 9 Pro Fold vs. Oppo Find N5 Camera Comparison
04:42
The Oppo Find N5 has a 50-megapixel wide, 8-megapixel ultrawide and 50-megapixel periscope telephoto camera, and two 8-megapixel selfie cameras, one for the inner screen and another for the cover screen. It costs $2,499 Singapore dollars, which converts to roughly $1,870 -- but it isn't available in the US or Europe. Aside from camera specs, one of the biggest selling points of the Find N5 is how thin it is. While the Pixel clocks in at 10.5mm thick when closed, the Find N5 is just 8.93mm.
It's important to note that more megapixels don't automatically mean better photos, so I tested these phones' cameras in the real world. Here's what I found.
Pixel 9 Pro Fold vs. Oppo Find N5 photo comparisons
One of the biggest differences between photos on the Pixel 9 Pro Fold and the Oppo Find N5 is that the latter depicts more vivid colors. In these shots of tulips, you'll notice the reds and yellows of the petals in the Find N5 picture are brighter, as is the pool in the background. Even though there are slightly more shadows in the Pixel photo, you get more texture, especially in the petals and the bricks in the foreground.
This boils down to personal preference, and each photo has its strengths. The Find N5 adds vibrancy, but the Pixel does a better job of showing more true-to-life colors and details. So I will award this one to the Pixel 9 Pro Fold.
Tulips photographed on the Pixel 9 Pro Fold.
Abrar Al-Heeti/CNET
Tulips photographed on the Oppo Find N5.
Abrar Al-Heeti/CNET
In these portrait mode shots of my friend Raneem, you'll see the biggest difference is that the Pixel crops in closer, which I'm not particularly crazy about, but it's how the phone achieves that blurred background. Both phones do a great job with that bokeh effect, and my friend's face looks well-lit and clear in each.
This one's a tossup, but ultimately, I like the more even tones and slightly cooler colors on the Pixel photo. At the same time, I like the sharpness of Raneem's features on the Find N5 photo. So I'll give a point to each here.
A portrait mode shot taken on the Pixel 9 Pro Fold.
Abrar Al-Heeti/CNET
A portrait mode shot taken on the Oppo Find N5.
Abrar Al-Heeti/CNET
These photos were taken in the early afternoon in the bright California sunshine. Again, the Find N5 brightens things up more than the Pixel 9 Pro Fold, but the Pixel maintains a more true-to-life tone, especially with the grass.
Overall, both pictures are crisp, but you'll notice more subtle details like the tree branches in the Pixel shot being sharper and the blades of grass being more discernible too. So I think the Pixel wins here.
A garden photographed on the Pixel 9 Pro Fold.
Abrar Al-Heeti/CNET
A garden photographed on the Oppo Find N5.
Abrar Al-Heeti/CNET
These nighttime images taken in my living room show how each phone deals with harsher shadows. You'll notice how much deeper the dark colors are on the Find N5, like the writing on the accent pillow and the shadows around the lamp and in the lower left corner by the pink chair. I think the Pixel 9 Pro Fold does a better job evening out those shadows and creating a more consistent overall shot, so that's getting my vote here.
A night time shot on the Pixel 9 Pro Fold.
Abrar Al-Heeti/CNET
A night time shot on the Oppo Find N5.
Abrar Al-Heeti/CNET
Now onto zoom range. The Pixel 9 Pro Fold features .5x, 1x, 2x and 5x optical zoom, while the Find N5 has .6x, 1x, 2x, 3x and 6x optical zoom (zoom levels achieved partly thanks to sensor cropping). Again, the Find N5 tends to brighten up shots and reduce shadows, and I appreciate having a 3x zoom option for when you want to get close, but not too close.
Here's how the Pixel 9 Pro Fold performs at each zoom level:
0.5x on Pixel 9 Pro Fold.
Abrar Al-Heeti/CNET
1x on Pixel 9 Pro Fold.
Abrar Al-Heeti/CNET
2x on Pixel 9 Pro Fold.
Abrar Al-Heeti/CNET
5x on Pixel 9 Pro Fold.
Abrar Al-Heeti/CNET
And here's how the Oppo Find N5 performs -- the 6x zoom shot is my favorite because of how bold and vibrant the petals are:
0.6x on Oppo Find N5.
Abrar Al-Heeti/CNET
1x on Oppo Find N5.
Abrar Al-Heeti/CNET
2x on Oppo Find N5.
Abrar Al-Heeti/CNET
3x on Oppo Find N5.
Abrar Al-Heeti/CNET
6x on Oppo Find N5.
Abrar Al-Heeti/CNET
Lastly, selfies were taken on the cover screen cameras on the Pixel 9 Pro Fold and Oppo Find N5, respectively. The biggest thing that stands out is how much more the wood door's staining is amplified in the Find N5 shot, which is a bit excessive for me. You'll also notice the pink flowers on my jumpsuit pop more.
Both phones do a good job depicting my skin tone and adding a nice overall smoothness to my features. But again, I think the color balance throughout the Pixel 9 Pro Fold image puts it on top.
A selfie shot on the Pixel 9 Pro Fold.
Abrar Al-Heeti/CNET
A selfie shot on the Oppo Find N5.
Abrar Al-Heeti/CNET
Final thoughts
Celso Bulgatti/CNET
Camera comparisons are equal parts critique and personal preference. I like how the Oppo Find N5 brightens up some shots, but generally, I prefer the more true-to-life and even tones served up by the Pixel 9 Pro Fold, especially with images of people. The Pixel also tends to do better with low-light photos by minimizing shadows.
The good news is you'll get clear, well-lit shots with both phones -- which you'd certainly hope for, given their hefty price tags. Whether you're zooming in, snapping a selfie or tapping into portrait mode, each phone has a lot to flex, beyond those foldable screens.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Microsoft's ‘blue screen of death' has died at 40
June 28 (UPI) -- The infamous "blue screen of death," which featured a text frown and terrified those who experienced it, no longer exists after Microsoft killed it in favor of a simple black screen and error code. The blue screen has been in use since Windows 1.0 was made available in 1985, but it will be replaced by the new black screen without the frown with the Microsoft 11, version 24H2 systems starting this summer, CNET reported. Microsoft used the blue screen to indicate system failures and the need to restart the computer, which often meant a loss of data and time wasted on work that might not have been saved. The new black screen is a "simplified UI for unexpected restarts" and part of Microsoft's new resiliency program for the Windows operating system. The black screen is designed to make it much easier and faster to fix problems by providing a stop code and identifying the relevant system driver. Microsoft says it could reduce system recovery time to as little as 2 seconds following a computer crash. The tech giant announced the change on Thursday, which addresses concerns raised following the global CrowdStrike outage that affected more than 8 million computers due an undetected error last year on July 19. The outage affected 911 services, airline travel, television and public infrastructure.
Tom's Guide
an hour ago
- Tom's Guide
I've been using Android 16 for two weeks — here's why I'm so underwhelmed
Google's doing things a little differently with Android 16, compared to other recent Android upgrades. Not only has the software launched around 4 months earlier than Android 14 and 15, the biggest upgrades won't actually be arriving until later this year. In my professional opinion, those two things are almost certainly related. And it shows with the amount of things Android 16 can actually do compared to Android 15 — which is to say, not a lot. I've been using the final version of Android 16 for just under two weeks, and I have to say that I'm very disappointed. As bland and uninspiring as previous Android updates have been, Android 16 takes it to another level — and it doesn't even feel like an upgrade. The one thing that gets me most about Android 16 is that it's basically just a carbon copy of Android 15. I'm not saying that every version of Android has to be drastically different from its predecessors. In fact I've argued that Android having bland updates isn't necessarily a bad thing, so long as the updates are actually present. But that does need to offer something that you couldn't get on older software. Android 16 doesn't really offer that kind of experience. After a few days of using Android 16 I had a sudden urge to double check that the update had actually taken hold. The experience was so close to that of Android 15 that it didn't actually feel like I'd updated, and I had to dive into the system menus to check my phone was, in fact, running Android 16. To make matters more confusing, Android 16 is also only available on Pixel phones — and was released alongside the June Pixel feature drop. That means features like the new Pixel VIPs arrived alongside Android 16, but technically aren't part of it, meaning Android 16 has even less to offer than some people might have suspected. Sadly this doesn't change the fact that I think Pixel VIPs is a pretty useless feature that doesn't deserve the attention Google has been giving it. But sadly it's one of the only things Google actually can promote right now. To make matters worse Android 16 is filled with a bunch of bugs — two of which I've experienced pretty frequently. One of the best parts of having an Android phone is the back button, and in Android 16 it only works about 70% of the time. Google's promised fix can not come soon enough. The one big Android announcement we got at Google I/O was the Material Expressive 3 redesign. Android 16 was getting a whole new look, with the aim of making the software more personalized and easy on the eyes. Which is great, assuming you can get over Google's purple-heavy marketing, because Android has looked pretty samey for the past several years. Other features of note include Live Updates, which offers something similar to Apple's Live Activities and lets you keep tabs on important updates in real time. Though this was confirmed to be limited to food delivery and ride sharing apps at first. There's also an official Android desktop mode, officially called "Desktop Windowing." Google likens this feature to Samsung's DeX, and confirmed that it offers more of a desktop experience — with moveable app windows and a taskbar. It's unclear whether that would be limited to external displays, or if you could do it on your phone too. These are all great things, but the slight issue is that none of them are actually available yet. Material Expressive isn't coming until an unspecified point later this year, while Desktop Windowing will only enter beta once the Android 16 QPR3 beta 2 is released. Since we're still on the QPR 1 beta, right now, it's going to be a while before anyone gets to use that particular future. Assuming they have a "large screen device," which sounds like this won't be available on regular phones. Live Updates is an interesting one, because all Google material acts like this feature is already available. But I can't find any evidence that it's actually live and working. No mentions in the settings menu, nothing on social media and no tutorials on how it actually works. It's nowhere to be found. Asking 3 features to carry an entire software update is already pushing it, but when those features just aren't available at launch, it begs the question of why Google actually bothered to release Android 16 so early. Android 16's early release didn't do it any favors. It seems Google rushed it to ensure the Pixel 10 launches with it, but the update feels unfinished — virtually no different from Android 15. Like Apple with iOS 18, Google is selling a future promise rather than a present product. Android 16 ends up being one of the blandest updates in years. Honestly, a short delay to finish key features would've been better.
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
Can Agentic AI Bring The Pope Or The Queen Back To Life — And Rewrite History?
Can Agentic AI Bring the Pope or the Queen Back to Life — and Rewrite History? Elon Musk recently sparked global debate by claiming AI could soon be powerful enough to rewrite history. He stated on X (formerly Twitter) that his AI platform, Grok, could 'rewrite the entire corpus of human knowledge, adding missing information and deleting errors.' This bold claim arrives alongside a recent groundbreaking announcement from Google: the launch of Google Veo3 AI Video Generator, a state-of-the-art AI video generation model capable of producing cinematic-quality videos from text and images. Part of the Google Gemini ecosystem, Google Veo3 AI generates lifelike videos complete with synchronized audio, dynamic camera movements, and coherent multi-scene narratives. Its intuitive editing tools, combined with accessibility through platforms like Google Gemini, Flow, Vids, and Vertex AI, open new frontiers for filmmakers, marketers, educators, and game designers alike. At the same time, industry leaders — including OpenAI, Anthropic, Microsoft Copilot, and Mistral (Claude) — are racing to build more sophisticated agentic AI systems. Unlike traditional reactive AI tools, these agents are designed to reason, plan, and orchestrate autonomous actions based on goals, feedback, and long-term context. This evolution marks a shift toward AI systems that function much like a skilled executive assistant — and beyond. The Promise: Immortalizing Legacy Through Agentic AI Together, these advances raise a fascinating question: What if agentic AI could bring historical figures like the Pope or the Queen back to life digitally? Could it even reshape our understanding of history itself? Imagine an AI trained on decades — or even a century — of video footage, writings, audio recordings, and public appearances by iconic figures such as Pope Francis or Queen Elizabeth II. Using agentic AI, we could create realistic, interactive digital avatars capable of offering insights, delivering messages, or simulating how these individuals might respond to today's complex issues based on their documented philosophies and behaviors. This application could benefit millions. For example, Catholic followers might seek guidance and blessings from a digital Pope, educators could build immersive historical simulations, and advisors to the British royal family could analyze past decision-making styles. After all, as the saying goes, 'history repeats itself,' and access to nuanced, context-rich perspectives from the past could illuminate our present. The Risk: The Dangerous Flip Side — Rewriting Truth Itself However, the same technologies that can immortalize could also distort and manipulate reality. If agentic AI can reconstruct the past, what prevents it — or malicious actors — from rewriting it? Autonomous agents that control which stories are amplified or suppressed online pose a serious threat. We risk a future where deepfakes, synthetic media, and AI-generated propaganda blur the line between fact and fiction. Already, misinformation campaigns and fake news challenge our ability to discern truth. Agentic AI could exponentially magnify these problems, making it harder than ever to distinguish between genuine history and fabricated narratives. Imagine a world where search engines no longer provide objective facts, but the version of history shaped by governments, corporations, or AI systems themselves. This could lead to widespread confusion, social polarization, and a fundamental erosion of trust in information. Ethics, Regulation, and Responsible Innovation The advent of agentic AI demands not only excitement but also ethical foresight and regulatory vigilance. Programming AI agents to operate autonomously requires walking a fine line between innovation and manipulation. Transparency in training data, explainability in AI decisions, and strict regulation of how agents interact are essential safeguards. The critical question is not just 'Can we?' but 'Should we?' Policymakers, developers, and industry leaders must collaborate to establish global standards and oversight mechanisms that ensure AI technologies serve the public good. Just as financial markets and pharmaceuticals drugs are regulated to protect society, so too must the AI agents shaping our future be subject to robust guardrails. As the old adage goes: 'Technology is neither good nor bad. It's how we use it that makes all the difference.' Navigating the Future of Agentic AI and Historical Data The convergence of generative video models like Google Veo3, visionary leaders like Elon Musk, and the rapid rise of agentic AI paints a complex and compelling picture. Yes, we may soon see lifelike digital recreations of the Pope or the Queen delivering messages, advising future generations, and influencing public discourse. But whether these advancements become tools of enlightenment or distortion depends entirely on how we govern, regulate, and ethically deploy these technologies today. The future of agentic AI — especially when it touches our history and culture — must be navigated with care, responsibility, and a commitment to truth.
