Today we're talking about Samsung's camera app on the Galaxy S23 Ultra — because I know you bought this flagship to squeeze the most out of its cameras without falling back on GCam. Yes, I saw plenty of comments along those lines on my channel (which, fair warning, is in Portuguese).
Get comfortable, because today we're having another nice little photography class.
Where to start
Once again, I'm not bringing just a tutorial. I want to start with the more technical side, so you genuinely understand the whys behind each decision in your photography, each name on the screen — including what you can simply skip because it makes no sense for you.
Imagine deciding to shoot everything at 50 MP because it's a bigger number, and in RAW because it's "unedited, so it must be better".
You'll end up with countless raw photos, each taking up around 120 MB of your storage, sitting there forever because they still need editing — and you may not even know how.
Well, that's exactly what we're going to learn to avoid today.
First, the optics: the Galaxy S23 Ultra has 4 cameras, split across 12 MP, 50 MP and 200 MP.
Why does this matter? Because megapixels are about the size of the image, not its quality. Those huge numbers exist to impress the customer. It's not that they never translate into quality — but before they reach us as specs, they hit us as marketing.
That said: 200 MP and 50 MP produce enormous photos in terms of information, and therefore in file size — something with basically no practical application for most people.
So let's focus on 12 MP and 50 MP — but mostly on the main camera's 12 MP.
Here's a quick explanation of how Samsung gets to that number: it uses pixel binning to merge 4 pixels into 1. Divide 50 by 4 and you get 12.5 MP — the 12 MP the system offers you.
And the 50 MP? I still find it an unnecessarily large file for the average user, who's probably after a camera for sharing moments on social media. And even if not — the 12 MP will still give you a more than adequate level of detail.
Another important point is the fixed f1.7 aperture, which produces files with a lot of background blur and some loss of structure, since the depth of field is shallow. Depending on what you're shooting, very little stays in focus — and we lose sharpness across the rest of the photo.
That's why Samsung's native app applies post-processing that's sometimes aggressive: to correct details that a less experienced user would probably blame on a "bad camera".
No, it's not the camera failing. That's simply what the sensor is actually capturing.
Expert RAW vs Pro Mode
With that out of the way, we can talk about the two modes the Galaxy S23 Ultra offers to whoever wants more control over the camera: Pro Mode and Expert RAW. What's the difference?
They're basically the same, and equally similar to the default camera mode — the difference being they're less about features and more about the technical metrics of photography: histogram, file format, aperture, shutter speed, focus and so on.
In both modes you can shoot either raw files or JPGs.
To be honest, I never quite understood why Samsung created both.
I only found one tangible difference: in Pro Mode you can control the optimization level of JPG shots. Beyond that, everything stays extremely similar.
JPG vs DNG
This is the heart of the discussion, and probably the main reason to use these modes at all: getting your photos in RAW — literally, raw.
Do you know the difference between JPG and DNG?
Put simply, JPG is the most common photo format: it's finished and compressed, ready to use, but with adjustments baked directly into the file.
And DNG? That's a format with far greater information retention — that's why we call it raw. In theory, it holds exactly what the sensor captured, all the light data that reached it. That's why the file is big: nothing has interfered yet to dictate how it should be finished. That part is up to you!
Hence the importance of knowing when to use each type of file.
What I noticed in each mode
Expert RAW
- There's already some processing applied, despite the RAW label. You can tell by a certain refinement in the curves of whatever you're shooting — it feels like more of the photo is sharp, when it's really post-processing adding sharpness to the file. It also partially removes the haze that comes from the fixed f1.7 aperture, as I explained earlier.
- The file is smaller than the Pro Mode raw, which points to some level of software intervention.
- My editing software, Luminar, wouldn't open files from this mode. Photoshop would.
Pro Mode
- Here I noticed no post-processing. It genuinely looks like a raw file — you can even see the characteristic f1.7 haze, uncorrected.
- The file is larger than what Expert RAW produces, since it retains more data.
- My editing software, Luminar, opened it normally.
My take on when to use each mode
We're almost at the end, so here's how I'd use each one.
I'll split this in two. First, Pro Mode — both raw and JPG.
If you want your photos as raw as possible for editing later, I'd prioritize Pro Mode's raw.
That's where you get the file closest to what the sensor can capture, free of software interference. The trade-off is a bigger file, especially at 50 MP. In my experience, I'd use this mode for landscapes, for that one meaningful shot, or for paid work — anything that will get a proper edit afterwards.
If you want a photo that's already presentable but lightly processed, I'd prioritize Pro Mode's JPG.
You get some processing, sharpness applied without going overboard, and a smaller file — ideal for everyday use. You can even pin it right next to the default Photo mode, something Expert RAW doesn't allow.
Now, Expert RAW and the default Photo mode.
With Expert RAW, I only found two scenarios where it seemed better: it gave some structure back to the 10x camera, which sometimes washes out — and it worked well for photos of objects, where you benefit from the processing while keeping some editing flexibility. Beyond that, you're getting a larger file with processing that looks a lot like the automatic mode's.
As for the default mode, you get a finished JPG, but a more heavily processed one.
You can see it in how the app tries to balance the photo's highlights and shadows — depending on the case, I'd even suggest setting the optimization to minimum.
This mode is ideal for most day-to-day scenarios, but with a level of software interference I sometimes find excessive.
Wrapping up
That's it — I hope I've added something to the discussion with my take. You may have arrived here expecting a plain comparison, but I wouldn't be happy doing something mechanical, without you truly understanding how each of these decisions plays out in your photography.
Keep in mind that much of what was said here applies to professional cameras too — the theory is the same.
One more thing: everything here comes from my own perceptions and my own use. It's not universal truth — so feel free to run your own tests and reach your own conclusions.
Now you tell me which of the two modes you plan to use, which one won you over — or whether you already knew all of this. The conversation continues on the channel (in Portuguese) and on Reddit, where I hang out often.
I'll stop here. Cheers!
Frequently asked questions
What's the difference between Expert RAW and Pro Mode? They're largely the same, both built around the technical side of photography — histogram, file format, aperture, shutter speed, focus. The one tangible difference I found is that Pro Mode lets you control the optimization level of JPG shots.
Which one should I use on the Galaxy S23 Ultra? Pro Mode's raw for anything you'll edit afterwards — landscapes, that one meaningful shot, paid work. Pro Mode's JPG for everyday photos that are already presentable. Expert RAW mainly for the 10x camera and for object photos.
Is Expert RAW really raw? Not entirely. There's already some processing applied despite the RAW label — you can see it in the added sharpness and in the partly corrected f1.7 haze. The file also comes out smaller than the Pro Mode raw.
Should I shoot at 50 MP or 200 MP? For most people, neither. Megapixels are about image size, not quality, and those modes produce enormous files. The main camera's 12 MP — pixel binning merging 4 pixels into 1 — already gives more than adequate detail.