The camera system — twin ~1-inch 200MP main and 200MP 85mm periscope plus a large ultrawide — is the best-equipped on any 2026 phone and the entire reason the device exists.
Video is class-leading: 4K 120fps 10-bit Log with Dolby Vision recorded on-device (no SSD), 8K30 across the rear cameras, and 4K 60fps on every lens including the selfie.
Battery life is genuinely strong — roughly 16 hours active-use score, ~7h heavy screen-on time, and 13–14 hour days with charge to spare, on the 6,600mAh cell.
The Zeiss 200mm/400mm telephoto extenders deliver real, usable optical reach (8.7x and 17.4x) with surprisingly good handheld stabilisation.
100W wired charging refills the big battery in roughly 46–50 minutes, with 40W wireless on top.
Pros & Cons
Vivo X300 Ultra
Pros
The camera system — twin ~1-inch 200MP main and 200MP 85mm periscope plus a large ultrawide — is the best-equipped on any 2026 phone and the entire reason the device exists.
Video is class-leading: 4K 120fps 10-bit Log with Dolby Vision recorded on-device (no SSD), 8K30 across the rear cameras, and 4K 60fps on every lens including the selfie.
Battery life is genuinely strong — roughly 16 hours active-use score, ~7h heavy screen-on time, and 13–14 hour days with charge to spare, on the 6,600mAh cell.
The Zeiss 200mm/400mm telephoto extenders deliver real, usable optical reach (8.7x and 17.4x) with surprisingly good handheld stabilisation.
Detailed Comparison
Cameras
Vivo X300 Ultra
The reason the X300 Ultra exists: a near-1-inch 200MP 35mm main (Sony Lytia 901), a 200MP 85mm periscope, and the best ultrawide sensor on the market, tuned with Zeiss. Reviewers near-universally rate it the best-equipped camera phone of 2026 — with two important caveats: the 35mm default is divisive, and on raw image quality it's only marginally ahead of the cheaper X300 Pro.
At the center is a 200MP main that's nearly a 1-inch sensor (Sony Lytia 901), backed by a 200MP 85mm-equivalent periscope telephoto — the phone is focused on camera quality and, even more so, video.
Featuring three extra-large image sensors, the X300 Ultra's uncompromising camera hardware earned a solid rating — but it's hardly better than the cheaper X300 Pro in actual camera performance despite the top-notch hardware.
I'm not sure I've seen better results from even 1-inch sensors — it's so close to 1-inch and the 35mm focal length makes for more cinematic-looking shots; the 85mm periscope is the sweet spot for portraits.
TechTalkTown may earn a commission from purchases made through links below. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. This does not influence our reviews. Learn more.
The 6.82-inch 144Hz LTPO AMOLED is among the best displays available, hitting ~1,900 nits in auto and ~3,300 nits peak.
Deal Breakers
The 35mm (~1.5x) default main focal length is polarising — many reviewers find it too tight/zoomed versus the usual 24mm.
It heats up quickly under sustained camera or gaming load and throttles to roughly 60–65% stability in prolonged stress tests.
The full experience needs the expensive Photography Kit — the global bundle approaches €2,600 and the 200mm lens isn't in every box.
Notebookcheck found it 'hardly better than the X300 Pro in camera performance despite top-notch hardware', and Linus preferred Oppo's less over-sharpened processing.
It launched in China first with a rocky early software state (fixed via updates), and global availability/pricing is limited and steep.
Xiaomi 17 Ultra
What Reviewers Agree On
Class-leading camera hardware: a 1.0"-type LOFIC main sensor and a true continuous mechanical optical zoom (75–100mm) that GSMArena rates as quite probably the best of its kind
Among the very best phones for photography on the market today, possibly the single best for stills
Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 delivers flagship-class performance — ~20% faster CPU and ~23% faster GPU than the previous generation, leading the iPhone in multi-core
Bright 6.9-inch 120Hz LTPO AMOLED rated at 3,500 nits peak with strong measured outdoor brightness
Distinctive physical camera controls (zoom ring on the Leica edition, Leica film simulations) that no mainstream rival offers
6 years of security patches confirmed (EOL February 2032)
Deal Breakers
HyperOS is widely seen as lagging the hardware — camera-app limitations, automatic JPEG post-processing criticised as poor, and a Phone Arena verdict that it's 'the best camera phone you'll hate using every day'
The global model runs noticeably hotter and shorter on battery than the China version, draining ~10% per hour in mixed use and losing more battery and running hotter than the OnePlus 15 and Oppo Find X9 Pro in head-to-head endurance
Very expensive globally — about $1,750 for the 17 Ultra and ~$2,300 for the Leitzphone — narrowing its value versus the previous generation
Polarising design and a usability tax: it's a camera-first device that some reviewers and users find feels more like a toy than a polished daily phone
100W wired charging refills the big battery in roughly 46–50 minutes, with 40W wireless on top.
The 6.82-inch 144Hz LTPO AMOLED is among the best displays available, hitting ~1,900 nits in auto and ~3,300 nits peak.
Cons
The 35mm (~1.5x) default main focal length is polarising — many reviewers find it too tight/zoomed versus the usual 24mm.
It heats up quickly under sustained camera or gaming load and throttles to roughly 60–65% stability in prolonged stress tests.
The full experience needs the expensive Photography Kit — the global bundle approaches €2,600 and the 200mm lens isn't in every box.
Notebookcheck found it 'hardly better than the X300 Pro in camera performance despite top-notch hardware', and Linus preferred Oppo's less over-sharpened processing.
It launched in China first with a rocky early software state (fixed via updates), and global availability/pricing is limited and steep.
Xiaomi 17 Ultra
Pros
Class-leading camera hardware: a 1.0"-type LOFIC main sensor and a true continuous mechanical optical zoom (75–100mm) that GSMArena rates as quite probably the best of its kind
Among the very best phones for photography on the market today, possibly the single best for stills
Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 delivers flagship-class performance — ~20% faster CPU and ~23% faster GPU than the previous generation, leading the iPhone in multi-core
Bright 6.9-inch 120Hz LTPO AMOLED rated at 3,500 nits peak with strong measured outdoor brightness
Distinctive physical camera controls (zoom ring on the Leica edition, Leica film simulations) that no mainstream rival offers
6 years of security patches confirmed (EOL February 2032)
Cons
HyperOS is widely seen as lagging the hardware — camera-app limitations, automatic JPEG post-processing criticised as poor, and a Phone Arena verdict that it's 'the best camera phone you'll hate using every day'
The global model runs noticeably hotter and shorter on battery than the China version, draining ~10% per hour in mixed use and losing more battery and running hotter than the OnePlus 15 and Oppo Find X9 Pro in head-to-head endurance
Very expensive globally — about $1,750 for the 17 Ultra and ~$2,300 for the Leitzphone — narrowing its value versus the previous generation
Polarising design and a usability tax: it's a camera-first device that some reviewers and users find feels more like a toy than a polished daily phone
It still holds the record for the best portrait-mode photos on a smartphone, especially at 85mm and 135mm; the 14mm ultrawide is sharp edge to edge.
Comparing it directly with the Oppo Find X9 Ultra, even though the Vivo looks great at a glance you could edit the Oppo image and get better detail because the Vivo isn't all over-sharpened and crusty.
Schools the Galaxy S26 Ultra in zoom quality without an excessive camera count — shaping up to be one of the best camera phones not just for 2026 but 2027 and 2028.
The 35mm main is divisive — many feel 24mm is better for phone photography and that 35mm is too tight; cropping to 23–28mm shows a noticeable detail drop.
Xiaomi 17 Ultra
The reason this phone exists. A 1-inch LOFIC main sensor and an industry-first continuous mechanical optical zoom put it at or near the top of the smartphone camera rankings — but JPEG processing and a steep learning curve divide opinion.
The 17 Ultra keeps a 1.0"-type main sensor while most makers go smaller; its main camera is quite probably the best of its kind and the phone is among the best for taking pictures currently on the market, possibly the best.
It combines two technologies not seen together in mobile before — a 1-inch LOFIC sensor in the main camera and a mechanical periscope with continuous optical zoom — reducing ghosting and capturing highlights and shadows in a single exposure.
Camera kit details: 23mm 50MP 1-inch main at fixed f/1.67, a 200MP 75–100mm true mechanical optical zoom (not a digital crop), and a 14mm 50MP f/2.2 ultrawide.
This is one of the best camera systems ever used on a smartphone, as was the 15 Ultra.
The sensor is excellent, but Xiaomi's automatic JPEG post-processing is an absolute disaster, and distant faces can look like paint blobs.
The bigger 1-inch sensor lets you get significantly closer with nicer background blur, and raw long exposures on a tripod are a real strength the iPhone can't match.
One long-term user found the cameras utterly underwhelming and sometimes downright horrible in video — Xiaomi really needs to fix the processing.
In a direct comparison, the Oppo Find X9 Ultra remained the best camera phone tested — the 17 Ultra didn't stand out as particularly better in any single way, though there's lots to love.
Telephoto closest focusing distance is around 30cm — worse than the Xiaomi 15 Ultra and roughly in line with competitors — and the Ultra showed the weakest resolution among the group when pushed to ~170mm.
Video
Vivo X300 Ultra
This is where the X300 Ultra has no real rival on Android: full-focal-length 4K 120fps 10-bit Log with Dolby Vision recorded on-device, 8K30 across the rear cameras, and 4K 60fps on literally every lens including the selfie and the external extenders.
It supports full focal-length 4K 120fps 10-bit Log recording with built-in 3D LUTs you can apply directly on the device, and can record up to 8K at 30fps with all the rear cameras.
Every single camera, even the selfie, can shoot 4K 60fps, and portrait mode can be shot at 4K 60fps across all rear sensors including the ultrawide and both external lenses.
Vivo's 4K 120fps Log Dolby Vision is possible directly on the phone without an SSD, whereas the iPhone shoots ProRes only at 4K 30fps and needs an attached SSD for 4K 60fps; portrait video on iPhone and Samsung tops out at 4K 30fps versus Vivo's 4K 60fps.
The periscope takes arguably the best, smoothest panning video I've ever seen from a telephoto camera at night, and this is probably the best ultrawide video I've ever seen from an Android smartphone.
The X300 Ultra also allows a higher bitrate in video recording — up to 1,200 Mbit in Log — with a separate dedicated mode for it.
There's a concern Vivo might be going the Apple route of locking high-bitrate video behind external SSD recording, and the phone heats up just minutes into the camera app under heavy push.
Xiaomi 17 Ultra
Serious video credentials — 4K120 Dolby Vision and log across the main and periscope sensors — undercut by odd software gaps and processing inconsistency.
Records 4K up to 120fps on the main and telephoto cameras, with Dolby Vision and log available for color grading.
All three lenses support 8K, but the ultrawide can't do 4K120, and despite 4K120 support the slow-motion menu only goes up to 1080p — odd software limitations.
A reviewer judged the iPhone 17 Pro Max the better of the two for video — the Xiaomi's footage is sharp 4K but a touch oversharpened and more contrasty.
Third-party pro apps like Blackmagic Camera and MotionCam Pro only get a fixed ~78mm field of view with no optical zoom range, making the mechanical zoom useless in a professional workflow.
Display
Vivo X300 Ultra
A 6.82-inch 144Hz LTPO AMOLED, now flat rather than quad-curved. Lab measurements put real brightness near 1,900 nits in auto and ~3,300 nits on a small window — among the best panels on any phone — and reviewers single out content consumption and clarity as standouts.
We measured a maximum of over 1,900 nits in auto-brightness mode and over 3,300 nits when lighting up a smaller portion of the screen.
Consuming content, scrolling the web, pixel-peeping and zooming in on text — it doesn't get any clearer, or with the 144Hz any smoother, than the display on the X300 Ultra.
It delivers an excellent max brightness of around 1,935 nits with a 75% white pattern and a peak of 3,328 nits with a 10% pattern.
Vivo has gone with a flat display this time, a clear shift from the quad-curved style of the X200 Ultra.
It's a 6.82-inch AMOLED with a claimed 4,500-nit HDR peak that can reach that figure in a one-person window watching HDR content; PWM sits around 3.5% at max brightness, better for flicker-sensitive users.
An absolutely stunning display with terrific, bass-heavy stereo speakers to match.
Xiaomi 17 Ultra
A 6.9-inch 1.5K LTPO AMOLED rated at 3,500 nits peak. Measured brightness is strong on small patches but middling full-screen, and one long-term user was pleasantly surprised by it.
6.9-inch M10 OLED LTPO flat display at 1.5K resolution, 120Hz, with up to 3,500 nits peak brightness, HDR10 and Dolby Vision.
In automatic brightness the screen measured over 1,100 nits, rising to over 3,600 nits on a small patch of the screen.
Manual full-screen white brightness reached only 675 nits in controlled testing — well below the headline peak figure.
The display surprised one long-term user in a positive way — not at the level of the Pixel 10 Pro's panel, but still rather good.
Performance
Vivo X300 Ultra
Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 plus Vivo's custom imaging silicon delivers flagship benchmark numbers and strong gaming, but the camera-heavy hardware runs hot — sustained stress tests show roughly 60–65% stability and the camera app warms it up fast.
At the heart is Qualcomm's current flagship Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5, supplemented by Vivo's custom VS1 and V3-Plus imaging chips.
It boots in 16 seconds (vs 21s for the S26 Ultra and 19s for the iPhone 17 Pro Max) and posts an AnTuTu score over 3,800,000, stronger than Samsung.
In a prolonged stress test it throttled CPU performance to about 60% of peak — in line with other high-powered flagships — and 3DMark stability landed around 63–66%.
It gets a bit hot after 30–40 minutes of gaming, but with no throttling even past an hour and never uncomfortable to hold; boost mode at max graphics gives around 4 hours of Wuthering Waves on a full charge.
Native 120fps gaming with smooth/very-high graphics in many titles, with temperature barely crossing 35°C and power draw around 4W in battle-royale modes.
Under sustained camera/imaging load the front reached ~46.8°C and the back ~45.2°C, and around 47°C the refresh rate drops slightly though not all the way to 60Hz.
Xiaomi 17 Ultra
Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 keeps it firmly in the flagship tier with strong gaming, though sustained behaviour and thermals draw mixed verdicts.
The Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 brings ~20% faster CPU, ~23% faster GPU and peak speeds up to 4.61GHz over the previous generation.
The iPhone has a slight single-core edge but the Xiaomi takes the lead in Geekbench multi-core.
Genshin Impact at very high settings ran 30 minutes at an average of 55.3fps with a 1% frame drop, while lighter titles like Honor of Kings averaged 107.8fps; both front and back stayed around 40°C.
It delivered significantly better gaming performance than the Xiaomi 17 Pro and performed better in the stress test than the 17 Pro with the same 16GB of RAM.
Delta Force ran for 23 minutes straight with impressive thermal management and no notable heating.
Battery & Charging
Vivo X300 Ultra
Vivo grew the silicon-carbon cell 10% to 6,600mAh while keeping the body the same size. Real-world endurance is strong — ~16h active-use score, ~7h heavy screen-on, 13–14 hour days with charge to spare — and 100W wired refills it in under an hour, with 40W wireless.
Vivo increased the battery by 10% to 6,600mAh despite the phone being practically the same size on paper.
In our battery test it earned an active-use score of almost 16 hours; 100W charging took it 0–66% in 30 minutes and a full charge in 46 minutes, plus 40W wireless. A charger is in the box except in Europe.
On the China version I'm finishing entire 13–14 hour days with 25–30% left; the global version keeps the 6,600mAh cell so battery life should comfortably last 12–13 hours of heavy use.
Getting nearly 7 hours of screen-on time with very heavy usage from the 6,600mAh silicon-carbon unit, with 100W wired and 40W wireless charging support.
After a 4-hour heavy-usage simulation the phone still had ~45% battery left, which is solid by today's standards, and 100W wired charging takes about 45 minutes to full.
In a head-to-head charge race against the Oppo Find X9 Ultra (80W), the Vivo on 100W finished first at 50 minutes 20 seconds to the Oppo's 52:39.
Xiaomi 17 Ultra
The single biggest divide in the coverage: lab tests record an excellent active-use score, but the global model's smaller battery, ~10%/hour real-world drain and heat make endurance inconsistent. Charging stepped down to 90W wired / 50W wireless.
The global 17 Ultra earned an excellent active-use battery score of over 19 hours, charging 0–70% in half an hour and to full in just 43 minutes.
After 3 months a user still had around 45% battery left at the end of the day when not using the camera intensively.
For a 6,000mAh battery, ~4 hours of screen-on time over a full day was disappointing — the S26 Ultra's 5,000mAh cell matched or beat it under the same camera-and-navigation use.
In a head-to-head extreme test the 17 Ultra ran hotter and lost more battery than the OnePlus 15 and Oppo Find X9 Pro at nearly every stage, finishing about 8 hours 8 minutes at 43.7°C.
The global model holds ~800mAh less than the China version and drains roughly 10% per hour, so it can't last a full 15-hour day the way the China version does.
