AR/VR Headset Camera Quality – Apple Vision Pro vs. Meta Quest 3 Compared by DXOMARK

Immersive Filmmaking

by Nino Leitner10 days ago

As the boundaries between digital and physical realities continue to blur, the imaging technology inside AR/VR headsets is coming under increasing scrutiny. DXOMARK, the French image quality benchmarking authority known for its rigorous testing of smartphone and display performance, has turned its attention to two of the most prominent players in the mixed reality space: Apple’s Vision Pro and Meta’s Quest 3.

In a recent video presentation titled “Evaluating Image Quality in ARVR Headsets – A Comprehensive Assessment of Texture Preservation, Color Fidelity, and 3D Reconstruction,” DXOMARK’s Fabien from their Paris headquarters offered a technical comparison of the two devices’ camera systems. The analysis focused on how image capture quality influences immersion, realism, and user safety—critical factors for any head-mounted display system.

How DXOMARK tests AR/VR headset camera quality—and how it aligns with CineD’s Lab standards

DXOMARK has built a reputation on detailed, protocol-driven image quality evaluations, often shaping the competitive landscape in the smartphone and camera markets. Their Analyzer product suite—encompassing hardware, software, and automated testing environments—is used by manufacturers and researchers globally to quantify aspects like exposure accuracy, color rendering, texture preservation, and visual noise.

At CineD, we share a similar commitment to empirical, lab-based evaluation. Our CineD Lab Test methods focus on image quality metrics relevant to filmmakers, such as dynamic range, rolling shutter performance, and exposure latitude, using standardized methods in controlled environments. While our lab tests primarily serve digital cinema cameras and hybrid mirrorless systems, the principle remains the same: quantify performance under reproducible conditions to empower informed decision-making.

As AR/VR imaging systems begin to intersect with professional production—whether through virtual production pipelines, immersive storytelling, or real-time VFX—DXOMARK’s work in this space complements our own mission. Their focus on AR/VR headset camera quality reflects a growing need for rigorous image assessment as these devices increasingly factor into visual workflows.

Their video breaks down the evaluation into three major pillars: color fidelity, texture and noise, and dynamic range.

Color accuracy in AR/VR headsets: Apple Vision Pro vs. Meta Quest 3

To evaluate color, DXOMARK used color checker charts under various lighting conditions. Notably, both devices performed with limited white balance and exposure correction—an intentional design choice, Fabien explained, because AR/VR images are meant for real-time viewing rather than sharing. This allows manufacturers to prioritize naturalistic rendering over photographic accuracy.

Even so, the Apple Vision Pro consistently demonstrated more accurate color rendering across multiple lighting environments compared to the Meta Quest 3. The Vision Pro’s slight edge in color performance, however, came with the caveat that the measured differences were most pronounced under controlled lighting conditions, such as D65 (simulating daylight), which may not fully reflect typical use cases in mixed reality environments.

Texture preservation and image noise in AR/VR cameras compared

Texture preservation is a crucial factor in maintaining realism, particularly in pass-through or mixed reality modes. DXOMARK employed its proprietary Deadleaf chart to analyze four key texture-related metrics: texture MTF, edge MTF, visual noise, and ringing.

The Meta Quest 3, while showing slightly better fine detail in certain areas, suffered from visible ringing artifacts due to aggressive sharpening algorithms. Compression noise—manifesting as blocky artifacts in flat regions—was also a recurring issue on the Quest 3, which detracted from the perceived image quality.

In contrast, the Apple Vision Pro showed cleaner image output with fewer compression artifacts and less pronounced oversharpening. Despite capturing slightly less texture in some regions, its overall visual fidelity was deemed superior by DXOMARK.

Dynamic range performance: Apple Vision Pro vs. Meta Quest 3 headset cameras

DXOMARK’s custom HDR test scene highlighted a stark difference in dynamic range performance. The Vision Pro preserved more highlight and shadow detail across the board, delivering a more balanced and immersive image.

However, Fabien pointed out a practical flaw in Apple’s hardware design: the placement of the headset’s camera makes it easy for users to smudge the lens while putting the headset on or taking it off. These smudges introduce flare and reduce the dynamic range, an issue not present in the Meta Quest 3 due to its more exposed camera design.

In case you missed our podcast on immersive video filmmaking for the Apple Vision Pro with Christoph Tilley from MXR Productions, check it out below:

We also interviewed Blackmagic Design about their upcoming Immersive Video workflow with the new URSA Cine Immersive camera and DaVinci Resolve 20 with their immersive tools recently at NAB. You can check that out here:

Why camera benchmarking matters in AR/VR headset development

It’s great that DXOMARK is trying to establish objective, protocol-based analysis to complement human perception studies in evaluating image quality for AR/VR. Their Analyzer tools are already being used by OEMs across industries—from smartphones and automotive cameras to drones and security imaging systems—and now also developers and manufacturers in the XR space have access to more standardized testing. This can only mean good things for end users.

DXOMARK has a more detailed webinar planned in the coming months for those interested in a deeper dive into the methodology and results. I will keep an eye out for that one, and let you know.

What’s your take on immersive video – both shooting it and consuming it? Let us know in the comments below.