| Author |
Lumia 1020 vs 808 PV vs any potential rival. |
false_morel
Joined: Feb 24, 2010
Posts: 375
PM |
On 2013-10-25 15:43:34, Sassho wrote:
Dear false_morel don't waste you'r time with compares between 808 / 1020 - no way. 1020 has very ugly sharpened image , photos looks pretty only to 5mp and if not look on 100% zoom. With such horrible postprocessing and lens build 1020 / Z1 stay far far away from Octa or Iphone 5S quality.
[ This Message was edited by: Sassho on 2013-10-25 14:45 ]
I agree Nokia did a horrible job with postprocessing. But except for cases where Lumia 1020 is left completely on auto and goes for a way off WB or results in tinted images, the 1020 still pulls way ahead of the iPhone and Galaxy and the rest of the standard bunch. At least regarding noise and detail.
The oversharpening is harming the 1020 in normal images bringing unnecessary grains to the images.
But for landscapes for instance, this sharpening is an advantage. It pulls way ahead in such scenes over any other cameraphone.
The Black update should bring the 1020 to its much closer to its max though.
[ This Message was edited by: false_morel on 2013-10-25 14:54 ] |
|
|
Sassho
Joined: Nov 03, 2007
Posts: > 500
PM |
On 2013-10-25 15:51:57, false_morel wrote:
the 1020 still pulls way ahead of the iPhone and Galaxy and the rest of the standard bunch. At least regarding noise and detail.
I'm not shure for this. General 1020 / Z1 problem is Lens quality. Not good lens , not good image. Second bad thing is terrible image postprocess - this is horrible thing , I have no words for this. Don't like standart Octa quality - shot in 5mp as "pixel sampling mode"  The nice things in 1020 / Z1 are good color reproduction and large lens aperture. There is no such strong vignetting in 808 PV.
Two the Best shоts by Z1 the most I've ever seen
[ This Message was edited by: Sassho on 2013-10-25 15:18 ] |
Bonovox
Joined: Apr 13, 2008
Posts: > 500
PM |
@Sassho careful now you'll be starting to sound like Sonysta
Phone?? What phone?? |
Sassho
Joined: Nov 03, 2007
Posts: > 500
PM |
On 2013-10-25 17:03:00, Bonovox wrote:
@Sassho careful now you'll be starting to sound like Sonysta
So what?  I not have problem with my 808 CV (ClearView) , this's wonderful camera. But I cant say the same for you'r "cameraphones"  If I had to choose a good cameraphone, I would choose Octa or Iphone 5S. However, you have the opportunity to upgrade to the Sony QX100 Smart lens. Wait results. Cheers Bono  |
aussieland1
Joined: Apr 11, 2013
Posts: > 500
PM |
On 2013-10-25 15:43:34, Sassho wrote:
1020 has very ugly sharpened image , photos looks pretty only to 5mp and if not look on 100% zoom. With such horrible postprocessing and lens build 1020 / Z1 stay far far away from Octa or Iphone 5S quality.
Lol you are probably the only one on this planet that thinks that then. I have an iphone 5s and a Lumia 1020 and i believe you cannot be more wrong- iphone 5s is good but doesn't come close to lumia 1020 |
Sassho
Joined: Nov 03, 2007
Posts: > 500
PM |
On 2013-10-25 17:50:19, aussieland1 wrote:
... iphone 5s is good but doesn't come close to lumia 1020
Agree - 1020 is realy BIG , heavy , plastic. How can the Iphone 5 to be compared to it? No say words , give compare shots please. Maybe I'm wrong? |
aussieland1
Joined: Apr 11, 2013
Posts: > 500
PM |
On 2013-10-25 17:56:46, Sassho wrote:
Agree - 1020 is realy BIG , heavy , plastic. How can the Iphone 5 to be compared to it? No say words , give compare shots please. Maybe I'm wrong?
I thought were were talking about camera only? why are you mentioning the "big,heavy, plastic" for ? And btw Nokia 808 is heavier than lumia 1020 and also made of plastic. I will update some shots later today- i am at work atm
[ This Message was edited by: aussieland1 on 2013-10-25 17:31 ] |
Bonovox
Joined: Apr 13, 2008
Posts: > 500
PM |
On 2013-10-25 17:27:27, Sassho wrote:
On 2013-10-25 17:03:00, Bonovox wrote:
@Sassho careful now you'll be starting to sound like Sonysta
So what? I not have problem with my 808 CV (ClearView) , this's wonderful camera. But I cant say the same for you'r "cameraphones" If I had to choose a good cameraphone, I would choose Octa or Iphone 5S. However, you have the opportunity to upgrade to the Sony QX100 Smart lens. Wait results. Cheers Bono
I was only messing mate
Phone?? What phone?? |
davidsic
Joined: May 30, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Belgium
PM |
On 2013-10-25 15:24:08, Sassho wrote:
On 2013-10-25 12:09:07, davidsic wrote:
Say Galaxy S4 and stop saying octa everytime...it's ridiculous 
No no , I find The True 
The i9500 has a Sony IMX135 (Exmor RS) , the i9505 has a IMX091PQ (Exmor R)
Check this and compare images
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2283201
Differences between the two cameras are clearly visible - look on wall , grass , tree. If you a possible change phone to Octa, do not waste your life New guys with Octa's comming here soon.
 
First of all I don't know a samsung smartphone called "octa"...and seriously the difference is very small especially that sometimes the Snapdragon S600 version is performing (a tinny bit) better but it's not even worth mentioning for me...but obviously not for you.
Finally, it doesn't matter. |
Sassho
Joined: Nov 03, 2007
Posts: > 500
PM |
On 2013-10-25 18:14:03, aussieland1 wrote:
Nokia 808 is heavier than lumia 1020 and also made of plastic.
Nokia 808? Nokia 808 not just a phone - it's Religion
Take it easy guys. Just fun |
cu015170
Joined: Oct 26, 2010
Posts: > 500
PM |
I don't know why they didn't use the lens from the 808.. its better overall, a lot of 1020s will destroy about ~15% of the frame due to side blurring.
On 2013-10-25 15:42:20, false_morel wrote:
I mixed up the order of the images in the original post above. Imageschack renames the images on the site. Anyway, put the right image under the right caption now. All sorted out.
I never said that you can't help the 1020 with post processing to make it look a bit cleaner, that isn't the point.. the raw image is not as clean as the 808. Let's hope lumia black can fix some of the issues. |
Bonovox
Joined: Apr 13, 2008
Posts: > 500
PM |
http://reviews.cnet.com/smart[....]ia-5/4505-6452_7-35828376.html
ZTE releasing a new device with Konica Minolta lens and Sony sensor whom now own Konica Minolta
[ This Message was edited by: Bonovox on 2013-10-25 20:41 ] Phone?? What phone?? |
false_morel
Joined: Feb 24, 2010
Posts: 375
PM |
On 2013-10-25 21:24:52, cu015170 wrote:
I don't know why they didn't use the lens from the 808.. its better overall, a lot of 1020s will destroy about ~15% of the frame due to side blurring.
808's lens was optimized for its sensor. It could be used on the 1020's since 808 has a bigger sensor, so its lens will cover 1020's surface area well. Actually it would even rid the 808's lens of its extreme edge softness and vignetting as with every lens optimized for bigger sensors than that they are mounted on.
But the 1020's lens also has an extra element. So optically it should be better had it not been for the higher rate of manufacturing defects.
I never said that you can't help the 1020 with post processing to make it look a bit cleaner, that isn't the point.. the raw image is not as clean as the 808. Let's hope lumia black can fix some of the issues.
I can't believe you misunderstood that post!
1. I showed you how the 1020 resolved more detail than the 808 from the original shots you posted. (totally untouched)
2. Then I showed you that the 1020 still retains more detail than the 808 even after it was smoothed out (got rid of the excessive grains). In contrast, I can't make the 808 resolve same amount od detail as the 1020 while staying as clean or cleaner. Either graining will be introduced to the 808's image or the detail level of the 1020 can not be simply achieved.
Conclusion: When it comes to detail/noise, the 1020 is evidently ahead.
The 1020's major problems at the moment: 1. Oversharpens in most situations 2. Poor color rendering in some cases (like the shot you made in the store) 3. Inconsistent auto WB 4. Tinting problems in some cases 5. Some metering errors (wrong exposure) in some cases 6. Color rendering and WB under flash are even worse and more inconsistent!
Nokia have a lot of work to do.
But as far as hardware goes, the Lumia 1020 is equipped with a sensor/lens combi that resolves best detail and manages best noise levels.
[ This Message was edited by: false_morel on 2013-10-25 20:51 ] |
aussieland1
Joined: Apr 11, 2013
Posts: > 500
PM |
On 2013-10-25 17:56:46, Sassho wrote:
Agree - 1020 is realy BIG , heavy , plastic. How can the Iphone 5 to be compared to it? No say words , give compare shots please. Maybe I'm wrong?
iphone 5s
originals:
iphone 5s
iphone 5s
lumia 1020
originals
Nokia 1020
Nokia 1020
[ This Message was edited by: aussieland1 on 2013-10-25 23:44 ] |
cu015170
Joined: Oct 26, 2010
Posts: > 500
PM |
The usual yellow tint.. but Nokia have fixed it, or at least they worked on it
http://www.allaboutsymbian.co[....]a_Camera_gets_Xenon_flash_.php
The 5s has more noise, much smaller sensor.. but even by looking at these I know that the 808 would blow them both away in terms of flash performance and noise levels.
DPreview did a 808 vs 1020 studio comp.. full size files, the difference would be even greater if they were using the oversampling mode on both phones. It doesn't get more professional than that, does it ?
http://connect.dpreview.com/p[....]08-lumia1020-studio-test-scene
here you can see some pixel bleeding.. BSI has that issue. The FSI has much cleaner definition between the lines.
More here:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52400993
edge sharpness, of course, no contest
more noise at base ISO
Again, the difference will be greater if they use the oversampling mode on both phones. This IQ only.. the fact that the right side of the frame on that 1020 is blurred is just standard I guess
And it seems like you can use lower ISO on the 808 to achieve the same amount of brightness, with less noise.
The 1020 is much messier overall. I've been generous in my comps by setting both phones at the same ISO, where in fact I can always set the 808 on lower ISO and achieve the same results with less noise.
And even at base ISO, the 1020 is noisier in some particular colors, which is pointed out here by Menneisyys
4, chroma noise-wise, at base ISO, the 808 is cleaner in all colors. As you can expect, the blue channel is significantly noisier in the 1020. This is pretty normal – after all, not even APS-C cameras can render blue skies without noise at base ISO – they can't beat the laws of physics. (At least not most of them.) Interestingly, which was pretty much hard-to-anticipate, the red channel, particularly with orange colors, is also significantly(!) more noisy in the 1020. A crop showing this:
And yes, they did set the 808 to 95% jpeg compression.
[ This Message was edited by: cu015170 on 2013-10-26 01:12 ] |
|
|
Posted: 2013-10-25 15:51
