| Author |
Lumia 1020 vs 808 PV vs any potential rival. |
cu015170
Joined: Oct 26, 2010
Posts: > 500
PM |
Yes DXO are very good.. how do you explain the flash results ? The Z1 has better flash than the 1020 ? 
They also concluded that the iPhone 5s has a better camera, and the 808 is on top of them all by a single point.. please.. their scoring system makes no sense. | |
|
false_morel
Joined: Feb 24, 2010
Posts: 375
PM |
On 2013-10-17 18:46:08, cu015170 wrote:
Yes DXO are very good.. how do you explain the flash results ? The Z1 has better flash than the 1020 ?
Problem with DXO Labs that they don't provide their measurements and tests for public viewing. One must pay for this.
For the Flash test though, they measure how the camera behaves compared to what it does without flash. That's why the LED equipped phones are on par with the Xenon ones on their tests.
They surely need to address this part though. What applies to DSLRs doesn't apply to mobile phones. With DSLRs no one considers the quality of the flash itself. Since it is a separate device mounted on the camera. One could compare the flash modules themselves, but not worth it as the specs say it all for flashes.
What's important is to measure and test how the camera deals with the flash mounted.
With cameraphones, it's a totally different case of course. And they need to adjust their approach. An LED flash isn't a flash in my own dictionary. Just an LED lamp to help light the scene. Xenon modules on the 808 and 1020 are real flashes.
So yeah, flash testing may be flawed, but results still make sense..
They also concluded that the iPhone 5s has a better camera, and the 808 is on top of them all by a single point.. please.. their scoring system makes no sense.
DXOmark usually test lenses and sensors independently.
With mobile phones this not possible of course.
And by judging a whole camera module, noise levels and detail retention become just two of many factors to consider.
Yes the noise and detail in the 5MP photos by 808 and 1020 are well ahead of the competition, but when it comes to other measures, they are no better.
Regarding noise and detail btw, DXO had this to say:
"Low noise and high detail retention are the hallmarks of the Nokia Lumia 1020, outperforming its predecessor, the Nokia Pureview 808, in those two metrics"
Where the 1020 fails is at rendering color! With its weak auto WB it scored a low 56! If Nokia address this through an update, which sure they will, the 1020 will jump over all other phones in still image quality.
Another area Nokia could address with the 1020 is the artifacts. In specific, color shading as DXO Labs highlighted. This could easily be addressed through an update unlike other factors.
So 1020 weaknesses are in areas easily fixed through updates.
And adjusting the coloring alone will put the 1020 at the top of the bunch.
As to video, DXO don't consider audio capture where the 808 and 1020 excel and are way ahead of the competition. They focus on image quality.
And here the 1020 fails at artifacts and noise surprisingly. Also coloring is behind the competition. This is a clear clumsy work from Nokia here. They need to address this through an update as well.
As to stabilization, DXO also stress on the jelly effect when panning through video. And it seems the 1020 is not as good at this as the competition. Also when mounted on tripod the stabilization doesn't recognize it and overcompensates. Still the 1020 not way behind in this area. But it could be much better.
It's clear that Nokia gave some areas more priority than others when developing the 808 and 1020. And I think they opt to reconsider this. Putting so much emphasis on noise, detail, and sharpness while delivering poor WB and not optimizing the artifacts isn't wise imo. And not new to Nokia. Same patterns were there in the N8 btw..
And note that DXO only focus on testing image quality. The don't consider performance and features. Lossless zoom of 808 and 1020 is a huge feature. Camera Pro app and creative mode on the 1020 and 808 respectively are another.
[ This Message was edited by: false_morel on 2013-10-17 20:30 ] |
davidsic
Joined: May 30, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Belgium
PM |
Look at that ! http://allaboutwindowsphone.com/features/item/18571_Smartphone_camera_shootout_Nok.php
 |
cu015170
Joined: Oct 26, 2010
Posts: > 500
PM |
Once again the 808 was used in 85% JPEG compression vs. 95% for all other cameras  I still don't get why he does that.. |
false_morel
Joined: Feb 24, 2010
Posts: 375
PM |
On 2013-10-17 23:26:50, cu015170 wrote:
Once again the 808 was used in 85% JPEG compression vs. 95% for all other cameras I still don't get why he does that..
You saw for yourself in this very thread what insignificant advantage the extra MBs bring.
The 808 would fair the same against the competition with the 95 compression.. |
cu015170
Joined: Oct 26, 2010
Posts: > 500
PM |
Its not insignificant at all.. and the files sizes would be in line with the other phones.
In the meantime, let us enjoy some nice pixels from the 808
 |
false_morel
Joined: Feb 24, 2010
Posts: 375
PM |
On 2013-10-18 00:27:55, cu015170 wrote:
Its not insignificant at all.. and the files sizes would be in line with the other phones.
No doubt Steve should put the 808 at 95 compression for these tests.
His argument is that he wants left all the phones at full auto. And also 95 ratio isn't a game changer for the 808 anyway.
But I would have put the 808 in its manual mode and left everything at auto only for the compression ratio. Not sure if the phones would behave the same regarding other parameters, but most probably it would.
So I disagree with Steve on this one.
The argument that the 95 ratio wouldn't have changed the outcome of the comparison stands true as illustrated in this thread by the photos you provided, allowing to compare the difference from 85 to 808's 95 and to 1020's output.
The patterns are clear where each phone would win by now:
- Landscapes at day (be it bright and clear, or cloudy and dim): 1020
- City- or landscapes at night: 1020
- Day Portraits: Haven't seen enough 808 samples to judge on this one
- Night Portraits (outdoors without flash): 1020
- Night Portraits (indoors with flash): 808
- General indoors flash use: 808
- General low light on auto without flash: 1020
- General bright light: 808
- Macro: both are poor
And one must add the SmartCam features which are amazing! Also the SS manual control on the 1020 which can go up to 4 seconds. And in tiny steps as well.
In the meantime, let us enjoy some nice pixels from the 808
I think there is another thread for this! |
Sonysta
Joined: May 25, 2013
Posts: 198
PM |
On 2013-10-18 00:27:55, cu015170 wrote:
Its not insignificant at all.. and the files sizes would be in line with the other phones.
In the meantime, let us enjoy some nice pixels from the 808
Congratulations for these beautiful shots... They only prove the supremacy of the 808 PureView Compared to any smartphone and compact digital camera !
The 1020 and other devices with camera, left crying so jealous !
The defenders of the 1020, cry with envy too and there remains only the alternative of buying the 1020 and with photos to prove que he indeed is better and not create the most ridiculous conspiracy theory in the world !
But one question remains in the air ?
Because the citizen who defends both the 1020, the does not have 1020 ?
What mystery !
P.S: Congratulations Cu015170 , you're an artist in the art of photography !
[ This Message was edited by: Sonysta on 2013-10-18 06:30 ] |
Bonovox
Joined: Apr 13, 2008
Posts: > 500
PM |
Cry with envy?? You really think people are actually going to cry about it?? Goodness sake 
Phone?? What phone?? |
mlife
Joined: Jan 16, 2003
Posts: > 500
PM |
On 2013-10-18 10:39:00, Bonovox wrote:
Cry with envy?? You really think people are actually going to cry about it?? Goodness sake
LMAO.... I gotta go with sean on this one! totally over the top, c'mon bro - what we're talking about here is literally at a finite level.... NO ONE (not even cu, imo) is going to have 1020 users crying with jealousy, cut the drama.
Sure, I too think the 808 is a superior imaging device but lets try and keep the debate realistic. Lets not try and dump the 1020 to the bottom of the heap just because old nokia over engineered a device most "normal"people have no idea even was ever made.
If in fact there was no 808, hands down- I would already own the 1020 (still even toying with the idea actually).
As I've said before, other than making large prints (which most of us never even do), the 808`s abilities are overkill. For posting online, email and even small prints $5 says NO ONE can tell the difference /much less "cry"over it...
[addsig] |
Marly
Joined: Jun 04, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: Netherlands
PM |
On 2013-10-18 05:30:02, Sonysta wrote:
The 1020 and other devices with camera, left crying so jealous !
The defenders of the 1020, cry with envy too
You are joking, aren't you?
If not, I really must pity you, only people with literally no life of their own could think, that anybody would cry about a phone (or any other device)
"America: please don’t be a Dumpfkopf" |
false_morel
Joined: Feb 24, 2010
Posts: 375
PM |
I just bought a new 350€ lens for my DSLR. I would have easily got instead an 808 and saved myself all the weeping.
I know this will probably sound cocky, but I think I have to say it.
When it comes to photography as a field of art and expression of creativity, a DSLR becomes a must.
Even these new and trendy mirrorless ILC cameras, even the expensive new ones with full format sensors, would still be limited in several aspects. These are again a compromise between portability and functionality. These are meant to replace DSLRs for vacations mainly where average people would rather carry small and light cameras while still getting same quality of a DSLR. Only that they will be limited to general use.. And also handling and ergonomics would be compromised.
Cameraphones are great all in one devices. But with many compromises especially when it comes to photography.
These are meant to capture those moments where one usually doesn't carry a camera along.
Dining evenings with some friends, hitting a party or the club, at home where something spontaneous happens, especially with kids and pets, and some general activities where nothing is planned worth getting a stand-alone camera to document or capture that certain event..
And certainly not for photography enthusiasts and hobbyists who indulge themselves in the arty side of photography.. Going for photography trips, spending some afternoon or evening, or a one day weekend photography sessions.. Spending time developing the RAWs and printing big or sharing on a dedicated platform..
I never use my cameraphone to spend time thinking about framing and composition, and some creative artistic motive. It's useless to waste such energy and time on such a limited device.
Almost all of the photos I end capturing with my phone are private. Capturing one private spontaneous moment to share online or keep as a memory.. Sometimes one comes across a certain happening on the streets or in a park for instance, some funny or special worth capturing and saving.. And could be publicly shared as well.. But that's it..
And judging from most of the photos I see on smartphone forums and mobile platforms, these lack the story and the context. Poor framing, or poor composition. No meaning to convey, or could have conveyed in a much better way.
Creativity is limited by the equipment of course, but also there are some cool stuff that could be achieved. Rarely seen however.
I think instead of focusing on some the quality a smartphone nowadays achieves of a bright sunny day scene, one ought to learn and practice the art of capturing a good motive.
On 2013-10-18 11:48:42, mlife wrote:
As I've said before, other than making large prints (which most of us never even do), the 808`s abilities are overkill. For posting online, email and even small prints $5 says NO ONE can tell the difference /much less "cry"over it...
I totally disagree on this point.
A reminder to all of us maybe, Nokia developed this PV technology not in order to scale those 38 and 34 MP photos back to 5 MP! It would be like pointing to one's left ear with one's right hand.
The purpose and the aim were the lossless zoom.
The PV mode appeals only to photography enthusiasts and it's of a lesser priority compared to the zoom feature which is a game changer for average smartphone users (vast majority of the user base) who can now zoom without losing any quality; with those zoomed in images being on par in quality to what other high-end smartphones deliver.
If it were only about quality of the original photos, using the same sensor technology and size, manufactured directly at 5 MP or 8 MP would have lead to better quality.
And speaking of these 5MP oversampled photos, they do make a difference in low light where noise becomes a decisive factor to the image's quality, and especially detail.
Otherwise, quality-wise, true, at a bright day for instance it's nothing to talk about given the use cases of the resulted images.
And here's where the camera features come in. SmartCam in the 1020 for instance enables one to take photos otherwise not possible without. Removing moving objects at the instance, great for group portraits, and the action feature.. Other high-end Androids have these features now, but the 808 doesn't. And I think this is a bigger and much more significant difference to that of a difference in quality.
Also the SS manual mode allows great creativity whereas the 808 is very limited in this sense.
Same goes to Xenon flash allowing photos otherwise not possible with LED. Not just about IQ here.
I think what the Lumia 1020 stands out for is not its superior noise and detail quality which was proven superior to any other cameraphone, nor its overall IQ which was proven on par with other current high-end smartphones, but it's the lossless zoom, low light photography, Xenon flash, manual SS, SmartCam, ability to zoom later as the phone saves the original full res photo.. These are the factors that make the 1020 the cameraphone to beat. Not the IQ. |
Bonovox
Joined: Apr 13, 2008
Posts: > 500
PM |
Very true about photography. As for crying over a phone,well now I cannot go living my life now knowing the 808 exists  What can I do?? Maybe I need counseling 
Phone?? What phone?? |
Sassho
Joined: Nov 03, 2007
Posts: > 500
PM |
On 2013-10-18 17:13:59, false_morel wrote:
I just bought a new 350€ lens for my DSLR.
How, how do you put your DSLR in your pocket and take a picture every day? Lens and DSLR is not to improve your photographic skills if you do not practice often. No job to walk every day with DSLR in "pocket", right? |
davidsic
Joined: May 30, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Belgium
PM |
I think what the Lumia 1020 stands out for is not its superior noise and detail quality which was proven superior to any other cameraphone, nor its overall IQ which was proven on par with other current high-end smartphones, but it's the lossless zoom, low light photography, Xenon flash, manual SS, SmartCam, ability to zoom later as the phone saves the original full res photo.. These are the factors that make the 1020 the cameraphone to beat. Not the IQ.
Ok but what's the ok but what is the difference between image quality and picture pleasant to look with your eyes?
When I view the test allaboutwindowsphones ... I don't understand how is it possible to still doubt that 1020 is better than the 808 !? For some the 808 is better but for me is more on paper/technically. What is better? What your eyes see or data sheet?
Although the 1020 produces more noise, white balance is sometimes bad, sometimes a too strong yellow tint but apart from that? Is there someone finds that the 808's pics are better than 1020'ones in this comparison ? seriously?
As said by 1020 is not a true dslr, it's more mainstream than 808 what is the problem?
Is it normal to be so called the best camera phone have a screen in such a low resolution? For me since the release of 808 I always thought it was a joke.
I had the 808 two times and I'll never understand that some may find it better than 1020 ! | |
|
Access the forum with a mobile phone via esato.mobi
|
Posted: 2013-10-17 18:46
