I think in most comments below, people are raving about the excellent performance of the Leica 45mm lens. But I don't think the quite bulky 45mm Leica is a logical companion for the petite GM1. A test scene shot with the 12-32mm F3.5-5.6 kit lens would be much more interesting.
It's sure nice that the sensor in the GM1 performs well, but that is to be expected, because it's the latest iteration of the m4/3s. It's not that the sensor will be worse, because it's placed inside a tiny body. It either fits, or it doesn't. The size of the camera (on the outside) doesn't have much influence on the image quality.
RobertSigmund: Only 5500 pounds for a 45mm F 2,8 lens, how cheap!
There's absolutely no point in producing mediocre medium-format lenses. This lens will probably be quite spectacular, and aimed at a very small target group.
Seems a bit like the SACD / DVD-audio war: the CD won...
Don't think there is a large market for whom the fastest CF and SD won't suffice. Current top-of-the line SD cards reach 250mbyte/s, which is only half of these, but still a lot faster than the writing speeds of most bodies.
At the ISE fair I've seen a few 4K recorders that used 2.5" or 1.8" Sata SSD's, these CFast cards are equal in speed, a bit smaller and A LOT more expensive :-)
Will there be an android version?
James Booba: dpreview´s own list:
1. Wider aperture for better low-light photos- fail2. A better, brighter and warmer flash- done3. A bigger sensor- more fail then done4. More megapixels- fail5. Longer battery life- maybe done
so ... Apple 5S .. s as same crap. 5C cheapo ... aint a cheapo at all (fail)
it has a larger aperture, and it has a bigger sensor. Why do you put "fail" at those points.Battery life is said to be comparable, and I don't hear a lot of people complaining about the battery life of their iPhone 5.
fotografer: Well, the usual moaners and groaners are out in force again as per usual. Yes images are a little soft but I think these are very promising for a mobile phone. The only phone it seems that outperforms this is the new Nokia 1020.
I would prefer the Samsung S4 photos as well. Those look less processed, more natural. Resolution might be a bit lower, but the difference is not that large.
Lars Rehm: Guys, the 808 has a nice camera for a phone but as a phone it is obsolete. You can carry it as a camera but then you still need a to carry another phone which kind of defeats the whole point of a camera phone. The 1020 offers both, a very good camera and a modern phone operating system. If it was running Android I'd already have put my order in but even with Windows I am seriously contemplating a purchase...
@MistyFog: The 808 can run Opera Mobile version 12, until very recently this was one of the best mobile browsers around. It's probably a better browser than Internet Explorer of WP8.
And support for things like Facebook and Twitter are quite decent. (via third party apps).
On the mail part you're right: it sucks. (so does the organizer, and many other things)
Dominick101: The writer kept praising its large sensor and kept re-emphasizing how downsampling helped in improving quality but made no mention of the comparative results against its predecessor which did better in all these aspects. Funny thing is that the 808 is being shown on the first page and the ending word kinda' implies that the 1020 is a better camera than the 808 without even a single comparative shot -- they are clearly trying to downplay the 808 without even a single proof that the 1020 can do better. Without a doubt, this article is biased and DP has lost its credibility as of late.
I think it does make sense to compare the 1020 to the 808, because those two phones are very comparable. And the 808 is the predecessor if you look at the camera technology. (for the rest, the 920 is clearly the predecessor).
808 wins:- higher level of detail- faster operation- external storage- much cheaper- smaller (not thinner)
1020 wins:- Better operating system- Thinner- Optical StabilizationI'm pretty sure the 1020 is the best "smartphone", Symbian doesn't fare well in being "smart".
Quirino2k: hm I feel the old 808 is still better image quality, way less smearing effect then 1020.
yeah, Nokia said the quality would be equal to the 808, but that's only true if the IS is usefull (to keep ISO low). In bright daylight, the 808 produces much more detail. The 1020 shots are only really sharp at roughly 1/3rd of the resolution, whereas 2/3rd size is perfectly sharp on the 808. Wondering whether the 1020 even wins it from the S4 in bright daylight. At low ISO that phone also takes very good pictures.
These (amazing) photos have been online for ages (Wikipedia uses them in many articles). So what's the "news"?
I'm still deeply impressed by the image quality of the "Turret lathe operator ", even for today's standards, that's a very high resolution picture. see full image at:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1a/WomanFactory1940s.jpg (uploaded in 2005!)
(unknown member): "Sigma has been doing lots of good things recently,"
If you mean that then where are the reviews for the Sigma DP1, 2 and 3 Merrill series cameras???
Why are readers also prevented from doing image comparisons with other cameras with the Sigma SD1 you tested outside of that particular review?
I think he refers to the lenses, Sigma's cameras never made a single dent in the vast lake of models. A review of a Sigma camera is quite simple though: Image Quality: spectacular @ low ISO, sucks at high ISO, Handling: sucks in every aspect. (and I've owned the SD9 and SD14)
Jake64: 41 mp on a sensor the size of a pinhead...grrrreeeaat
you'll probably die if someone puts this "pin" in your body... (Sensor size is 8.80×6.60 mm, that's quite a big nail)
Impulses: If you're gonna be re-shooting scenes with other phones you might as well toss in something like the Canon S110 into the testing IMO... It's pretty affordable ($30 less than the cost of this phone plus the grip...) and I bet a lot of people (at least within your audience) would only spend $300+ on a phone (primarily with it's camera in mind) if it can actually replacesomething like the S110 and not just outdo other more popular phones (nothing against WP8, can't deny the facts tho).
yep, and add the 808 to the comparison!
vaclav1: What is the shutter lag of Nokia 1020?Is it as slow as Nokia 808 ?
Didn't find the shutter lag on 808 "slow". It's not DSLR like, but it's better than most compact cameras.
brdeveloper: Is the sensor as big as the N808's 1/1.2" ? If not, I'm better going to buy a 2nd-hand N808. As a bonus, I get fm transmitter, hdmi port, usb on-the-go and a micro-sd card slot. Symbian was way better in connectivity than WP8.
I have the 808, and seriously conciser buying this one, to get rid of Symbian.
Symbian is dead, there are no new apps, it can only sync to Exchange.
qianp2k: When DXOMark will test this 41mp cellphone camera or older 41mp 808 cellphone camera? I want to see their P-MPix, guess no more than 5 mpix :-)
DXOMark tested the Nokia 808 in 8MP modus, but they gave no absolute MPix value.
But if the 1020 scores an 5MP effective resolution in the DXOMark it would very good. Imagine having pixel-perfect 5MP shots, that would be perfect!!!
(5MP is enough for any application except poster printing)
ntsan: Judging from all the photos released the 808 still have advantage in terms of image quality. The noise on the 1020 is a bit too much, and bokeh is not as great too. (Toshiba sensor > Sony sensor)
But with OIS the video should be much improved though
As far as I know, all samples of the 1020 were from pre-production models, so it's too soon to tell.
And if the 1020 indeed does better on dynamic range, it might be a better camera despite less sharpness, and more noise. On top of that you'll get image stabilization and a much more up-to-date OS.
Reginhild: It would be interesting to see this sensor put into some other phones or a tablet using the new Nvidia Tegra 4 processor that allows for very fast automated HDR processing. The fast HDR could address the highlight clipping issue.
Nope, not really, the whole image processing takes place in a dedicated chip. The processor does not have access to the sensor data. That's why a slow phone like the 808 does not have any performance issues while shooting 38MP images.
The only way to get more dynamic range, is to enlarge the pixels (reduce the resolution) but keep the same sensor size.
Lack of dynamic range is one of the major problems of the N808 image sensor.
keysmith: i have the phone for about a month. Photo (pixels) quality is good. Unfortunately lens has alot of distortion (it is 26mm equiv) totally incapable/inappropriate of shooting scenes with people in the corners (it stretches their heads in a very obvious ugly way). The lens for landscapes its fine but for faces/people.. nope.. So always place them in the centre of the frame (forget 3:2 rule, crop later) if you wand a better result.
Image stabilization (luck of) is another problem. It results in blurred/shaked pictures.
I also have a canon S90 (and a 500d). In my opinion, S90 produces more pleasant pictures due to less distortion of the lens (better correction i should say). I need to do more tests on that (if i prefer s90 or 808).
yep, the n808 often chooses a long shuttertime, causing blurry photos.
24mm is not much good for portraits, but that's why you can zoom in, effectively getting a longer focal length. Choose the 8MP modus, and zoom in fully, then portraits will come out nicely.
I have a S90 as well, and in most cases it is better. But it's a high-end compact camera, so it should be better than a phone!
Compared to a $100 compact camera, the n808 is very impressive.
Mistral75: "world's first compact camera with an APS-C sensor"
What about the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-R1 from 2003?
The R1 was not a compact camera. It was just a camera with a fixed lens. (a very good lens on an otherwise quite mediocre body, with a hefty price tag)