mobile photography technology, culture and community
www.dpreview.com

Putting Nokia's zoom claims to the test: Lumia 1020 smartphone versus Canon PowerShot S120

115
Nokia says it "reinvented zoom" with the Lumia 1020, but how does it stack up to the zooming prowess of a compact camera?

In case you've missed the last couple months of excessive media blasting, Nokia's been diligently working to keep its 41-megapixel Lumia 1020 front and center by putting it in the hands of famous photographers and explaining how it works via sophisticated computer animations.

Amongst the claims it's made about the Lumia 1020 are those about "reinvented zoom," extolled in this commercial that shows a roomful of parents at a school play clamoring for a closer position as they snap photos with their non-Nokia tablets and smartphones while the Lumia 1020 wielding parents calmly zoom into their photos shot from the back of the room.

As we explained in our full review of the device, the Lumia 1020 does deliver more advanced zooming capabilities than its camera phone competitors. 

On most smartphones digital zoom simulates optical zoom by cropping the image and then upsampling it to the camera’s native resolution. The pixels are enlarged while image resolution and image quality are reduced. But the Lumia 1020’s high 41MP native resolution (maximum output  is 38MP in 4:3, 34MP in 16:9) means that even with some digital zoom applied, the image is still downsampled through most of the zoom range. You can zoom into 2.7X (a 74mm equivalent in 4:3 mode) before the cropped image hits 5MP.

But how does the Lumia 1020 stack up against a compact camera with optical zoom?

The Canon PowerShot S120 offers 5X optical zoom with an equivalent focal length of 24-120 mm and a 12MP 1/1.7" backside-illuminated sensor. (For comparison, the Lumia 1020 offers 25mm equivalent focal length in 16:9 and 27mm in 4:3, and a 1/1.5" backside-illuminated sensor.) The Canon's optical zoom works by physically changing the focal length of the lens.

We recently put the Lumia 1020's and Canon PowerShot S210's zoom capabilities to the test. As you'll see in the first table below, we're comparing the Lumia's 27mm wide angle equivalent full resolution 38MP capture to that of the Canon's 24mm wide angle 12MP capture. We're also comparing both cameras at their full zoom capabilities: the Lumia's 2.7X digital zoom produces a 74mm equivalent 5MP capture while the Canon can zoom to 5X for a 120mm 12MP capture.

The full scene from the Lumia 1020 without zoom. The Lumia's fixed lens offers a 27mm equivalent focal length in 4:3 format.
The full scene using the Canon S120 without zoom. Note that the Canon provides a wider view from the start at the wide 24mm focal length of the lens, without as much lens distortion as the Lumia 1020.
The Lumia 1020 fully zoomed in to its maximum digital magnification, an approximately 74mm equivalent.
The Canon S120 fully zoomed in at 120mm is able to get quite a bit closer than the Lumia 1020.

Now let's take a closer look at a 100 percent crop from the full resolution 38MP Lumia 1020 image at the widest 27mm equivalent focal length and compare it to 100 percent crops from several images shot at different focal lengths using the Canon S120. Each original Canon image is a 12MP file; the lens changes the angle of view but the megapixel count stays the same. The Lumia image is exactly the same in each comparison, while the Canon images will show where an optical zoom differs. 

A 100 percent crop from the full resolution 38MP Lumia 1020 image at the widest 27mm equivalent focal length in 4:3 ratio. Each image in this column is identical.
A 100 percent crop from the 24mm wide image from the Canon S120. At this perspective, the crop from the Lumia shows better detail and sharpness as it's taken from a 38MP file versus the 12MP file from the Canon.
Here we compare a 100 percent crop from a 28mm capture from the S120 on the right for a more direct focal length comparison between the two cameras. 
Again, the Lumia offers better definition and sharpness at this point.
At 50mm, the magnification is nearly the same between the Lumia image above and the Canon on the right. 
The two devices offer nearly the same quality of image as we can see in these 100 percent crops. It is also interesting to note the color of the sky here. As in each example, the slightly oversaturated Lumia image is pretty, but the Canon rendition is probably most accurate.
At 70mm, we can see that the optical zoom of the Canon image at right is offering a larger, sharper image than the Lumia image above.
However, the Canon also begins to exhibit some lens flare around the letters here, an unfortunate optical phenomenon the Nokia doesn't exhibit. 
This final comparison shows how optical outperforms digital zoom when we look at the 100 percent crop from the 120mm fully zoomed Canon S120 capture on the right versus the Lumia image above.
Lens flare is even more pronounced in the Canon example above.

Our results show the benefits of zooming in with a compact camera over even the best-in-class smartphone. The Lumia 1020's digital zoom simply can't stack up against the Canon S120's optical zoom. The Canon can not only zoom in further, it also retains detail and sharpness better when zoomed in to its full 5X power.

Photographers and photography websites like ours will continue to debate the pros and cons of smartphone versus camera, but for now there's simply no contest when it comes to zoom.

Comments

Total comments: 115
12
Little Willow
By Little Willow (4 weeks ago)

Before I start I'll say... I have a Nokia 1020. The thing is, I can't compare it to a digital camera I've never used, or will never use. I can only compare it to digital cameras, camera phones I've used in the past and my dslr. My reasons for posting.

1. I always carry around my phone. It's multifunctional.

2. I go trekking around places with my dslr in it's backpack, but there are many times where I don't want to get it out because I know I'm going to end up on the flor at some point and I don't want to hurt it.

3. My phone contract states that I can have a new phone every 2tyrs so I obviously went for one with the best camera.

What do I think about it: It's my phone, also my games console, I get messages and emails on it, read my e-book, find where I am. It wakes me up in the morning and gives me the days appointments. As such I didn't (and to be honest shouldn't) expect it to be as good as something that is solely a camera. However, as a backup to my dslr ... it's awesome. :)

0 upvotes
Lightpath48
By Lightpath48 (1 month ago)

Is it just my eyes, or are the Nokia W/A details superior to the Canon's?

0 upvotes
pellicle
By pellicle (1 month ago)

at the risk of being obvious, lenses do work and using them to be capturing less of the scene will always mean that even a basic digicam will beat a high end phone on telephoto. Two years ago I compared my 2009 Nokia E72 to a panasonic digicam. At wide the results are better for the Nokia, but it was clear that I wouldn't even waste my time with zooming.

http://cjeastwd.blogspot.com/2012/04/nokia-e72-cam-vs-digicam.html

0 upvotes
costinul_ala
By costinul_ala (1 month ago)

Not there yet but close enough to leave the s120 home

0 upvotes
Donald Klopper
By Donald Klopper (2 months ago)

The best in class smartphone is the Nokia 808

1 upvote
JayDT
By JayDT (2 months ago)

Had the rx100 and sold it when I got the 1020... Just don't see the point of keeping an optical zoom when I have to carry two things.

I have a young child and also work in a school as a photography teacher, cameras just don't work well with kids or at least mine lol. The 1020 is in my pocket everyday and it's RAW files are as pleasing as the rx100 and Fuji x20 units I have in my classroom BUT i do landscapes and pictures of the family where they are within 20ft. Each to their own but for me the 1020 is the one phone I have waited for, I now have something with me always that works as well as my compact.

1 upvote
electrophoto
By electrophoto (3 months ago)

Just this: Check the "background"...
Open both photos at max-zoom side by side...
I guess the verdict is pretty simple: the nokia sucks. looks like a watercolour painting gone wrong without any details.

0 upvotes
vladimir vanek
By vladimir vanek (4 months ago)

"how optical outperforms digital zoom when we look at the 100 percent crop from the 120mm fully zoomed Canon S120 capture on the right versus the Lumia" - woooow! really?!

2 upvotes
tbcass
By tbcass (4 months ago)

And on top of that the S120 is a piece of garbage compared to the Sony RX100.

4 upvotes
craniac
By craniac (3 months ago)

Really? A piece of garbage?

One comparison: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52315288

3 upvotes
starbase218
By starbase218 (4 months ago)

The Lumia certainly is impressive for a smartphone. However, the Canon still is a better camera. It seems to retain more dynamic range and has more accurate colors. But apart from that, also consider that the Canon is only a camera, whereas the Nokia is a smartphone, first and foremost. That probably means lots of touch controls and only a few push-buttons. And what if you have an iPhone and purchased IOS apps? You may not want to buy this. So it will always be compromised in that regard, which is why I think the future of compact cameras isn't as doomed as some think it is.

Regarding the "constant aperture" of the Lumia; that simply isn't true. An aperture of f/2.8 means the focal length is divided by 2.8 to give you the diameter of the aperture. With a zoom, that focal length increases as you zoom in, so the diameter has to get bigger as well. With a fixed lens, it does not. The image is cropped afterwards to be equivalent to a longer FL, but the aperture diameter is still the same.

2 upvotes
carlos roncatti
By carlos roncatti (4 months ago)

And we will see many jojurnalists shotting portraits at 28mm eq....sadly...

0 upvotes
Bilgy_no1
By Bilgy_no1 (5 months ago)

You need to also compare to a 'regular' smartphone digital zoom to truly establish the usefulness of this technology.

You'd expect a compact camera with optical zoom to outperform a smartphone with digital. But if the latter provides something that's 'good enough' in terms of zoom, it can still be a viable alternative, The traditional digital zoom on smartphones doesn't achieve that, but this Nokia technology might.

0 upvotes
mermaidkiller
By mermaidkiller (5 months ago)

I absolutely disagree. All 100% crops of the Canon are sharper and show more detail.

4 upvotes
Just another Canon shooter
By Just another Canon shooter (5 months ago)

No. The Canon is f/2.8-4.5 and a 4x zoom.
The Lumia is f/2.2. The effective f-stop gets multiplied by the crop factor. At 4x zoom, the Lumia would be like f/8.8 equivalent to its own sensor size. Now, one starts with 24mm eq., the other - with 28mm, sensor sizes are a bit different but you get the idea.

0 upvotes
jxh
By jxh (5 months ago)

Actually, that should not affect anything. If the effective f-stop changed with crop/zoom, then cropping would make the image darker. This plainly does not happen.

(depth of field, however would not follow in the same way as optical zoom)

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (5 months ago)

> then cropping would make the image darker

this is correct.

what does dark mean? for darkness, the real scale or standard is image quality, for a human, a cat or a bird. same illumination may mean different darkness all depends on image quality.

you get lower image quality when cropping, you get darker image.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (3 months ago)

The canon s120 starts at f1.8 end has an 5 times zoom.

0 upvotes
JapanAntoine
By JapanAntoine (5 months ago)

Yes in daylight, but in low light, the digital zoom allows better aperture, no?
I am not sure the Canon at 120mm in very low light would be so comfortable...

0 upvotes
Just another Canon shooter
By Just another Canon shooter (5 months ago)

See the reply above.

0 upvotes
keeponkeepingon
By keeponkeepingon (5 months ago)

I would just love to see this same test with the 3X RX100.

I've got the S100 and Pureview 808. Yeah the S100 is better at full zoom but gosh it's nice to be able shoot at 28mm (equiv) and to "zoom in post". When you get it right there is just so much content in the pureview images, but there is the rub. It takes a lot of light and (for me) a lot of luck to get it just right. If the light is not perfect, or you are not getting a good shutter speed forgetaboutit.

The S100 is no lowlight monster either. You really should point that out, zoomed into 5X the thing is like F6 or something crazy while the 808 is still shooting at F2.4 It may still be better than the 808 but if things get dim I reach for my DSLR or ILC.

1 upvote
vv50
By vv50 (5 months ago)

there seems to be a lot of zooming in this video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0cE3TffJ_g

0 upvotes
BWG
By BWG (5 months ago)

The Lumia is worth buying for the commercial alone. Comic genius.

0 upvotes
saycheese
By saycheese (5 months ago)

>Nobody prints photos anymore.<

Do we not? oh, ok, would you mind telling me what else we don't do so I can compile a list to refer to, thanks in advance...

3 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (5 months ago)

we print less and less for that's an inferior media. popular A1 and B1 posters are being replaced by 42" to 72" flat panel displays, 2K now and 4K soon, and instead of electric poles and bulletin boards people now stick flyers on smart phones and PCs.

0 upvotes
robogobo
By robogobo (4 months ago)

Stupidest thing I ever heard.

3 upvotes
clicstudio
By clicstudio (5 months ago)

This is the digital age. I'm not saying the camera phones are better but definitely more convenient. Digital photos are destined for low resolution on Facebook or text messages and emails. Nobody prints photos anymore.
Usually most bad quality photos still look great on small screens or digital photo frames. Some bigger tablets show the real noise and artifacts but lately people really don't care. I see blurry, out of focus and noisy photos and people are proud of them because they captured a moment. You ALWAYS have your phone with you, not your camera. So quality really doesn't matter so much and "normal" people are not as technical as they would care.

1 upvote
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (5 months ago)

Even if we do not print photos any more, the much larger higher resolution display panels are revealing more detail in images.

0 upvotes
mallaig
By mallaig (5 months ago)

Nokia phones have always boasted a good camera, but lets face it most smartphones need charging every day, I would rather have a camera with a longer battery life than that. It is good to have a smartphone with a good camera, but even better to have a camera without the time-wasting phone attached. There is something satisfying about a proper camera with all its knobs and settings. We are in an age where everything is getting smaller, and 'throw away' devices. I have a Sony HX50 with 30x (24mm to 720mm) optical (60x digital) zoom, not the smallest or cheapest camera around but a fantastic piece of kit and very satisfying and solid to handle - with great flexibility, hope I will be using it for years to come.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (5 months ago)

The Nokia 808 can last for a good 3 days with light use, and has a very descent camera :)

1 upvote
ChrisKramer1
By ChrisKramer1 (5 months ago)

That the Lumia offers pretty good image quality has been clear from the available samples for quite some time. I do not think you need a comparison like this. Rather, you need to focus on what you can do with a mobile camera and the related apps like Snapseed or Photoshop Touch. Surely the point about mobile photography is that the camera is only part of the package. So minisculing like this (for that is what this is) helps nobody.

0 upvotes
Joseph Mama
By Joseph Mama (5 months ago)

Comparing to a low level ELPH 115 or something would be more appropriate. Why use an S120? Thats a pretty good camera. Heck, maybe just use an RX100 and then crap all over the poor cameraphone...

3 upvotes
YiannisPP
By YiannisPP (5 months ago)

Because the Nokia beats this pretty good camera at wide angle.

0 upvotes
KariIceland
By KariIceland (5 months ago)

I iwn the 808 and it does not beat an s120 and the 1020 does even worse

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (5 months ago)

I don't think this is to decide which beats which but rather measure Nokia 1020 against a popular compact P&S and S120 was chozen as a scale.

0 upvotes
YiannisPP
By YiannisPP (5 months ago)

I do not believe you, sorry but the 808 beats the S120 in terms of noise/detail (when you downscale the original 40MP file down to 12MP yourself and process accordingly. I've done this exercise, you probably haven't, you're just assuming. If you're referring to other aspects of performance like handling, WB or whatever then fine.

0 upvotes
Azurael
By Azurael (4 months ago)

But the shots from the Nokia (at least this one) are far too contrasty and the colours are crazy. While it has captured notably more detail than the S120 at the wide end, I personally prefer the S120's image at every magnification, and suspect that at sane print size, they would most likely continue to look better. Sure, you could probably print A3 from the Nokia at the wide end in good light and it might be more tolerable that most compacts, but it seems like a very limited use case to me.

0 upvotes
K E Hoffman
By K E Hoffman (5 months ago)

Nokia claims digital zoom is as good as sneaker zoom (walking up to the object) you have seen the ads? so why not compare IPhones etc. to 1020 with photos taken to give same coverage differentiated by camera distance?

And not shoot through a window at the Lake Union Amazon office :)
Waste of my time to read.. this as no thought or effort was put into it.

0 upvotes
JWest
By JWest (5 months ago)

"You may be surprised by the results".

Sometimes I worry about DPReview. This is a professional photography site, and it thinks I ought to be surprised that an optical zoom performs better than a digital zoom?

10 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (5 months ago)

if it's the image quality of a specific subject at distance, aperture size alone tells a large part of the story, just like astronomical telescopes or battleship guns.

Nokia 1020: 3.3mm
Canon S120 max: 4.6mm (area ratio 1.9 or 1 stop better).

while for sensor resolution, it's clear from the review that 41MPix is still resolution challenged. should need 164MPix to compete with compact point-n-shoots.

Comment edited 5 times, last edit 11 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
wansai
By wansai (5 months ago)

Considering what the Lumia is, a smartphone, it's biting right at the heel of the s120, by all accounts, a very good point & shoot.

The difference in IQ is noticeable but still close enough to be negligible for use. Meaning, when the quality is so nearly even, there's a good argument for only just really needing to carry the lumia about with you.

4 upvotes
IEBA1
By IEBA1 (5 months ago)

also note the blown highlights in the peak of the building in the Lumina versus the Canon.

I'd like to see this redone with RAW from both.

1 upvote
Petrogel
By Petrogel (5 months ago)

Can Nokia's Pureview technology zoom as well as a compact camera?
No, of course not.

4 upvotes
vv50
By vv50 (5 months ago)

do people use cameras at the maximum zoom most of the time? no, of course not.

1 upvote
JoeR
By JoeR (5 months ago)

What a pointless review. Why compare a phone to a camera. Does a camera make phone calls, surf the web, send emails and text messages, manage your calendar, solve your math problems, etc., etc... The phone just happens to take pictures too. And the pictures are competitive.

Nobody buys a phone just to take pictures. I know which one I would choose to carry with me. It wouldn't be the camera regardless of how good it was.

This is just a lame attempt to garner support for an obsolete device.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
Dark Fader
By Dark Fader (5 months ago)

Shut the duck up.

0 upvotes
Just another Canon shooter
By Just another Canon shooter (5 months ago)

To call Nokia's bluff?

0 upvotes
Chanthis
By Chanthis (5 months ago)

Who would have thought it would come to this on Dpreview, the preeminent photography website.

4 upvotes
clicstudio
By clicstudio (5 months ago)

It WAS the preeminent photography website... I've been reading for years and they lost some credibility IMO.
It's a review website and still the flagships Canon 1Dx and Nikon D4 haven't been reviewed.
Instead they have what the duck...
That's what I think... WTD?

4 upvotes
vesa1tahti
By vesa1tahti (5 months ago)

Make this simple test: Open both Lumia full view and 2,7x zoom images in Photoshop. Make any part of these images visually of the same size. You can't see any difference. So, this 'constant aperture zoom' is a big joke. You can do this kind of zooming by software. Why selling these kind of devices having 'zooming' properties?

0 upvotes
AndyHWC
By AndyHWC (5 months ago)

No matter how you slice it, crop zoom cannot match optical zoom. It's all come down to the sensor size. 1020's sensor is not a lot bigger than S120, so the result is predictable. A full frame may have a better shot...

So why do we want this feature? It helps users to get better composition. In-camera crop zoom may have small advantage with RAW data, less PP time. And most importantly, crop zoom can be very useful for HD Video mode. Something I like to see being implemented on all new camera.

0 upvotes
HubertChen
By HubertChen (5 months ago)

The Nokia is still surprisingly good and for posting online purposes more than sufficient. If you only carry a mobile phone then using the Nokia is much better than having no point and shoot with you. That the quality of a mobile is coming even close to the S120 is no small feet and is impressive nonetheless.

If you consider that most people take most pictures in the focal range of 24 ... 50 mm focal length, where the Nokia even exhibits an edge this becomes even more darn amazing! If I would own both devices, I/d probably sell the S120 :-)

Thanks to the connect team for this comparison!

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
5 upvotes
Infms
By Infms (5 months ago)

A huge plus that the 1020 zoom brings is the constant aperture throughout the zoom range.

Point ‘n shoots don’t often have this. If ever.

0 upvotes
vesa1tahti
By vesa1tahti (5 months ago)

But this 'zoom' is not a real zoom. Digital zooming = cropping, nothing else.

1 upvote
Just another Canon shooter
By Just another Canon shooter (5 months ago)

It does not. Cropping changes the effective aperture. Equivalence.

0 upvotes
YSLaiHK
By YSLaiHK (5 months ago)

Noise, noise, noise !!!!!
You should know which one I'm talking about. You guys in Connect really like noisey photos? Weird !

2 upvotes
YiannisPP
By YiannisPP (5 months ago)

This is way oversaturated which contributes a lot to the noise you're seeing. If you shoot with the Canon's saturation and then resize to the Canon's 12MP, the noise levels will be the same and the Nokia will have clearly more detail.

1 upvote
meanwhile
By meanwhile (5 months ago)

For photos, this is only step one for the S120. It also shoots RAW. The quality difference of the RAW vs JPEG on the S series cameras can be significant (not always, but can be). Especially if you are looking to get details out of blown highlights or deep shadows, sharpen during demosaicing, or need to adjust white balance.

Any chance of adding the RAWs too?

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
YiannisPP
By YiannisPP (5 months ago)

The Nokia shoots RAW too. There's an article here in Connect about it and you can see that you can get a significant advantage from it over the phone's processing.

1 upvote
meanwhile
By meanwhile (5 months ago)

If the Nokia RAWs aren't supported by your workflow (Lightroom, Aperture, etc) that makes it less versatile or useful though.

0 upvotes
YiannisPP
By YiannisPP (5 months ago)

I don't see why they wouldn't be supported in due time.

0 upvotes
Hadarmil
By Hadarmil (5 months ago)

Nokia can tell whatever they want but sadly you just can't (yet) beat physics. No matter how good your eyesight is, if you can't get up close you'll always see less than someone else who can. Now if they can cram in there an optical zoom...but I doubt it will happen.

Remember the era of 35mm film? The 35mm focal length was pretty much all the ordinary Joe needed. The zoom for most is just another sales pitch, the lenses are too slow anyway to catch anything other than a blurry mess and composition isn't exactly a word people bother looking in the dictionary.

1 upvote
supeyugin1
By supeyugin1 (5 months ago)

You should have compared it to the Galaxy S4 zoom, instead of Canon S120.

0 upvotes
5inchfloppy
By 5inchfloppy (5 months ago)

The Canon's sensor size is closer to that of the 1020, so it would have given closer results.

The S4 zoom uses 1/2.3", so while it would have been able to match the zoom range of the Canon, it would have worse sharpness/detail.

1 upvote
CyberAngel
By CyberAngel (5 months ago)

Maybe GPS, touch screen, over 1 MPx OLED display, etc
would have been a better comparison camera
Note that the zoom moves inside the camera in this one:
http://www.dpreview.com/products/sony/compacts/sony_dsctx200v
or maybe leave out the waterseal & GPS, add manual focus:
http://www.dpreview.com/products/sony/compacts/sony_dsctx66

0 upvotes
Sam Carriere
By Sam Carriere (5 months ago)

This topic? You gotta be kidding. You're trying to compare a camera to a phone, for God's sake!! One is for taking pictures, the other is for wasting time.

4 upvotes
5inchfloppy
By 5inchfloppy (5 months ago)

Agreed, the S120 is a waste of time indeed. With a camera as capable as the 1020, who needs a dedicated compact?

8 upvotes
quiquae
By quiquae (5 months ago)

I suspect you're trolling, but in terms of camera "capability," the S120 wipes the floor with any mobile phone available today just by having enough buttons and dials to make most settings changes very quickly without digging into menus. By the time you finish customizing the ISO setting, white balance, etc., on that touch screen, I'll have finished photographing and put the camera back in my pocket. The world's best sensor ain't gonna help you if you aren't ready to shoot.

8 upvotes
Just another Canon shooter
By Just another Canon shooter (5 months ago)

Nokia makes a big deal of the camera, why not compare it?

0 upvotes
chillgreg
By chillgreg (5 months ago)

"Click through for more, you may be surprised by the results"

Huh?

2 upvotes
YiannisPP
By YiannisPP (5 months ago)

The surprise is that the Nokia beats the Canon at wide angle. Downsize the Nokia image at 12MP and shoot wide more moderate saturation (or in RAW) and you'll get an image with the same levels of noise as the Canon, but with clearly more detail.

0 upvotes
Just another Canon shooter
By Just another Canon shooter (5 months ago)

Why is that a surprise? Larger sensor, brighter lens.

0 upvotes
KariIceland
By KariIceland (5 months ago)

If you needmto ask which is better, then tou do not belong on a big website as a reviewer

0 upvotes
WT21
By WT21 (5 months ago)

Can I just comment that neither look very good?

6 upvotes
Kipplemaster
By Kipplemaster (5 months ago)

The Canon looks consistently better to me from these shots which is slightly surprising. When I did the same test between my Canon s95 and Nokia 808, the 808 was clearly (quite a lot) better in terms of resolution at 28mm but as soon as I started "zooming" the limitations of digital zoom became very clear.

1 upvote
Expat Nomad
By Expat Nomad (5 months ago)

And this is in bright sunlight!

5 upvotes
Michael Ma
By Michael Ma (5 months ago)

Going to the top of a building and zooming in is a really good example of how people like to shoot photography today. Not being sarcastic, but people are more concerned about how their camera performs on technical specifics rather than message, lighting, and composition. This is demonstrated by the numerous articles online on how people love to turn off all the lights in their kitchen and take pictures in the dark with the Nokia.

2 upvotes
Impulses
By Impulses (5 months ago)

Zoom aside, how about an overall comparison? I still carry an advanced compact (LF1, even longer zoom than the S120 at the same size, plus EVF) and I've had a few decent smartphone cameras but nothing that would make me drop the compact, haven't had a Pureview mind you... Maybe a critical IQ comparison once RAW is available on the Nokia?

2 upvotes
Jonne Ollakka
By Jonne Ollakka (5 months ago)

As a smart phone, the PowerShot seems slightly limited to me. As a camera, the Nokia is really great and on par with alot of these cheap compacts.

5 upvotes
Lan
By Lan (5 months ago)

The S120 isn't a cheap compact though, image quality on the S120 is significantly better than the compact camera average.

Go over to main DPReview, and have a play with the studio scene comparison.

Try the Nokia 808, the Canon S110, and then compare with (say) the FujiFilm Finepix XP30.

5 upvotes
Digital Suicide
By Digital Suicide (5 months ago)

Since we are comparing phone versus camera, why don't compare start-up times, focus speed, times between shots and etc. Well.. here's the answer: if you are OK with annoyingly slow camera - 1020 is good for you.

9 upvotes
Jogger
By Jogger (5 months ago)

lmao, typical iSheepDroid responses.. did you know that Nokia sells more phones than most Android handset makers.. Android as a whole sells well.. but, divide that by 20 manufacturers with Samsung dominating most of it. Nokia can be very profitable as a WP phone maker, but, they would just be another bit-player if they used Android.

9 upvotes
simpleshot
By simpleshot (5 months ago)

Here are the facts.
http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2573415

Samsung, LG, Lenovo, ZTE all sell more phones than Nokia. All of them are also making profits, unlike Nokia which is losing billions of dollars. Even the smaller players (Xiaomi, Meizu) are making profits.

4 upvotes
bloodycape
By bloodycape (5 months ago)

Link to current data?

1 upvote
sunhorse
By sunhorse (5 months ago)

Android is not the way to go for Nokia. Lumia sales have done pretty well in Q4. However, Nokia sells a lot of phones if you include all segments of phones. These include a large number of non-Symbian, basic phone sets, Symbian sets, and WP phones. Nokia, like Samsung, reports "channel" sales, not actual end user sales.

Look at Nokia's own reports:
http://www.nokia.com/global/about-nokia/investors/financials/reports/results---reports/

See the segment information in the Excel sheet.

Of note, Nokia for the first time this year is not providing a breakdown between Symbian and other devices, probably indicating much lower Symbian sales. What Nokia calls "Mobile phones" are still outselling "Smart devices" though the gap is narrowing fast.

Here is a source for phone segment breakdown for Q2:
http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/news/item/17956_Nokia_Q2_2013_results-Lumia_sa.php

1 upvote
CyberAngel
By CyberAngel (5 months ago)

The last Symbian phones sold were Nokia 808
destination India - at the end of June.
2013Q3: no more Symbian
They just...killed the sales!

0 upvotes
YSLaiHK
By YSLaiHK (5 months ago)

There's no more Nokia anymore.

1 upvote
YiannisPP
By YiannisPP (5 months ago)

Really? I thought this article is about a new Nokia phone or am I dreaming YSLaiHK?

0 upvotes
stevens37y
By stevens37y (5 months ago)

For the web you don't need 5Mpix a full HD fullscreen ~2Mpix. Most people never print on paper an never crop the corners.

2 upvotes
Philip Goh
By Philip Goh (5 months ago)

That depends. As HiDPI screens become more common, you'll need larger photos even for web display.

1 upvote
Total comments: 115
12
About us
Sitemap
Connect