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

Connect smartphone reviews are written with the needs of photographers in mind. We focus on camera features, performance and image quality.

Nokia Lumia 1020 Product Images
1 / 7
Image 1
Image 1
Image 2
Image 3
Image 4
Image 5
Image 6

A 41-megapixel camera on a phone. You’d assume that was a typo if Nokia hadn’t already unveiled the 41-megapixel 808 Pureview last year, a technological tour-de-force that escaped mainstream appeal thanks largely to its orphaned Symbian operating system. With the Lumia 1020, Nokia has brought the innovative downsampling approach it debuted in the 808’s camera to a Windows Phone with a more relevant OS.

While zoom lenses that span from wide-angle to telescopic have been the norm on dedicated digicams for years, zoom optics remain impractical for thin phones (they exist only on the occasional camera-with-a-phone-in-it like Samsung’s Galaxy S4 Zoom). The “digital zoom” feature on most phones is generally a disappointing alternative.

Nokia changed that with the 808’s downsampling zoom, and the 1020 combines that technology with the optical image stabilization introduced in Nokia’s Lumia 920 that allows significantly better image quality in low light. On paper, that hardware combination makes the 1020 stand out impressively in a field in which incremental resolution bumps and often-gimmicky software features have been the name of the game. But do these great ideas translate into a great photographic experience? We put the Lumia 1020 through its picture-making paces to find out how its impressive imaging technology works in the real world.  

Key Photographic / Video Specifications

  • 41-megapixel 1/1.5-inch backside-illuminated sensor
  • F2.2 lens
  • 25mm equivalent focal length in 16:9, 27mm in 4:3
  • 2.7x downsampling digital zoom
  • Optical image stabilization
  • Manual shutter speed, focus, and ISO control
  • Xenon flash
  • 1080p 30fps video recording
  • 1.2MP F2.4 front camera
  • Panorama mode
  • Nokia Smart Camera mode
  • Nokia Pro Cam mode

Other Specifications

  • 1.5 GHz dual-core Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 Pro processor
  • Windows Phone 8 
  • 4.5-inch 1280x768 (334 ppi) AMOLED display
  • 2GB RAM
  • 32GB storage
  • NFC
  • 2000MAh battery, non-removable

Our 11-page review

We've considered every aspect of the Nokia Lumia 1020, with the photographer in mind. We examined the user interface of the native camera app and its special features. We experimented with the camera's performance when taking stills and video, and had a play with the device's many special feature modes. Click any of the links below for more information of specific functions and continue to our conclusion for a final summary of our findings.

Comments

Total comments: 367
12
supeyugin1
By supeyugin1 (Aug 31, 2013)

This worth nothing, if not compared to S4 zoom.

0 upvotes
Alfred A
By Alfred A (Aug 31, 2013)

Yes, you are right. In terms of phone size, I don't think any phone can compete with S4 zoom.

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Petrogel
By Petrogel (11 months ago)

Neither in terms of image quality .

0 upvotes
Jon Holstein
By Jon Holstein (11 months ago)

@Petrogel
In tests, the 1020 has outpeformed the S4 zoom in overall image quality, but the zoom just can't compete.
So over all image quality makes the 1020 winner of the two. And if you badly need zoom, well the S4 mini plus a camera that outperforms the S4 Zoom, costs about as much as the S4 zoom, and is a pocketable... So I would go for the separate things, then you can spread the load over two pockets.
I would however instead go for the 1020 as a mobile, as it fits my mobile usage pattern (when I get a 8inch windows tablet)

0 upvotes
CyberAngel
By CyberAngel (11 months ago)

S4 zoom has it's place.
Unfortunately it's really S4 mini zoom
I would LOVE it if the specs would be
S4 Active zoom = 1080+miracast, Qcore, IP68

0 upvotes
iae aa eia
By iae aa eia (Aug 31, 2013)

OK, it's a great phone, but I can't believe this is the successor of the 808 PureView.

7 upvotes
MistyFog
By MistyFog (Aug 31, 2013)

Nobody says it is. It's meant to be the successor of the 920/925 which are successors of the iPhone 5 and Galaxy S4.

2 upvotes
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (Aug 31, 2013)

I disagree MistyFog, the 1020 is not the successor for the 925. It may be a continuation of the 920, but the 925 and the 1020 are aimed at different target markets. The 808 was a flagship camera phone, and hence the most logical successor would be the 1020 as it too is the flagship camera phone from Nokia

3 upvotes
MistyFog
By MistyFog (Aug 31, 2013)

Sorry, the 808 was not a flagship. There was barely a market for it. It was more a proof of concept phone to test the market. We're the guinea pigs. With knowledge of its strengths and weaknesses Nokia implemented the 1020. So yes, it has many improvements over the 808, such as OIS and sharper images than the 808.

2 upvotes
nawknai
By nawknai (Aug 31, 2013)

No, I agree that this is the successor to the 808 PureView.

How could the 920/925 possibly be the "successors" to the iPhone 5 and S4? Different companies. Besides, the 920 came out at around the same time as the iPhone 5, while the 925 came out at around the same time as the S4 (and no, a few months here and there doesn't matter).

1 upvote
Tan68
By Tan68 (Aug 31, 2013)

Who's on first, here ?

0 upvotes
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (Aug 31, 2013)

@MistyFog Sadly by the time Nokia was able to manufacture and deploy the 808 to the mass market, it's time had past, and although the camera section was still ahead of it's competitors , the operating system of choice was obsolete. When first released the 808 was still sold at a high price, compared to other Nokia handsets at that time, so would have been pretty close to being a flagship phone. Flagship phones never necessarily sell the most in the market, due to their much higher price.

Also the way you describe the improvements of the 1020 over the 808, does sounds like you are indeed describing the "successor" of the 808 Pureview.

1 upvote
MistyFog
By MistyFog (11 months ago)

@bigley:

2 things:

1. It is up to Nokia to decide whether the 1020 should be a successor for the 808, and what direction to take for its new phones. Phones are inherently different from pure cameras which are not so much constrained by space/weight. Part of the engineering challenge involves the tradeoff between quality and weight and this is where Nokia's strength had been. To evaluate the 1020's achievement over 808 solely on IQ alone is missing the point. You will recognize that Nokia has successfully shaved off several mm from the camera module which by itself is a big achievement even if without OIS.

2. It is not clear if the 808 is actually better IQ-wise than the 1020 overall. For low-light shots, the 1020 is actually wayyy ahead of the 808. I could handhold the Lumia 920 at 1 second exposure time, but the maximum I can ever handhold the 808 is only 1/7 seconds. This makes a world of difference. And please don't mention tripod. Cameraphone on a tripod looks silly.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (11 months ago)

@ MistyFog

Yes that is one of the pros for the 1020. It is much thinner than the 808. I still think the 1020 is meant to be the successor to the 808, as it is the second generation Nokia handset to sport the pureview lossless zoom. Although there are benefits from the new 1020 design, being thinner and having OIS, the overall image quality is less than the 808 due to soft corners and the pureview 5mp modes needs refinement.

From what I have seen from sample comparisons between the 808 and the 1020, the 808 has better IQ in daylight and low ISO, and the 1020 takes the IQ lead past ISO800. High ISO 1020 samples I have seen is really quite remarkable, and has excellent detail with high noise, but the detail is there.

All these sample comparisons have obviously not been done in a studio, and for this reason, we were all waiting to see it done properly in dpreview connect.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
MistyFog
By MistyFog (11 months ago)

Unfortunately, a studio comparison by dpreview will not do proper justice to the 1020's OIS. Especially if both cameras are set on tripod, and ISO/shutter speed are equalized. A more scientific comparison will also incorporate motion shake as an additional parameter, but we all know that's impractical.

Perhaps this will be mitigated somewhat by using auto-mode for comparison. From my experience in lowlight scenes, the 808 may go for shutter speed 1/8s with ISO 800, while the 920 will go for shutter speed of 1/4s with ISO 400 to get the same exposure.

Assuming the 1020 behaves the same way as the 920, and compensating for larger aperture and BSI illumination, perhaps the 1020 can capture the same exposure with ISO at say 320. So we are really comparing the 1020 with ISO 320, versus 808 with ISO 800.

1 upvote
MistyFog
By MistyFog (11 months ago)

In fact, from my experience, the OIS helps to compensate by more than 1 stop (maybe 2-3 stops). The 808 on auto mode tends to select a slower shutter speed compared to the 920 (i.e. greater tendency of getting motion blur).

So, adjusting for this, the 1020 would be capturing the same scene with ISO 100 versus the 808 using ISO 800.

Of course this is all subjective, but based on my own experience the difference is quite dramatic. I take lots of handheld lowlight pictures with my 808 and 920, and from my experience the 920's image is quite comparable to the 808 thanks to the much lower ISO. I'm sure the 1020 will be far better.

1 upvote
MistyFog
By MistyFog (11 months ago)

Somehow I feel that the benefit of OIS has been downplayed and understated.

For me, I take indoor/lowlight shots at least 50% of the time. If I can capture lowlight shots at ISO100 rather than ISO800, to me this improvement VASTLY outweighs the slightly worse IQ in daylight shots.

In fact, I expected Nokia to put a 20MP (N8-like sensor) with OIS, and would have been happy enough with that. So this 41MP sensor (albeit slightly smaller) had exceeded my expectations in that sense.

2 upvotes
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (11 months ago)

I believe it is possible for DP review to do multiple tests for the studio shot comparison, both a static tripod shot and one where the camera or phone is setup on a pendulum tripod that moves at a set rate. It seems logical as more and more digital cameras are coming out with Ois or sensor shift, and it would be nice to see which performs better than others.

In an ideal world, yes the 1020 will capture images at a lower ISO than the 808 thanks to OIS, but from the sample images we are seeing, and ones from national geographic, the IQ of the 1020 at ISO 100 is not so good, and I have noticed that ISO100 to 400 shots all seem to have alot of noise. At higher ISO, there is still noise, but there not a substantial increase and to me the 1020 seems to shine and exceed past ISO 800.

Based on that, if the 1020 had no OIS, it still would be better than the 808!

Basically we need to carry 2 phones min, daylight landscape, portrait 808, and super low light shot with 1020.

1 upvote
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (11 months ago)

Do you find this strange MistyFog that the 1020 has a better performing High ISO than low ISO.

In an ideal world the 808 low ISO iq combined with 1020 OIS would have made a formidable combo, This is not the case, so even though the 1020 may capture lower ISO for the same shot as the 808, the Iq wil be marred with digital noise

1 upvote
MistyFog
By MistyFog (11 months ago)

@jalakarhu confirmed that adaptive oversampling for 1020 works by favouring sharpening in low ISO, versus noise reduction for high ISO. This explains your observation. So *if* the 1020 chooses noise reduction, it can actually do a good job like the 808. Just that the current algorithm chooses sharpening in low ISO.

I think adaptive oversampling is a good idea. With good light, noise is less of a problem especially at low ISO. The 808's pics are known to be quite soft, especially when zoomed in. For the mass market, soft images can be a major perception problem, i.e. people might conclude that the camera is inferior, or their lens are defective, etc. A sharp image tends to have that "wow" factor.

OTOH, it will be great if the adaptive oversampling algorithm can be overridden to select either sharpening or NR. This would be good for low light long exposure shots. The default is sharpening (due to low ISO), but we can choose noise reduction for a cleaner image.

1 upvote
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (11 months ago)

wow factor seems to be more than just sharpening , it is also contrast, color and saturation. I guess if Nokia wanted the "wow" factor for the 1020, they have got it this time, but obviously different people want different output, so I cannot see why Nokia will not give a multi output solution, a consumer output, and a "pro" output.

Images captured from my 808 very sharp, yet not over sharp. This is so even at full resolution, but... depending on scene, in lower light, or closeup, one has to be very careful with the 808, as the depth of field may be quite narrow, and locking precision focus may not occur. In these cases, the image captured may appear to have a soft look. For this reason, after a capture, if I have time, I immediately review and zoom in 100% to check focus.

The 1020 having a smaller sensor has an advantage with a smaller sensor, as not only will the focus be more accurate (wdie depth), it can also lock autofocus faster.

1 upvote
Jon Holstein
By Jon Holstein (11 months ago)

I dont think it's as easy as to put two modes, or sliders in there.
You actually have to do a lot of work to get the best result at a given setting.
Sure, a Pro mode, would mean only two modes to work with, but then Nokia would have to think if it's really worth it. And with a pro mode, would we not want RAW option? Sure nokia should be able to build a raw converter based on the same path they have gone inside the phone. On the other hand, it probably does more work than we would like to think, so RAW images not converted would not be a nice thing.

But I agree, DP should build a handshake rig. Using a motor, they could have certain amounts of shake, not exactly the same for every pic, but at quite comparable levels.
And that is very important for mobiles, as if you are the one who brings a pod, you probably could have brought a dedicated camera.

1 upvote
Jon Holstein
By Jon Holstein (11 months ago)

I doubt the 1020 is really meant as a successor of the 920/925, maybe they made it sound like that, to try to capture the audience looking for the new Nokia that was to compete with S4 and 5s.
Especially now that it sounds like microsoft is going to buy parts of Nokia, and therefor might put other releases on hold.

But the sucessor of the 920 should be called 930. The 925/928 was mid cycle updates (not a year had passed).

The 808 as someone said was probably a proof of concept. They had been working on it for so long and probably had a pretty developed test-version for every new hardware platform. And when Nokia was moving to WP, they didn't have a lot of developed phones to put out there, so they went ahead with the 808.
Remember the N900, was also a proof of concept, and Nokia kept saying but writers kept calling it flagship.

1020, is the kind of phone 808 should have been. It cant meassure up on all points, but it's a good package, the 808 wasnt.

1 upvote
Alfred A
By Alfred A (Aug 31, 2013)

I can't understand why 808 owners keep bashing this phone. If you think this is not the phone upgrade from your 808, then you do not need to upgrade it. As simple as that.

It makes me think that some 808 users simply want to prove that their phone is the best in terms of camera. So when Nokia come out new phone , they will keep bashing it. This already happened when Nokia announced 1020.

IMHO, both 808 and 1020 have pros & cons, you just need to find out which phone more suitable for you. But I doubt anyone will buy a Symbian phone now.

Peace ~

Comment edited 30 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
vlad0
By vlad0 (Aug 31, 2013)

No one is bashing it... its better than anything else but the 808.. that's all.

3 upvotes
YiannisPP
By YiannisPP (Aug 31, 2013)

Indeed no one is bashing it, but these people want to believe we do for some reason:)

4 upvotes
MistyFog
By MistyFog (Aug 31, 2013)

The thing is... every award/praise that the 1020 gets, everyone is cheering its achievements, including those iPhone/Android users (even if grudgingly).

And then there are a handful of 808 owners who will protest and carry placards saying "808 is better" and loudly booing the 1020. They are a tiny tiny minority but they are the ones creating the loudest noise. And they are intentionally there to rain on the 1020's parade. You wonder their motive.

2 upvotes
lecoupdejarnac
By lecoupdejarnac (Aug 31, 2013)

I can't speak for all 808 owners, but personally I'm disappointed that there isn't a clear upgrade path right now.

To switch to the 1020 from the 808 has a few serious tradeoffs:

1. loss of image quality (the most important factor for people buying these kind of phones)
2. lack of microSD card slot; this is absolutely baffling to not include in a camera phone
3. loss of configurable bracketing mode, sharpness, saturation, contrast controls
4. no more HDMI port
5. no more 8MP output resolution option; I use this one the most

Sure there are a few gains too, but for me at least, they don't outweigh the losses.

I do hope that the 1020 is a huge success, and that people will buy it. That would mean better camera phones down the line.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (Aug 31, 2013)

It is not about "bashing" this new handset. It is a discussion, and it is a discussion specifically about the camera module section of the 1020. I am sure more 808 users are quite happy to upgrade to a 1020 if it at least could match or better the quality of images coming from the 808. Is it not logical to want to move up to a better phone that will capture similar or better images? This is especially so with the 1020, since the camera portion seems to dominate the handset.

No one is stopping buyers from getting a 1020. The idea of a review is to determine the in's and out's of a device, be it positive or negative, and in the "connect" site focusing on the camera section and to let the reader decide for him/her self.

2 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Aug 31, 2013)

lecoupdejarnac, as a 808 (in addition to the iPhone 5 and some other gadgets) owner, I fully agree. And this is why I'll also skip the 1020. Hope the next Nokia camera flagship will be at least as good as the 808 with all the features already offered by the Snapdragon 800 chipset - 1080p60, 4K video recording etc.

BTW, the audio quality should also be added to your list, in which the 1020 also lags behind the 808.

2 upvotes
MistyFog
By MistyFog (11 months ago)

That would be true for folks like lecoup, bigley and messrs werner, who have been reasonable and objective. I understand your point of view. But, there are others who are just looking at an excuse to tarnish the 1020. I mean, just looking at the comment section alone, an unsuspecting reader gets the impression that the 1020 has a poor camera, which is not the case. And these comparisons to the 808 are way disproportionate for owners of a device that probably has 0.01% of market share. So despite your good intentions it is being taken advantage of by others with less noble intentions.

2 upvotes
Stoli89
By Stoli89 (11 months ago)

I don't think the 1020 was designed to be an upgrade to the 808. Frankly, the market is not big enough. No, the 1020 was designed to have greater market appeal, and therefore it had to make certain concessions that were not made for the 808. In particular, the image sensor size, which has resulted in significantly smaller physical pixels. The other missing attributes (no SD expansion, no HDMI and no 8MP) are not as critical for the mass market, else Nokia would've included them.

Personally, if it weren't for the shrinking Symbian ecosystem, I'd probably go for a second hand 808. But if I were to invest over the next 2 years, knowing that Symbian support is on the verge of waning...I think the 1020 is a very compelling device.

Comment edited 18 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Jon Holstein
By Jon Holstein (11 months ago)

Yes, that is the simple Truth, the 1020 is not an upgrade to the 808, it's rather what the 808 should have been.
A better sized phone.
With better screen.
More appealing OS (touch version of Symbian never felt finnished).
Nice design.

The 8MP mode of the 808 is not as good as the 5MP mode of the 808 according to Nokia. So they probably removed it, so it would not be used by misstake.

HDMI out on phones, has not been a hit.
No microSD slot, I agree is a let down, especially since the phone as far as i know does not have USB OTG mass storage support, cause connecting a USB-drive would for me beat MicroSD slot any day.

The 808 lacked all mass market appeal, and therefor made no sense for the Nokia that were. They needed mass appeal products.

Sure, Nokia could have built a device that outperformed the 808 in every aspect, but who would get it? It would have to be thick and chunky, and with that thickness they could have almost included an optical zoom lens for a smaller sensor...

1 upvote
CyberAngel
By CyberAngel (11 months ago)

Let Nokia keep the 5MPx in default aspect ratio
but I would LOVE to see in 16:9 these
8Mpx UHD 3840x2160
(4Mpx monitors 2450x1440)
2Mpx FHD 1920x1080
1MPx Phone/Web/Social 1280x720
in both images and video

0 upvotes
Miike Dougherty
By Miike Dougherty (Aug 31, 2013)

What am I missing? The enlarged images taken with this phone on my computer look great.

5 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Aug 31, 2013)

DId you accidentally disable your angry old man mode? It's the default setting, but sometimes it can get switched off by accident. Look for it in the user control panel

5 upvotes
noirdesir
By noirdesir (Aug 30, 2013)

Isn't the low light test a bit arbitrary if you are not controlling the shutter speed? Yes, one argue that almost everybody will never actually try to control the shutter speed, and matters is what you get out the camera using stock, all-auto settings.

A camera might select a rather long shutter speed in your test setup and thus create a better IQ but adds more motion blur and the real question is whether a grainy or a slightly blurry picture is the better one. To which there cannot be a universal answer, for once motion blur will vary from image to image, will depend on the situation and the shooter and last but not least one the preferences of the person viewing the image.

What you test here is only the low light performance 'on a tripod' using auto settings. And while auto probably is the most relevant setting for the vast majority of users, I'm not so sure about the 'tripod' aspect.

2 upvotes
whatsa
By whatsa (Aug 31, 2013)

@noirdesir
I think the only thing it does is favour the outcome for the other phones as they do not have a floating lense.

if anything the others would be worse
given the same movement
This is basically impossible to replicate from phone to phone. so ?

0 upvotes
MistyFog
By MistyFog (Aug 31, 2013)

This kind of comparison actually works to the advantage of the iPhone and Samsung Galaxy which do not have Optical Image Stabilization. In the real world, shots are taken handheld, thus the iPhones and Galaxies will have issues with motion blur.

4 upvotes
Lars Rehm
By Lars Rehm (Aug 31, 2013)

well, what you are saying is true but the same is true for our camera tests. The world is one big compromise and not everything can be tested in the same test. If a camera tends to use very slow shutter speeds in low light and blurry pictures we speak about that on the Image Quality page of the review.

1 upvote
noirdesir
By noirdesir (Aug 31, 2013)

Since this is a photography enthusiast site, there might be a fair share of people who want to know which camera does better at, eg, ISO 800. They also want to how effective the OIS is but they want to know both things separately because for moving objects the OIS doesn't really help.

Just posting the shutter speed (and f-stop, though the aperture will be wide open anyway) would be instructive. Posting the ISO would also be instructive but about something else, namely that a manufacturer's ISO value is rather loosely defined.

Lumia 920: ISO 640, f/2, 1/15 s
iPhone 5: ISO 500, f/2.4, 1/15 s
Samsung: ISO 1600, f/2.2, 1/30 s
Lumia 1020: ISO 800, f/2.2, 1/11 s

And for your camera tests, what matters is IQ per shutter speed and f-stop (for a fixed lighting). Anything else is just complicating things, eg, by using a calculated ISO as a proxy for shutter speed.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Jon Holstein
By Jon Holstein (11 months ago)

@noirdesir
Very true...
For mobiles, tripod tests are pretty much wrothless. If you can bring a Tripod, you can probably bring a dedicated camera as well. if you get the Lumia 520, which is a pretty good phone, with almost the same performance as the 1020, and a RX100, you will end up at about the same price as an 1020 plus tripod mount (not necessarily the grip pack), I think even less actually. But what you will do is outperform the Lumia 1020 in ever aspect.
If you are looking for a phone that can take pictures, well, then you wont use a tripod.

Surely it cant be impossible to build a small rig, that outputs shakes at the same level as a steady grip, but in a way its possible to repeat the same kind of shakes (motor-base system), so handheld performance can be compared. It could probably even have settings, so you can have steady hand, less steady and shaky hand settings.

0 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Aug 30, 2013)

It has gotten to a point that they have to plop a great camera in order to sell a smart phone.

Blurred lines.

.

3 upvotes
MistyFog
By MistyFog (Aug 31, 2013)

Pretty much every smartphone maker is doing (or at least trying) this today? Just so happens Nokia is best at doing it?

4 upvotes
Rage Joe
By Rage Joe (Aug 30, 2013)

Looks like this Nokia 1020 is on a completely different level IQ-wise, compared to its rivals.
Just look at the comparison pages. That's where you really see what a huge difference there is. Comparing the pictures in same size you avoid the mistake many people tend to make, comparing only 100% per pixel sharpness - and of course it is harder to get all the 41 million pixels tack sharp (for any optics) than say 8 million.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Dominick101
By Dominick101 (Aug 30, 2013)

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.

6 upvotes
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (Aug 31, 2013)

agree with you, it is quite disappointing that both Nokia and DP review are trying to ignore the 808, considering it was the previous flagship Nokia camera phone. It seems this review has more emphasis on marketing the 1020.

5 upvotes
MistyFog
By MistyFog (Aug 31, 2013)

Sorry, you won't find customers going into a phone store asking, hey is this phone's camera better than 808? I know you have an 808 but the world does not revolve around you.

3 upvotes
Impulses
By Impulses (Aug 31, 2013)

Pretty much, the 808 is irrelevant to most consumers, kinda like Symbian.

1 upvote
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (Aug 31, 2013)

MistyFog, again I iterate, is it not logical to compare what improvements have been made over the older model? When DP review reviews a new camera, they will compare it to cameras in the same class but also they will look at what has improved over it's predecessor, eg review of Fuji X100s, has direct image quality comparison to the older X100. Have you a problem with that too?

4 upvotes
Lars Rehm
By Lars Rehm (Aug 31, 2013)

Nobody is trying to downplay the 808. But the fact is that as a mobile device it is obsolete and only ever sold in extremely small numbers. The 1020 in contrast is a mainstream product which appeals to large groups of consumers.

3 upvotes
nawknai
By nawknai (Aug 31, 2013)

I wouldn't see the point of comparing to the 808 anyway. As a consumer, it's not like I can choose between the 808 and the Lumia 1020. A comparison to the 808 would be "cute", but not relevant to the significant majority of people who want to make a purchase today.

0 upvotes
Hobbit13
By Hobbit13 (Aug 31, 2013)

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 Stabilization
I'm pretty sure the 1020 is the best "smartphone", Symbian doesn't fare well in being "smart".

3 upvotes
vlad0
By vlad0 (Aug 31, 2013)

Yes you can... as a consumer you can pick up an unlocked 808 from amazon with US warranty for under $400. Its a proper smartphone..

4 upvotes
stylinred
By stylinred (11 months ago)

@hobbit13 the 808 is a better smartphone though... it has more features and can do things better than the 1020 can heck it can compete with other devices too the only thing it lacks is support and apps since the os has been abandoned

Comment edited 35 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Lars Rehm
By Lars Rehm (Aug 30, 2013)

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...

3 upvotes
Markol
By Markol (Aug 30, 2013)

I have been using the 808 for over a year and its camera looks clearly better to me. I can do all I want to do even on the old Symbian, some things are even available only there like call recording. The browser is a pain, but personally I don't like to look at non mobile websites with any phone.
So for me there is no reason to change and I am a little disappointed in the 1020 compronises conpared to the pure experience on the 808 imaging wise.

13 upvotes
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (Aug 31, 2013)

so what you are saying is that it is worth the compromise in quality just to have a phone that is not obsolete

2 upvotes
MistyFog
By MistyFog (Aug 31, 2013)

@markol, bigley:

I have an 808 too, and I'm definitely replacing it with the 1020. Shocking isn't it, that not everybody thinks the same way as you?

3 upvotes
blue hour
By blue hour (Aug 31, 2013)

The 808 is quite capable as a phone too.

I'd really like to see an image quality comparison with the 1020.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 54 seconds after posting
7 upvotes
MistyFog
By MistyFog (Aug 31, 2013)

@bluehour:

Sure, the 808 is perfectly capable as a PHONE. And a pretty darn good camera. But that is all. Browser? Meh. Email? Meh. Social? Meh.

2 upvotes
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (Aug 31, 2013)

@MistyFog Agree the 808 is quite obsolete, but is it too much to ask for at least the same camera quality that we are used to in the newer 1020?

I guess if I had to migrate to a 1020, I think I would get a Sony RX100 or RX100 ii to complement it.

0 upvotes
3DSimmon
By 3DSimmon (Aug 31, 2013)

My phone works perfectly fine on my 808, or is talking on it too old school these days?

2 upvotes
YiannisPP
By YiannisPP (Aug 31, 2013)

You mean the 808 has no browser and no email? Stop lying please. Again, I do not own an 808. And I don't work for Nokia either. Just don't like fanatics that dismiss something just because "it's not Android". Seems too geeky to me:)

Comment edited 12 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
Hobbit13
By Hobbit13 (Aug 31, 2013)

@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)

2 upvotes
vlad0
By vlad0 (Aug 31, 2013)

I disagree .. the 808 can be as smart as any other smartphone out there.

5 upvotes
oscil8
By oscil8 (Aug 31, 2013)

@bigley Ling frankly yes it is too much to ask. Nokia may do good optics, but ultimately they're a phone maker and they want to sell phones. Is it too much to ask that you might actually be impressed at how much Pureview they actually retained while squeezing it into a pocketable device? Not to mention adding capabilities that even the 808 doesn't have?

There is a certain type of smartphone owner who is obsessed by cpu cores and screen resolution, usually because they want to win p1ssing competitions. Some of the comments by 808 fans sound suspiciously similar...my sensor's bigger than yours

Read below and we'll see if anyone develops a bit of perspective

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/07/15/nokia_lumia_1020_technical_walkthrough

1 upvote
MistyFog
By MistyFog (Aug 31, 2013)

lol@yiannis

You accused me of lying, and yet you do not own an 808 yourself? What a joker.

First off, I never said it does not have a browser or email. Technically speaking it sort of does have a "browser" and "email". But not ones I would use in today's world. I have no patience for waiting 10 seconds for an email to load/reply.

@hobbit:
I prefer Opera Mini which is faster and smoother than Opera Mobile. But it does have some quirks like when you reply in forums it does not get posted in the correct place. Gravity is pretty good but it costs a bomb and it does have some occasional performance/connectivity issues. In any case, these are pretty basic stuff that should work right out the box.

0 upvotes
stany buyle
By stany buyle (Aug 31, 2013)

808 is a great phone as well with very nice sound.
OS is just a question of getting used to it.

2 upvotes
YiannisPP
By YiannisPP (Aug 31, 2013)

I'm a joker because I don't own a 808 but can still comment on it? Lol, if you say so...OK, can't resist, my best friend has one and I've used it a few times out of interest and he's shared his opinion with me too. But please don't tell us that you can't wait 10secs for an email to load. You obviously have loads of time to spare judging by the amount of time you spend making fun of other people on this one single page...

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Stevan G
By Stevan G (Aug 31, 2013)

"you might actually be impressed at how much Pureview they actually retained while squeezing it into a pocketable device?"

808 is more pocketable(less volume) and there is more chance you will find short pocket where you couldn't fit 920 than thin pocket where you couldn't fit 808, it's just marketing that deludes people.

also 1020 doesn't retain anything from PV technology, it doesn't have dedicated imaging processor, it doesnt have any oversampling goodies at all, just a simple resize procedure

0 upvotes
MistyFog
By MistyFog (11 months ago)

@Yiannis

What device you use? I doubt you use anything slower than the 808. Probably a blazingly fast Lumia, judging by the inordinate amount of time you have available to comment here on the 808.

0 upvotes
CyberAngel
By CyberAngel (11 months ago)

"also 1020 doesn't retain anything from PV technology,
X
it doesnt have any oversampling goodies at all, just a simple resize procedure"
OR
Taras says:
July 23, 2013 at 2:03 pm
I emailed Elop today and this was his reply

“The oversampling in 1020 is much more advanced than in 808. In 1020, the oversampling is adaptive so that we prioritize the high amount of details in bright light, and we prioritize the low noise in low light.

This means that in bright light our 5MP images have higher sharpness and bit higher noise than 808. On the other hand, in low light our images use similar low noise tech. that we have in 808. The background for this implementation is that the subjective image quality tends to be limited by sharpness in bright light and noise in low light.

While we believe that this is exactly the right thing to do, I have also noticed that it has caused some confusion among the users. Naturally the parameters are fully tunable in future software updates if needed.”

1 upvote
Stevan G
By Stevan G (11 months ago)

He could mail Nokia marketing department as well and get the same response...I still rather believe my own eyes than elop, sorry.

0 upvotes
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (11 months ago)

@ CyberAngel

That is an interesting reply from Elop, in low light samples I have compared, the 1020 differs from the 808 in both bright and low light scenes. In low light the 1020 retains more detail, with a slight expense of visible noise, in bright light the 1020, does still have more noise than the 808, yet it does not have any more detail. The images coming from the 1020 in daylight do seem sharper, but that's due to edge sharpening.

Possibly Nokia has over processed the "bright light" scenes with edge sharpening to make up for the shortfalls of the smaller sensor quality, & minimized processing in low light high ISO shots.

A 3rd party app, or a Nokia firmware update should allow user tweaking of the 1020's algorithm. In bright light, the image quality of the 1020's smaller sensor may not as flattering as the 808's larger sensor & with the application of over zealous edge sharpening may have a far more damaging effect of fine details than just leaving the image as is.

1 upvote
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (11 months ago)

@ oscil8

thanks for the link. Some interesting reading. It does still sounds like it is a marketing white paper, but yes it does raise valid points.

For my camera centric requirement, the 1020, needs some tweaks and it can be a formidable upgrade for 808 users.

Software improvements :

- Reinstate the creative modes in the 1020 where you have multiple presets for all those new manual settings.

- improve buffer efficiency so allow for at least 3 frames in 5Mp pureview mode, to give a small burst portential

- Allow for user configurable sharpness, contrast, and saturation for those who want to personalize their images to their taste

- disable widest angle setting when capturing dual image or full res image, as the corner performance is not so good, but allow for the widest focal length in 5MP only mode (corner softness should be less visible with less resolution)

Hardware improvement:

-easiest mod is to add a drop in Aperture ring and that will sharpen the entire frame nicely

1 upvote
robbo d
By robbo d (Aug 30, 2013)

I've seen head to head samples between 808 and 1020 on another site. The 1020 overall is the better shooter, giving better tones and Low light performance. Perhaps in kind lighting, the 808 has better IQ, but overall, technology has caught up. Still going to oust any other cam phone and hopefully Nokia Aust, will bring it in, then my plan expiry in Nov will be complete.
Simply, it's an advancement on any previous phone, it's getting closer and closer to being the same as a top compact, so for having tethered to your phone, it's a half decent shooter.
Nice review.

3 upvotes
MistyFog
By MistyFog (Aug 31, 2013)

Shh, please don't bring up the 808. The 808 owners ego get hurt when their phones don't get praised skyhigh and especially if another camera has taken its place at the top.

4 upvotes
3DSimmon
By 3DSimmon (Aug 31, 2013)

No Fog, we don't seek praise, we just KNOW the 808 is still king, we just need to rub it in, haha

6 upvotes
MistyFog
By MistyFog (Aug 31, 2013)

Yes dear, it is the king. Now time for bed, and don't forget to kiss your 808 before you sleep.

2 upvotes
YiannisPP
By YiannisPP (Aug 31, 2013)

MistyFog, sorry but you come across as a smug idiot. Yeah, go ahead, report me. Not everybody here is defending the 808 because the own it. I don't own it. Has it ever occured to you that it might be clearly better and the IQ on the 1020 is a downgrade and that's something interesting and we'd expect DPR to touch on that?

2 upvotes
vlad0
By vlad0 (Aug 31, 2013)

The 808 has superior IQ overall... anyone who knows anything about how a good jpeg should look like will clearly see that :) Its no big deal, it is what it is..

Comment edited 18 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
MistyFog
By MistyFog (Aug 31, 2013)

Now Yiannis, pretty much EVERY single posts of yours is talking about the 808. Zero comments on other phones. That is quite an amazing obsession for a non-808 user, don't you think? What was/is holding you back from purchasing an 808?

1 upvote
lecoupdejarnac
By lecoupdejarnac (Aug 31, 2013)

Heh almost every parent post on here has an anti-808-owner flamebait post by @MistyFog.

I say we all stop feeding the troll.

1 upvote
YiannisPP
By YiannisPP (Aug 31, 2013)

Yes lecoup, I think you're right.

1 upvote
stylinred
By stylinred (11 months ago)

mistyfog and petrogel do nothing but diss nokia and the 808 this has gone on for years yet they have the gall to put down those speaking in favour of the 808 for having too much time,ego,pride In devices they actually own and use?... time to roll that wheelchair outside and enjoy the sun while its still summer you two

1 upvote
CyberAngel
By CyberAngel (11 months ago)

nice troll and bad troll.
I like the first one MUCH better
I wish I could filter the latter >:-(

0 upvotes
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (Aug 30, 2013)

A few search revealed that the 808 has a larger sensor of 1/1.2" which is pretty saddening. All I wished for a newer Pureview 808 was an updated OS; and maybe a better display.

Nokia, why not make a P&S based on 808's hardware? Sell it around the price of a Canon S or Panny LX, and you probably might sell a substantial amount.

2 upvotes
Jon Holstein
By Jon Holstein (11 months ago)

The 808 can not compare in performance with the RX100 and RX100 II, and it would cost a lot to develop such a device.
And it's only the pro compact segment that has any real interest left, it has slightly gone up in sales, but the rest has lost out to mobiles.
So unless they can do something to take on the best in that segment, there is no use.

0 upvotes
YiannisPP
By YiannisPP (11 months ago)

Well Jon, I own the RX100 and do not own the 808. But I had considered the 808 and while doing it I examined every full resolution sample I could come across. My conclusion was that yes in general the RX100 is a superior imaging tool, but by not as wide a margin as you probably imagine. In terms of resolution/noise at base ISO they are pretty level. Not looking at WB, speed of operation etc. Purely in terms of IQ at fixed WA and good light they are actually surprisingly close. And the 808 beats the other smaller sensor enthusiast cameras in that regard, like the G15 or XZ2 etc. I did not use the "oversampled" images from the 808 but rather downsized the full 41MP ones myself for my comparisons.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
NewVu
By NewVu (Aug 30, 2013)

Great view! Excellent job with a lot of details. I was wondering if there's a seconds delay option on the 1020? I like taking multiple exposures of the same scene to do HDR but cameras without a delay means the first shot is off as I'm pressing the shutter button.

I'd love to try this with the new grip as it comes with a mount for my tripod.

Comment edited 42 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Lars Rehm
By Lars Rehm (Aug 30, 2013)

yes, the 1020 has a shutter delay option in the settings menu.

1 upvote
Lan
By Lan (Aug 30, 2013)

To echo the general sentiment; I'd really like to see a direct comparison between the 1020 and the 808 at full rez.

Based on my experience of the 808 and looking at the samples posted, it looks like the 1020 is a noticeable step down in detail at a per-pixel level - too much NR even at base ISO. I'd like to be able to see how much detail it gives away though... The Nokia PR flacks might be less keen however ;)

Whilst the PR flacks are looking, maybe some decent and consistent product names would help sales? By that I don't mean branding everything with a camera as Lumia and a scattering of numbers. The only reason I can remember this is the 1020 is because it says so at the top of the screen... Most people simply don't care!

12 upvotes
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (Aug 30, 2013)

also a pureview 5mp comparison will reveal which has the better oversampling engine

3 upvotes
Lars Rehm
By Lars Rehm (Aug 30, 2013)

I'll meet some guys from Nokia next week. If they can still dig out a 808 we can organize a a quick shoot-out.

3 upvotes
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (Aug 31, 2013)

Lars Rehm, hope you can get hold of an 808 for testing. It seems logical to always test the new against the old right?

3 upvotes
MistyFog
By MistyFog (Aug 31, 2013)

Save the trouble Lars, just tell them that 808 is better and these guys will go away.

2 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Aug 30, 2013)

"Nearly all phones offer some version of this function, and they all work pretty much the same way: hit the shutter and pan as smoothly as you can. This is fast and intuitive, but it has some drawbacks. Most importantly, the still images that are stitched into the final pano are taken while you’re moving the camera. For bright, outdoor conditions, shutter speeds are generally high enough to hide this movement. But for lower-light, indoor panoramic opportunities, the panning speed is often enough to blur the final image."

Also, the non-stiching approach has a lot of other drawbacks, at least when it comes to Apple's implementation:

- very bad low-light (noise, sensitivity - not only blur!) performance
- very sensitive to 100/120 Hz light flickering, unlike anything stitching-based (see my flicker set showing this at http://www.flickr.com/photos/33448355@N07/sets/72157635185544525/ )
- etc.

(Note that I'll elaborate on this in my forthcoming "iOS Panorama Shooting Bible".)

1 upvote
barareklam
By barareklam (Aug 30, 2013)

Fantastic Review, thanks !

One question regarding software on Lumia 920 since you compare image quality. Is Nokia Lumia 920 updated to GDR2 and Amber and Pictures taken with Nokia Pro Cam, or which software version is on Lumia 920? Because it is improved a lot after updates! So we know what are you comparing, thanks.

1 upvote
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (Aug 30, 2013)

Where is the image quality comparison say against the older sibling the Nokia 808?

Although a very informative review, I think it is a little biased, and does not portray any accuracy, since they dare not compare it to the likes of the Nokia 808. The 808 does have better lens performance in the corners over the 1020, and even lower noise at full resolution, combine that with a much superior 5mp oversampling pureview handled via dedicated image processor rather than software, I believe the 808 still retains the lead.

13 upvotes
YiannisPP
By YiannisPP (Aug 30, 2013)

Agreed 100%. DPR I think on purpose shied away from a direct comparison. I think you're being very conservative in saying the 808 still retains the lead. I have downsized many full resolution 808 images I've found on the net, down to 10MP and they look on a completely different level to the 5MP 1020 samples posted here. No comparison.

4 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Aug 30, 2013)

Agreed. The 808's lens IS better in the full (at 16:9) 10% of both borders. Also, it has less noise.

I wish Nokia ported their Pro Camera / action camera etc. stuff back to Symbian (of course I know they won't).

5 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Aug 30, 2013)

(edit: removed the post as it was posted to the wrong thread)

Comment edited 54 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
MistyFog
By MistyFog (Aug 31, 2013)

Biased because it does not compare against a phone that nobody except you and me have? Do you understand the meaning of bias?

Comment edited 43 seconds after posting
1 upvote
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (Aug 31, 2013)

yes I do understand the meaning of bias MistyFog. As I said earlier it is logical to compare the old with the new as newer is meant to be better, and connect here is meant to review the cameras of handsets, not the apps, OS or the browsers.

1 upvote
MistyFog
By MistyFog (Aug 31, 2013)

So how are they biased? If anything, Connect tends to be biased towards iPhone/Android rather than WP/Symbian. You need a bit more substance before hurling that word around.

1 upvote
Jon Holstein
By Jon Holstein (11 months ago)

There is probably a reason they did not compare to the 808.
They didnt have one to do a fair comparisson?

DP when reviewing the 808 had it set to 8Megapixels, for its downsampled test images, even though default was 5 and Nokia was saying that 5 was the best mode.

On the other hand the 808 is irrelevant, almost no one got it, ans it wasnt widely avaible. Pretty much no one can still pick it up, if they ruled it better.
And the 1020 has OIS, and much better format, and better experience OS, so I'm sure DP would not like to recommend it to anyone today, even if IQ is slightly higer.

0 upvotes
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (Aug 30, 2013)

Nokia, this is too expensive.

0 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Aug 30, 2013)

The (full) price will surely go down (to about half of the current one) after 7-8 months - as happened to the previous camera flagships (808 / 920).

1 upvote
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (Aug 30, 2013)

Thanks, but I'm not as enthusiastic after reading into some comments and searching the net about the qualities of the 808.

1 upvote
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (Aug 30, 2013)

absolutely agree, why pay premium price for a lesser product when it come to image and video capture! If 1020 cannot be better than the 808, it should not be marketed at similar price as the 808 when it was released.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
Lars Rehm
By Lars Rehm (Aug 30, 2013)

well, it's a much better phone, so that's a good reason.

2 upvotes
whatsa
By whatsa (Aug 31, 2013)

And you can buy it!

0 upvotes
Impulses
By Impulses (Aug 31, 2013)

I think the price is high but not necessarily because it isn't worth it, but because WP has a massive market share to make up against iOS & Android and flagship phones priced this high isn't gonna help matters... Specially not when Android's iterated so quickly that last May's hot releases (like the One) can already be found for $50.

0 upvotes
vlad0
By vlad0 (Aug 31, 2013)

It might be a better smart phone, but not a better phone...

1 upvote
Jon Holstein
By Jon Holstein (11 months ago)

@vlad0
Did the 808 feature super sensitive touch-screen, in that case, I probably agree, as a phone this probably wont be better, but not worse either.
As a camera, it's a mixed bag.
As a device to put in your pocket, the 1020 wins hands down.
As an overall product, well Symbian was ok, but Nokias touchscreen implementation was never really good. 1020 has a better feel, and more compatible apps. Symbian has some advantages, like file manager and better multitasking, but as a whole WP in the 1020 leaves you with a better experience.

0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Aug 30, 2013)

What impresses me most is the fact that you can see the LCD when it's sunny. This is a huge improvement that could make cameras without viewfinders practical. Bad news for Hoodman, though.

If this type of phone can be made without anything Windows and without a monthly data fee, I'm definitely interested.

0 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Aug 30, 2013)

"If this type of phone can be made without anything Windows"

Hmmm... if you can give up OIS and these additional apps (incl. the ability to set the shutter speed), Symbian?

" and without a monthly data fee"

Pay upfront for the unsubsidized, full-price version?

1 upvote
YiannisPP
By YiannisPP (Aug 30, 2013)

Hmm, from a very brief look at the 5MP samples it is very obvious that it's clearly worse than the 808. Review should've mentionned that. The 808 could compete directly with enthusiast dedicated cameras. This cannot.

8 upvotes
dpLarry
By dpLarry (Aug 30, 2013)

I need 5mp.

0 upvotes
Carbon111
By Carbon111 (Aug 30, 2013)

Huh. Looks like a great "phone camera" but a not-so-great "camera".
I'd prefer 12 clean megapixels to 41 noisy, smeary ones...

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Aug 30, 2013)

Uhhh, that's what the 5MP mode is for.

2 upvotes
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (Aug 30, 2013)

The older model Nokia 808 had 41mp, and in pureview 8mp the image does not look smeary. oversampling algorithm has alot to do with quality output in reduced mp

Comment edited 33 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Jon Holstein
By Jon Holstein (11 months ago)

Well you never get the full sensor resolution, and the 41MP sensor for the 1020 can probably under perftect condition capture more than 12Megapixels... So what you would want is about 20 Megapixels, in as a big sensor so the pixels will be larger.
But nokia really had to do something worth headlines, and 20MP 1.5 years ago (when 808 was announced) would have sounded nice, but not really impressive. Now it would not have raised any eyebrows at all.

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Aug 30, 2013)

"Because each of those five million pixels is the average of seven actual photosites, the output is higher quality than what you’d expect from a straight 5MP sensor. "

And guess what, because pixels on 5MP sensor are bigger than pixels on 41MP sensor, the pixel output of 5PM sensor is average of the light falling onto the area of the bigger sensor equivalent to the area of 8 pixels plus dividers between them, so the quality of 5mpix sensor would be even better than average of 7 pixels in 41mpix sensor.
Of course, on superres sensor you can use tricks like EXR, but just averaging gives you nothing.

1 upvote
pavi1
By pavi1 (Aug 30, 2013)

Too bad such a nice camera is housed in a smart phone that is not all that smart.

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Aug 30, 2013)

Will Fuji install that "densor" into X30 and X-S2?

0 upvotes
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (Aug 30, 2013)

eh? It is possibly a modified variant of the 1020 sensor will be implemented in the upcoming Sony Honami

0 upvotes
keeponkeepingon
By keeponkeepingon (Aug 30, 2013)

I've been waiting for this review.

I love my 808 but will dump it in a heart beat if there is something significantly better.

Unfortunately this review has no IQ comparisons against the 808.

(that I could find, if I'm wrong tell me the page number and I will cower in shame).

I thought y'all reviewed the 808 as one of your first reviews? How can I get a comparison of the 1020 and 808 test shots? Your selectoramoter does not include the 808.

Also you state the sensor of the 1020 is "slightly smaller"than the 808s. That's sort of an exageration. I've seen anything from 30 to 50% smaller. What's the exact size difference?

Thanks!

Comment edited 43 seconds after posting
6 upvotes
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (Aug 30, 2013)

review is biases because of this, and I suspect Nokia may have restricted "connect" from doing a direct comparison, in fear that it would affect sales of the 1020. It just does not looks good from a sales point Nokia releasing a newer model flagship phone that has less IQ and lower performing lens that the previous flagship.

4 upvotes
YiannisPP
By YiannisPP (Aug 30, 2013)

Indeed that might have been the case. Not sure about the lens, but the 808 sensor is quite bigger and it shows on the samples for sure.

2 upvotes
zonoskar
By zonoskar (Aug 30, 2013)

The 808 uses a 1/1.2" (10.67×8 mm) sensor, while the 1020 uses a 1/1.5" (8.8×6.6 mm) sensor. So the sensor area is roughly 32% smaller (or the 808's sensor is 47% bigger)

6 upvotes
YiannisPP
By YiannisPP (Aug 30, 2013)

So approximately 50% more light gathered. That's got to make some difference. But really one needs to make a direct comparison to see the actual difference. I'm willing to bet it's a clearly noticeable difference on a per pixel level.

2 upvotes
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (Aug 30, 2013)

image sample comparisons have already been posted on other sites, and it shows the 808 having detail over the whole frame, vs 1020 which has less detail on the left and right hand side and very poor detail at the extreme corners.

3 upvotes
MistyFog
By MistyFog (Aug 31, 2013)

4. The 808's video, especially when fully zoomed in, shakes like crazy. The 1020 has addressed that.

3. The 808 does not take very good long-exposure low-light shots unless with tripod. Which 99% of people don't carry around. The 1020 addresses that problem.

2. The 808 also has a rather big hump. The 1020 addresses that, too.

And most importantly:

1. Nokia did not create the 1020 specifically for you, the tiny handful of 808 owners, to upgrade to. And neither is DPReview writing articles specifically for a tiny handful of 808 owners.

2 upvotes
MistyFog
By MistyFog (Aug 31, 2013)

@Zonoskar, Yannis:

Sure, sensor size is one thing. Did you factor in the difference in aperture? How about a bunch of wires in front of the 808's sensor blocking some light from reaching the sensor?

Comment edited 29 seconds after posting
1 upvote
3DSimmon
By 3DSimmon (Aug 31, 2013)

That's right fog, this phone is aimed at the masses who don't regard picture quality as highly as, we'll people who do appreciate picture quality, and that's fine. The masses don't care about corner sharpness or smudgy images, so the 1020 will serve it's intended market well, and that's cool. But from a pure imaging perspective, the 1020 sucks in comparison to the 808.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
3 upvotes
MistyFog
By MistyFog (Aug 31, 2013)

If you value absolute picture quality above everything else, I think Samsung might make your next best camera. Guessing from their recent history, it won't take long before they stick a phone to their DSLR range. Introduciiiing, the Samsung Galaxy S4 DSLR!

For the rest of us, shape/form does matter. Thanks to their engineering design work, the 1020 is now compared very favourably against the Galaxy S4 Zoom. You know which "phone" is the one people are laughing at, right?

1 upvote
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (Aug 31, 2013)

@MistyFog

"Sure, sensor size is one thing. Did you factor in the difference in aperture? How about a bunch of wires in front of the 808's sensor blocking some light from reaching the sensor?"

Absolutely true, for this reason, it would be nice to see the advantages of a f2.2 aperture over a f2.4 aperture. To see the differences between old FSI vs new BSI. We all want improvement in technology. We all want a thinner handset while retaining all the pureview goodness we have become accustomed to. This is why DP Conect should include a comparison with the 1020 predecessor, and show what the 1020 can do.

0 upvotes
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (11 months ago)

@ MistyFog

"4. The 808's video, especially when fully zoomed in, shakes like crazy. The 1020 has addressed that.

3. The 808 does not take very good long-exposure low-light shots unless with tripod. Which 99% of people don't carry around. The 1020 addresses that problem.

2. The 808 also has a rather big hump. The 1020 addresses that, too.

And most importantly:

1. Nokia did not create the 1020 specifically for you, the tiny handful of 808 owners, to upgrade to. And neither is DPReview writing articles specifically for a tiny handful of 808 owners."

Excellent points MistyFog, for this reason we want to see this in the review comparing what the 1020 can do over the 808. It would be good to see some video stabilization tests.

Yes the number of people with 808 may be few, but it was because of minimal to no marketing. I would like to think the 1020 was designed for everyone to be able to upgrade, even for the small populous of 808 owners.

0 upvotes
Jon Holstein
By Jon Holstein (11 months ago)

The 1020 has much more massa market appeal.
I saw some marketing for the 808. But it simply did not have a massa market design appeal.

The 1020 has soem advantages over 808, that may very well win over quite a lot for those who got the 808. Some of which are not using it on a day to day basis, due to the size. Some who wants a more modern smartphone experience. And those who appreciate OIS.
Those who got the 808 and only care about IQ could find themselves in a dilemma, OIS could help some images, but in perfect conditions, the 808 is better.

But the 808 didn't sell well, and some will be willing to upgrade to the 1020. But the 1020, will probably sell to a whole lot of people who never even new about the 808. And excluding 808 upgraders the 1020 will probably far outsell the 808, thanks it its much better mass market appeal.

You guys think Nokia should have focused only on beating the 808 image quality-wise and not in sales. I do think that in this matter some need a realitycheck

0 upvotes
stany buyle
By stany buyle (Aug 30, 2013)

Not innovative enough to replace my 808... IQ isn't significantly better than 808 neither.

8 upvotes
Lars Rehm
By Lars Rehm (Aug 30, 2013)

that's true but it's a much better phone :-)

2 upvotes
YiannisPP
By YiannisPP (Aug 30, 2013)

I am 99% certain the 808 beats this in the IQ department quite comfortably.

Comment edited 14 seconds after posting
6 upvotes
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (Aug 30, 2013)

Lars Rehm, it may be a much better phone, but all for a thinner form factor for a less capable phone... one may as well get the lumia 925, as that formfactor is even better.

2 upvotes
MistyFog
By MistyFog (Aug 31, 2013)

If you're happy with slow laggy Symbian experience PLEASE do keep your 808. I'm done with it once the 1020 starts selling here.

2 upvotes
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (Aug 31, 2013)

@MistyFog is this a camera phone review or is it a phone review?

The camera app for symbian is far less laggy that the Pro camera app for 1020. It takes minimum 3 seconds between shots when capturing just a pureview 5mp image. The laggy symbian captures pureview 5mp at about 1 frame per second.

2 upvotes
MistyFog
By MistyFog (Aug 31, 2013)

Just a few days ago a few helicopters flew overhead. I quickly activated the camera on my 808. It hung. Long after the copters are gone the camera is still hung. That's not the first time this happened with the 808.

1 upvote
vlad0
By vlad0 (Aug 31, 2013)

Symbian on the 808 is not laggy...

2 upvotes
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (Aug 31, 2013)

@ MistyFog

I have not had this issue before, but it does not mean I disregard it does not happen. I think alot of smart phones suffer from this issue, and not just the Symbian. My iPhone 5 also hangs on occasion sometimes needs to be rebooted. Even android phones need rebooting from time to time. Are you saying Windows Phone 8 is infallible and never hangs and never needs reboots?

I have no idea why you are deliberately trying to flame the Nokia 808. It is as if you are trying to deceive buyers into buying the 1020 by stating that it can capture images in pureview faster than the 808.

If you are so confident that the 1020 has a better camera than the 808, I am sure it will sell with ease. You do not have to defend it a if your life depends on it.

1 upvote
MistyFog
By MistyFog (11 months ago)

@bigley

Of course not. I myself use the 808 as a daily driver and I understand its good and bad. There are so many anti-1020 and pro-808 comments here I feel the need to provide a counter-argument, lest people get deceived into thinking the 808 captures faster than the 1020 which may or may not be true.

I have had many occasions where the 808 camera totally failed to boot up. As in hanged. As in need-to-reboot kind of hang. Now I suspect it may have something to do with poor network connection especially with Gravity on, but still, it hanged when I needed it the most.

Of course I am aware the 1020 has issues with capture speed. This is something Nokia MUST address but hopefully it is just a matter of optimizing their code.

But people are making it sound like the 808 doesn't have issues. Which it does as mentioned above.

And of course as a smartphone the 808 has a lot more issues as well.

1 upvote
Just another Canon shooter
By Just another Canon shooter (Aug 30, 2013)

The S4 is so much better, in the studio comparisons, in good light, despite its smaller sensor. Downsized to 5mp, the Nokia is strongly aliased. The 41mp original is not. This shows a lousy downsizing algorithm designed to boost "detail". P&S with sensors of this size (which is what the Nokia is) have much better IQ (well, with better lenses as well).

The samples are very uninspiring with a few exceptions. Dull colors, "hazy", etc.

1 upvote
Lars Rehm
By Lars Rehm (Aug 30, 2013)

Can't say I agree with you. I've been shooting with both and in terms of image quality the Nokia wins hands-down. What I'd prefer as a phone and mobile device is a different matter...

2 upvotes
Just another Canon shooter
By Just another Canon shooter (Aug 30, 2013)

I was talking about what is posted. The conclusions of the review, in this particular case, contradict the images.

1 upvote
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (Aug 30, 2013)

oversampling results here seems more like image resizing. Could be due to no dedicated image processor

0 upvotes
Stu 5
By Stu 5 (Aug 30, 2013)

Have to say Lars I don't think this review is doing much for the credibility of the website. S4, iPhone 5 and 4s in good light are more than capable than producing better results. The DR is good but the lens is unacceptably poor in the corners and very early on. Plus the noise reduction is dreadful when it comes to smearing detail on landscape photos which are much better on the other phones mentioned.

1 upvote
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Aug 30, 2013)

"The DR is good but the lens is unacceptably poor in the corners and very early on. "

Just cut the left/rightmost, in 16:9 (in 4:3, it's about 6%), 10% of the frame and make sure you compose your shot knowing you WILL crop.

Then, what you have is a tack sharp image.

1 upvote
MistyFog
By MistyFog (Aug 31, 2013)

@Stu5:

Are you serious? The iPhone 5's pictures are HORRIBLE in anything less than perfect lighting. Barely usable. Of course, with good lighting the iPhone 5's images are comparable with the Lumia 925 (or 920/928 post-Amber update).

1 upvote
Ferling
By Ferling (Aug 30, 2013)

"slow camera app start-up"
"long shot to shot times"

Ah, the little things that still make folks angry in the crowd when they miss the shot of their kid at a compelling moment, etc. How many times I've earned a little business by jumping in with a DSLR to save the day and exchange an email address.

4 upvotes
Lars Rehm
By Lars Rehm (Aug 30, 2013)

well, it'll take a long time before a phone will replace your DSLR but the Nokia is veeeery close to many decent compact cameras in my opinion.

4 upvotes
Ferling
By Ferling (Aug 30, 2013)

Please don't take me wrong. Trust me, I don't doubt it's getting better, but we've become a photo addicted lot and get upset when we expect to use a wrench for a hammer. "Close" is still not fast enough for most moments.

1 upvote
Pavel H
By Pavel H (Aug 30, 2013)

I think I've read somewhere you can disable saving the big original fullsize file, just the 5Mpx version and it gets snappier.

Can anyone confirm?

1 upvote
CyberAngel
By CyberAngel (11 months ago)

save options are:
BIG+small
BIG
small

0 upvotes
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (11 months ago)

@ Pavel H

Steve Litchfield has reviewed the 1020 extensively. The best he said he got was 3 seconds between shots in 5mp pureview mode, and 4 seconds between shots if both 5mp and full res shots are captured simultaneously using Pro Camera app

Obviously if you want faster burst rates, there is other other apps that you can use to get burst rates in "Smart camera" or the default Windows Phone camera. The only drawback from not using Pro Camera, is that you do not get full resolution shots, nor will you get the "pureview" over sampling for 5Mp images.

0 upvotes
rb59020
By rb59020 (Aug 30, 2013)

In my experience having owned multiple brands of cell phones. Cell phone batteries are generally toast at around 24 months. This has been convenient for companies like Verizon, T-Mobile etc. Most soccer moms and other non-tech types could easily be talked into a contract renewal with a replacement of upgraded phone purchase, as the commission paid salesman didn't stock the $49.95 battery needed. Anyone with a butter knife and a screw driver could of course replace the battery with one from Amazon for $12.95 shipped free with Amazon Prime.

Now the manufacturers are making phones like the Nokia 1020 with a "non-removable" battery? Nothing like planned obsolescence. I'll keep my crappy HTC HD7 forever, at least the memory is upgradable and the battery replaceable.

3 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Aug 30, 2013)

"Cell phone batteries are generally toast at around 24 months. "

While I'm not happy the 1020 doesn't have a swappable battery either, I'd certainly argue with your statement.

It may be true with Apple, who refuse to put long-lasting batteries in iPhones. (Actually, on the contrary: for example, several batches of 3GS had a battery that not only died after between 2-3 years as did the other 3GS batteries, but also badly swollen, also breaking the screen / motherboard. I've handled several of those batteries and have even taken some shots of them: http://www.flickr.com/photos/33448355@N07/sets/72157633931601917/ )

With Nokia, however, I've had much better experience than with Apple. For example, the original battery of my five-and-a-half-year-old Nokia N95 still delivers about two-three days uptime, making it unneccessary to shop for a replacement battery. Needless to say, it didn't swell either. My original 10-year-old N-Gage battery operates just fine in my GPS tracker etc.

1 upvote
Peiasdf
By Peiasdf (Aug 31, 2013)

"...It may be true with Apple, who refuse to put long-lasting batteries in iPhones...."

That is just BS. It is like saying the tires on your daily driver wear out faster than the convertible you only take out on summer weekends. iPhone sees far greater charge cycle than any other phone.

0 upvotes
CyberAngel
By CyberAngel (11 months ago)

Don't buy cheap Chinese tires for your Smart-4-2.
Get Nokia tires that last loooooong.
The same with the phone batteries.
Phones antennas.
Brittle glass as back?
Lousy maps?
Do I need to continue?

0 upvotes
Jon Holstein
By Jon Holstein (11 months ago)

The tires are Nokian since many many years and Not Nokia...

0 upvotes
Jogger
By Jogger (Aug 30, 2013)

I'll stick with my RX100 and Nokia 620.. far better image/video quality without the cellphone contract, and it wont be obsolete in 6 months.

1 upvote
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Aug 30, 2013)

RX100 already obsolete. RX100 II is out, man. Get with the times.

3 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Aug 30, 2013)

"RX100 already obsolete. RX100 II is out, man. Get with the times."

Obsolete? It might be superseded by the next model but the latter still doesn't make the former useless. It's still way better, IQ-wise, than anything of the same size (Canon Sxx, Nikon P3xx etc.).

1 upvote
YiannisPP
By YiannisPP (Aug 30, 2013)

Lol, the RX100 is not obsolete...

1 upvote
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Aug 31, 2013)

That was my sarcastic point. This phone won't be obsolete in 6 months, either.

1 upvote
MistyFog
By MistyFog (Aug 31, 2013)

I don't carry a handbag with me for an extra device. No thanks.

1 upvote
Impulses
By Impulses (Aug 31, 2013)

While I personally still prefer Android and don't mind carrying an advanced compact in my other pocket (Panasonic LF1 atm), Nokia's phones have actually been tempting me to try WP from time to time and the camera on the 1020's particularly tempting... WP's still a bit limited for my usage tho but I'm glad MS is still in the fight.

1 upvote
YiannisPP
By YiannisPP (Aug 31, 2013)

I would be interested to hear a couple of examples of your usage that WP wouldn't be able to cater for. How is it "limited"?

0 upvotes
Jon Holstein
By Jon Holstein (11 months ago)

There are many things you can do with android that you cant do with WP. But at the end of the day you may very well be able to live without most of that.

But there are clear limitations for example, your bank may not have an App for WP and no mobile site. Same can be true for services like public trasportation, car pools.
I'm glad to see trends shifting and we are getting new, very good mobile sites (for a while it was all apps, and in many cases we even lost functional but not good mobile sites and were referred to apps), but still many services are missing.

Some features are less accessible, like toggle mobile data or wifi, gps, bluetooth on and off, some people don't want that active all day, but wants to be able to turn them on quickly when they are needed.

Personally I could live with WP.
The downside of this phone is that it's as big (bigger in volume) than phones with screens even bigger than 5", so I cant recommend it to all I would like to.

0 upvotes
Jimmy jang Boo
By Jimmy jang Boo (Aug 30, 2013)

No gold award? Seriously, not even silver or bronze?

How about a blue ribbon then?

3 upvotes
VividExposures
By VividExposures (Aug 30, 2013)

I think the low light test target shots need to be the same crop to be fair.

1 upvote
solarider
By solarider (Aug 30, 2013)

Thank you for an impressive review.

Questions: What is the call quality for this phone and what types of phone networks are/will be compatible?

Cheers

0 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Aug 30, 2013)

Well, it's no better or no worse than other 8MP smartphone flagships. Based on this, I certainly wouldn't call it crappy.

0 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Aug 30, 2013)

Sorry, my previous post was meant to be posted to another thread, not this one. I've only now noticed this - after the editing timeout.

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Aug 30, 2013)

I'll need several times more.

0 upvotes
jcmarfilph
By jcmarfilph (Aug 30, 2013)

iPhone 5 shots are hurting my eyes. Do they really use that crappy phone for photography?

2 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Aug 30, 2013)

Well, it's no better or no worse than other 8MP smartphone flagships. Based on this, I certainly wouldn't call it crappy.

2 upvotes
Stu 5
By Stu 5 (Aug 30, 2013)

iPhone 5 still often out performs this Nokia.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Aug 30, 2013)

"iPhone 5 still often out performs this Nokia."

In speed / responsiveness maybe. But definitely not in IQ.

Nevertheless, the iPhone 5 isn't bad at all. It, as I've stated above, does deliver what a decent 1/3" 8 Mpixel shooter should - no more, no less.

2 upvotes
jcmarfilph
By jcmarfilph (Aug 30, 2013)

iPhone and other smartphones with sensor smaller than one on Nokia should be used for snapshots and printing it up to wallet size only. IQ is horrible that it should stay within 2MP resolution.

2 upvotes
AlanG
By AlanG (Aug 30, 2013)

I would like to see this technology adapted into a very small camera - without the phone - that could be used for decent quality still photos from RC multirotor aircraft,

1 upvote
bigley Ling
By bigley Ling (11 months ago)

Your wish may be granted faster that you think,

See this link for a 41MP watch with optical zoom

http://www.hyetis.com/products-page/

0 upvotes
steviecapt
By steviecapt (10 months ago)

seems to me, quite a few people are missing the point, most people who buy these camera phones, couldnt care less about pixels, iq, they are just interested in convenience, just like myself, i had my own photography business years ago , im not interested in how many pixels or noise or iQ, just take a photo and up load it to a to social media site, if i or other people were that interested in the quality of the photos, we would use a dedicated camera instead, its just about the best tool atm for a phone camera no more no less, if your after pure quality then look else where

0 upvotes
Total comments: 367
12
About us
Sitemap
Connect