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

DxOMark Mobile report: Sony Xperia Z2 takes top spot

151

DxOMark Mobile Report: Sony Xperia Z2

Summary

The Xperia Z2 is Sony's latest flagship smartphone and replaces the Z1. The full-HD display measures 5.2 inches and offers better viewing angles than its predecessor's 5-inch equivalent. While a new Snapdragon 801 processor and 3GB of RAM offer plenty of power, the camera specification is nearly identical to the Z1's. Images are captured by a 20.7MP 1/2.3-inch CMOS sensor on a F2.0 lens. Nevertheless, Sony has managed to improve the image quality of its new flagship.

With a DxOMark Mobile score of 79 the Sony Xperia Z2 is the new number one in the DxOMark smartphone rankings, placing itself in front of the Nokia 808 and its own predecessor, the Xperia Z1

The DxOMark team reports the Xperia Z2 images show "impressive detail preservation outdoors" and "in low light, a lot of detail is still visible, even if a loss of details is noticeable compared to outdoors." Noise levels are reasonable at all light levels, with small grain size and no chroma noise. The autofocus works in a fast and responsive manner, with only very few focus errors. The DxO team found the Z2 to deliver "good overall exposure," "nice colors in all conditions" and a "good overall flash performance."

On the downside, DxO says the "white balance is sometimes unstable indoors" and "outdoors, some images show a slight blue cast." They also report "slight color shading is also noticeable under tungsten light." Aside from the white balance issues the Z2 images show "noticeable fringing, ringing and maze artifacts."

In video mode the Xperia Z2 displayed "good stabilization, especially on walking movements, good texture reproduction and low noise levels." However, the "autofocus moves step-by-step rather than continuously, and is unstable." DxO has also found "white balance failures on vegetation scenes under daylight illuminant, visible color shading and aliasing."

Still Photography

Color, Exposure and Contrast

The DxOMark team found that the Sony Xperia Z2 images show "good overall exposure and nice colors" and "in extreme low light conditions, images are better exposed than most other camera phones." The DxO testers also noticed the exposure adapts intelligently to the scene or shooting conditions - for example when shooting portraits or mounting the Z2 on a tripod. 

However, DxO also found "contrast is not very good in shadows, white balance is slightly cold outdoors" and there is "slight color shading noticeable under tungsten light."

Overall DxOMark awarded the Sony Xperia Z2 scores of:

  • 4.5 out of 5 for Exposure
  • 4.0 out of 5 for White Balance accuracy
  • 3.5 out of 5 for Color shading in low light*
  • 4.0 out of 5 for Color shading in bright light*
  • 3.0 out of 5 for Color Rendering in low light
  • 4.5 out of 5 for Color Rendering in bright light

*Color Shading is the nasty habit cellphone cameras have of rendering different areas of the frame with different color shifts, resulting in pictures with, for example, pinkish centers and greenish corners.

Noise and Details

DxOMark's engineers reported the Sony Xperia Z2 shows "impressive detail preservation outdoors" and in this respect is "one of the best smartphones tested to date." In the Z2 image output "noise is only in the luminance channel and the grain is small." Good detail is maintained in low light (20 lux) but a slight reduction is noticeable. 

Texture Acutance

Texture acutance is a way of measuring the ability of a camera to capture images that preserve fine details, particularly the kind of low contrast detail that can be blurred away by noise reduction or obliterated by excessive sharpening (such as fine foliage, hair or fur).

Sharpness is an important part of the quality of an image, but while it's easy to look at an image and decide visually whether it's sharp or not, the objective measurement of sharpness is less straightforward.

An image can be defined as "sharp" if edges are sharp and if fine details are visible. In-camera processing means that it's possible to have one of these (sharp edges) but not the other (fine details). Conventional MTF measurements tell us how sharp an edge is, but have drawbacks when it comes to measuring fine detail preservation. Image processing algorithms can detect edges and enhance their sharpness, but they can also find homogeneous areas and smooth them out to reduce noise.

Texture acutance, on the other hand, can qualify sharpness in terms of preservation of fine details, without being fooled by edge enhancement algorithms.

A dead leaf pattern is designed to measure texture acutance. It's obtained by drawing random shapes that occlude each other in the plane, like dead leaves falling from a tree. The statistics of this model follow the distribution statistics in natural images.

In this example from a DSLR without edge enhancement, sharpness seems equal on edge and on texture. Many details are visible in the texture.

In this second example, edges have been digitally enhanced, and the edge looks over sharp, with visible processing halos ("ringing"). On the texture part, many details have disappeared.

At first sight, the images from these two cameras may appear equally sharp. A sharpness measurement on edges will indeed confirm this impression, and will even show that the second camera is sharper. But a closer examination of low contrasted textures shows that the first camera has better preservation of fine details than the second. The purpose of the texture acutance measurement is to qualify this difference.

Note: Acutance is a single value metric calculated from a MTF result. Acutance is used to assess the sharpness of an image as viewed by the human visual system, and is dependent on the viewing conditions (size of image, size of screen or print, viewing distance). Only the values of texture acutance are given here. The measurements are expressed as a percentage of the theoretical maximum for the chosen viewing condition. The higher the score, the more details can be seen in an image. 
 
For all DxOMark Mobile data presented on connect.dpreview.com we're only showing 8MP equivalent values, which gives us a level playing field for comparison between smartphone cameras with different megapixel values by normalizing all to 8MP (suitable for fairly large prints). DxOMark also offers this data for lower resolution use-cases (web and onscreen). For more information on DxOMark's testing methodology and acutance measurements please visit the website at www.dxomark.com.
Luminance texture acutance is similar under daylight and tungsten light and increases to high levels as the illumination becomes brighter. 
In terms of texture acutance, the Xperia Z2 lags slightly behind the Nokia 1020 at low light levels but takes the top spot in brighter conditions. 
Edge Acutance
Edge acutance is a measure of edge sharpness in images captured by the phone's camera. Again we're only looking at the most demanding of the three viewing conditions that DxOMark reports on - the 8MP equivalent.
In terms of edge acutance the Sony Xperia Z2 leads the pack at all light levels. 
The Sony Xperia Z2's ability to retain sharp edges is excellent across all light levels. 
Visual Noise

Visual noise is a value designed to assess the noise in an image as perceived by the human visual system, depending on the viewing condition (size of image, size of screen or print, viewing distance). The measurements have no units and can be simply viewed as the weighted average of noise standard deviation for each channel in the CIE L*a*b* color space. The lower the measurement, the less noise in the image.

Noise levels in daylight conditions are low across all light levels.
Noise levels under tungsten light are a touch higher than in daylight conditions.
The Sony Xperia Z2's noise levels are among the lowest at all light levels. 

Noise and Detail Perceptual scoring

DxOMark engineers don't just point camera phones at charts, they also take and analyze scores of real-world shots and score them accordingly. Their findings for the Sony Xperia Z2 were:

Natural scene

  • Texture (bright light): 5.0 out of 5
  • Texture (low light): 3.5 out of 5
  • Noise (bright light): 3.8 out of 5
  • Noise (low light) 3.8 out of 5
Bright light sample shot. 
100% crop: A lot of fine detail is visible in the Z2 images.
Low light (20 Lux) studio shot.
100% crop: Detail is still good but has been slightly smoothed over by noise reduction.  
100% crop: Luminance noise is visible but the grain size is pleasantly small.

Artifacts

Phone cameras, like entry-level compact cameras, tend to suffer from artifacts such as sharpening halos, color fringing, vignetting (shading) and distortion, which can have an impact on the visual appeal of the end result. DxOMark engineers measure and analyze a range of artifacts. Their findings after testing the Sony Xperia Z2 are shown below:

  • Noticeable fringing outdoors
  • Strong ringing
  • Some flare in challenging light situations
  • Maze artifacts

Perceptual scores

  • Sharpness 4.0 out of 5
  • Color fringing 4.0 out of 5

Measured findings

  • Ringing center 22.6%
  • Ringing corner 16.0%
  • Max geometric distortion 0.2%
  • Luminance shading 25.1%

Distortion and Chromatic Aberrations

The graph shows the magnification from center to edge (with the center normalized to 1). The Sony Xperia Z2 shows slight pincushion distortion, which you are not going to notice in normal photography.
The Xperia Z2 shows some lateral chromatic aberrations which is slightly visible in some pictures.

Autofocus

DxOMark also tests autofocus accuracy and reliability by measuring how much the acutance - or sharpness - varies with each shot over a series of 30 exposures (defocusing then using the autofocus for each one). As with other tests these results are dependent on the viewing conditions (a little bit out of focus matters a lot less with a small web image than a full 8MP shot viewed at 100%). Using the 8MP equivalent setting, the Sony Xperia Z2 is quite a bit better than its predecessor, the Xperia Z1. The overall score is 87/100 in bright light and 81/100 in low light.

Pros: 

  • Fast and reactive autofocus
  • Good overall repeatability and precision

Cons: 

  • n/a
Autofocus repeatability - average acutance difference with best focus: low light 2.36%, bright light 5.50%

Flash

DxOMark scored the Sony Xperia Z2 85/100 overall for its flash performance which is one point more than the Xperia Z1.

Pros: 

  • Precise autofocus, good exposure, good color rendering and white balance, good detail preservation

Cons: 

  • White balance slightly inaccurate in when mixing flash with tungsten light
  • Some noise
  • Slight vignetting

Overall DxOMark Mobile Score for Photo: 81 / 100


Video Capture

DxOMark engineers put phone cameras through a similarly grueling set of video tests, and you can read their full findings on the DxOMark website here. Bottom line: DxOMark found the Sony Xperia Z2's overall video performance to be good,  with decent stabilization, nice textures and low noise levels. However, the AF tends to be a little unstable and white balance can be unreliable in some shooting situations. 

Pros: 

  • Good stabilization, especially on walking motion
  • Good texture reproduction
  • Low noise level

Cons: 

  • Autofocus moves step-by-step rather than continuously, and is unstable
  • White balance failures on vegetation scenes in daylight
  • Visible color shading

Overall DxOMark Mobile Score for Video: 73 / 100

DXOMark Mobile Score
79

DXOMark Image Quality Assessment

The Sony Xperia Z2 further improves on the performance of its predecessor, the Xperia Z1, and takes over the number one spot in the DxOMark smartphone ranking from the Nokia 808.

The Xperia Z2's images show good detail and comparatively low noise levels in all light conditions. The autofocus is reliable, fast and responsive. The the DxO team found the Z2 to deliver "good overall exposure," "nice colors in all conditions," and a "good overall flash performance."

On the downside the white balance can occasionally struggle outdoors and in mixed-light, flash scenarios. Close-up, the images also show "noticeable fringing, ringing and maze artifacts."

In video mode the Xperia Z2 displayed good overall performance with "decent stabilization, nice textures and low noise levels." However, the AF tends to be a little unstable. Like in stills mode, the video white balance can produce color casts when shooting in daylight. For a more detailed analysis, visit www.dxomark.com.

Photo Mobile Score 81   Video Mobile Score 73
Exposure and Contrast 88   Exposure and Contrast 95
Color 74   Color 79
Autofocus 84   Autofocus 52
Texture 83   Texture 81
Noise 84   Noise 81
Photo Artifacts 68   Video Artifacts 68
Flash 85   Stabilization 66

  

Comments

Total comments: 151
Dominick101

Luckily we have GSMARENA for a fair comparison:

Enormous amount of artifacts and noise:
http://www.gsmarena.com/piccmp.php3?idType=1&idPhone1=6144&idPhone2=4577&idPhone3=5753

Fuzzy grasses anyone:
http://www.gsmarena.com/piccmp.php3?idType=2&idPhone1=6144&idPhone2=4577&idPhone3=5753

Nuf said. You guys and DP can tell me Z2 is the new king but facts will never lie. Don't kid yourself, checkout the comparisons.

8 upvotes
Macist

Nope. GSMArena is basically a Samsung fan site, where every comparison places the S5 on top, or as close to the top as possible without their faces being completely covered in egg....

Even though their own sample photos from the S5 show the poor dynamic range and heavy over-processing, GSMArena boldly claims it's a great camera.

Samsung either sponsors the GSMArena reviews, or they are pandering to get their ads.

Either way, GSMArena is just about the most unreliable site for camera reviews.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
brdeveloper

808 still wins. I have a Galaxy Note I (2011) and I'll only upgrade to a decent camera phone. Moving from the N8 to the Galaxy Note I lost a lot of fun taking pictures through the phone and I want to recover it.

0 upvotes
muzzy66

I really find you guys amusing, sitting here trying so hard to argue that the 808 is better than the Z2. Do you not really how rediculous this argument even is?

The Xperia Z2 is a full featured smartphone. It's a phone, it's a serious mobile gaming device, it's a multimedia device (5.2" Full HD IPS display and stereo front-facing speakers), it's a personal assisant and it's rated to the highest standard of dust and water resistance.

This is a device that you will carry everywhere with you as an all purpose device, and the camera is there purely so that if an unexpected 'candid moment' pops up you can get a quick snap.

The 808 has minimal 'smartphone' capabilities and was pretty much built as a camera first, phone second.

That the Xperia can even challenge the 808 is a hell of an impressive feat because no normal person will ever carry an 808 every day in the real world - you'd only take it if you know you willbe taking photos. It's basically a camera that can make calls.

0 upvotes
muzzy66

Yes they rate things like Autofocus ability. Why? Because of exactly what I just described above.

The whole idea of a smartphone camera is that the smartphone is the main function, the camera is an afterthrough and 'bonus' function. The idea is thatif you are walking down the street an a super-hot car goes past, you can pull out your phone and snap a quick shot before it vanishes. For a phone like the Z2 many of the circumstances will involve pulling the phone out and using the hardware shutter button so that youo can get a quick shot to capture that quick moment. You're not always going to have the time to manually focus - by that time the moment may have passed.

Now I will agree that in many ways the 808 takes purer shots, but there are legit reasons for taking those other factors (autofocus, video recording, etc) into account. They said it's the best smartphone camera, doesn't necessarilly mean it takes the most accurante stills - it may make up for it in other areas.

0 upvotes
Dominick101

Think you're the one who's missing the point. Saying the Z2 wins over 808 in the camera department is like saying the Z2 wins a DSLR over it's additional functionality as a smartphone whereas the DSLR doesn't have any of those. This comparison is about camera and while, yes, I agree autofocus affects the user experience, it does not constitute to quality of the pictures and should have a lower weight age. Never mind that, DP's score is laughable when they said Z2's LED is better than 808's Xenon flash. Go figure.

5 upvotes
vv50

"sitting here trying so hard to argue that the 808 is better than the Z2" - it's actually not hard at all. on the other hand, arguing that the Z2's advantages over the 808 are a hardware shutter and AF to capture the quick moment just goes to show that someone doesn't know that the 808 has these too. also, a statement such as "no normal person will ever carry an 808 every day in the real world" is only true for a very narrow-minded definition of "normal" and "real world".

5 upvotes
muzzy66

Really? I would love to see a sales comparison of how many peole in the world own a Nokia 808 RIGHT NOW compared to how many people own say..a Galaxy S4, Xperia Z1, HTC One, etc. I would hazard a guess that the number of people still using an archaic device like the 808 would be very, very slim given that I do not know a single person who has ever owned one, and have never seen a random person on the street ever using one.

Secondly, please refer to the my following posts in regard to image quality...

0 upvotes
muzzy66

1) Refer to this page:
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Retro-chic-Nokia-808-PureView-vs-Xperia-Z2-photo-samples-pop-up_id55682#2-Nokia-808-Pureview-top-Xperia-Z2-bottom

Image 2 - if you look at the sign on the building the Z2 (bottom) clearly has far greater detail than the 808 (top). On the 808 the large 'Lands End' text is definately blurred, and the smaller 'Brakspear' text is so blurred that I wouldn't even know what it said unless I looked at the Xperia shot first.

The walls of the bulidings have a very clear (and very strong) yellow hue to them - something I've noticed is very common in a lot of shots that are taken with Nokia 'pureview' devices.

If you look at the roof of the building on the top right (to the right of the lamp) you can still vagely recognise the lines in the wall tiles. On the 808 it is all completely blurred and you cannot make out any detail whatsoever.

0 upvotes
muzzy66

On the other hand there are certain parts of the photo in which the 808 wins. The bricks on the chimney - here the 808 definately displays more details, as much of the detail in the Z2 is lost due to the agressive noise reduction.

Likewise in that same roof on the top right, you can clearly make out the diagonal edge of the roof as it angles downwards, while this is again drowned out a lot on the Z2.

The trees on the Z2 lose some details due to oversharpening, while on the 808 they look detail due to over blurring.

Are their areas where the 808 is better? Sure. But there are also areas where the Z2 is better. Trying to argue that the 808 shot is better here is certainly a debate that would require some effort...I'd say the two are about on par if you analyse them up close (they each have their faults) but when the image is at original size the Z2 looks far better.

0 upvotes
muzzy66

Image 4: The lake.

Again there is absolutely no denying that the Z2 looks far better in this image, despite some slightly aggressive shapening.

1) Look at the leaves. The Z2 produces some detail, but overly aggressive shapening. The 808 clearly has less detai, which is almost entirely lost in the 'blur'.

2) Look at the 'depth meter' sign. All of the numbers (except the '8' are very clearly legible on the Z2, as is each individual line. The background on the sign is clear white. On the 808 all of the numbers are blurred to the degree that it's very difficult to make out the numbers on the more distant sign. Only the 5 is really legible, the '6' is very difficult to distinguish and at quick glance appears to be a 5 or an 8. Both the black numbers and the white background blend more towards a 'grey' tone, which makes them hard to distinguish.

You can make out clear ripples and bubbles in the water that are much harder to see on the 808.

0 upvotes
muzzy66

Page 6: The skull

This skull is on a grey wall. On the Z2 the wall colour is perfectly accurate, on the 808 it looks like dark brown.

In the eye socket the 808 resolves some details that the Z2 does not, however the dark blacks look much more like a washed out grey. The detail resolution on the horns I would say is about equal, possibly a slight edge to the 808. If there is an advantage it is so small that it is essentially insignificant.

Overall I would say the 808 resolves slightly better detail in this image, while the colour accuracy is clearly far better on the Z2. Which is better overall? Depends on what you value more. The difference in detail will not be noticable unless you zoom right in or blow up the image, whereas the colour will always impact on how the image looks, even if it's just in a low res 'instagram' size. For that reason I give the Z2 the edge here.

0 upvotes
muzzy66

Now my purpose in presenting all of these points from these samples is not to try to prove that the Z2 takes better shots. My point is to demonstrate the fact that it's a much closer call to make than most of the Nokia fanboys here seem to want to admit to.

When it comes to pure picture quality, for every area the 808 has an advantage, there is one area where the Z2 wins. To try to argue that the 808 is CLEARLY the superior camera is an argument that is not demonstrated from these shots. I would argue that all things considered, the shots from the Z2 are at the very least comparable. Which one is 'better' is objective and depends on whether you prefer the poorly coloured and highly smudged/blurred (but somewhat more natural looking) photos of the Nokia, or the more tonally accurate and detailed (but more artificually 'enhanced') photos of the Z2.

Personally I prefer the Z2. If you call them equal, then the convenience features (better focus, etc) of the Z2 make it the winner.

0 upvotes
vv50

"To try to argue that the 808 is CLEARLY the superior camera is an argument that is not demonstrated from these shots." - yeah because your link compares 5mp images with 8mp images. and instead of linking phonearena's version, try reading the original source http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/flow/item/19729_Camera_initial_head_to_head_No.php
"Personally I prefer the Z2" - who wouldn't prefer the item that they own?

1 upvote
Dominick101

@muzzy66, you really missed the mark with all your points. Z2 samples were 8MP while 808's were 5MP. The original post linked above clearly stated the difference and the poster regretted that he didn't use 8MP on the 808 (or even 38MP which will pwn Z2 in every way). You have to use GSMarena's comparison tool for a fair comparison. No arguments here, just check it out yourself.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
vv50

too bad DxO doesn't publish the full size samples they took and let everyone confirm the white spot issue on the Z2

0 upvotes
Dominick101

lol yep. over-sharpening effect. but anyone with eyes can see for themselves in samples all over the Internet (just lookout for grasses in bright daylight)

Comment edited 55 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Dominick101

Well there's already a proper comparison done between the 808 and Z2:

http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&prev=/search%3Fq%3D808%2Bvs%2Bz2%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26hs%3D0wX%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26channel%3Dfflb&rurl=translate.google.com.sg&sl=pl&u=http://www.komputerswiat.pl/testy/sprzet/smartfony/2014/04/xperia-z2-vs-nokia-808-pureview---ktory-smartfon-wykonuje-lepsze-zdjecie.aspx&usg=ALkJrhhYQyV6RFPAgkWDlwDWkAposWZv3g

0 upvotes
Menneisyys

Yup, based on these shots, the two cameras deliver pretty much the same effective resolution, which is certainly a big plus for the Z2, given that it only uses a “mere” 20 Mpixel sensor.

However, the noise reduction & very aggressive oversharpening also managed to royally mess up for example the last Z2 image (in section “Stage 8 - Route WZ”). The results (white specks in horribly smeared grass) are almost as horrible as they were in the daylight, base ISO Z1 shot in the DPReview test (my dedicated crop is at https://www.flickr.com/photos/33448355@N07/13757394875/ )

The Polish shots also exhibit serious corner softness and CA increase. I've already spotted these in a completely different set of test shots published on a Japanese site (see my separate post above.)

As those shots have been shot by an entirely different Z2, we can safely state that corner softness is common with all Z2's (as are with the 1020's, for that matter), and not just a problem with that specific instance.

0 upvotes
Dominick101

"Yup, based on these shots, the two cameras deliver pretty much the same effective resolution, which is certainly a big plus for the Z2, given that it only uses a “mere” 20 Mpixel sensor."

Don't foget the 808 can shoot at 38MP whereas the Z2 maxes out at 20MP. So I don't think they have the same effective resolution.

0 upvotes
Menneisyys

"Don't foget the 808 can shoot at 38MP whereas the Z2 maxes out at 20MP. So I don't think they have the same effective resolution."

I meant the actual resolution the lens + sensor combo is capable of resolving. It's not 40 Mpixel with the 808 but a bit lower. (Nevertheless, it's still way higher than those of most other phone cameras, which can clearly be seen if one compares for example the resolution chart or small-text shots here at DPR.)

0 upvotes
Menneisyys

Have you checked out the sample images at http://sony-xperia.mobi/eng/sony-xperia-z2/649-sample-daytime-shots-by-sony-xperia-z2-s-camera.html

All the shots have been made at ISO 50, with very fast shutter (for example, WRT the linked image below, 1/640s).

All images exhibit

- noise, which is certainly higher than that of the 808 shooting at base ISO,
- pretty bad corner softness simply not present on the 808
- pretty bad corner CA simply not present on the 808

An example of an image, with which these problems can easily be identified, with tons of backlight allowing for easy CA assessing and, for softness assessing, usable subjects in the focus plane in all four corners:

http://sony-xperia.mobi/images/novosti/2014/february/8/camera-z2/1640-shutter-ISO-50-(12)s.jpg

So much for the Z2 alleged delivering better IQ than the 808. LOL!

0 upvotes
vv50

808 photo: 78 + 80 + 73 + 84 + 88 + 89 + 81 = 573
Z2 photo: 88 + 74 + 84 + 83 + 84 + 68 + 85 = 566
both score = 81?

4 upvotes
Petrogel

What is this an argument with yourself?

3 upvotes
Menneisyys

Still image quality key areas:

Photo Artifacts:
Z2: 68 pts
808: 89 pts

Noise:
Z2: 84 pts
808: 88 pts

Texture:
Z2: 83
808: 84

Color:
Z2: 74
808: 80

I don't really see a lead for Z2 here. Do any of you?

What did make the Z2 "better" overall? In addition to video (Z2: 73; 808: 68), autofocus (Z2: 84; 808: 73). Something that, assuming you have time for pre-focusing, has no effect on the overall IQ.

And something that is plain unacceptable and really questions the entire testing methology: Flash:
Z2: 85 pts
808: 81 pts

Only this is what I can agree with, knowing the relatively low DR of the 808:

Exposure and Contrast:
Z2: 88
808: 78

Nevertheless, in _all_ other still areas the 808 either beats the Z2 or has a dubious loss (see Flash above), autofocus aside. This is, however, only one area and, when shooting low-DR stuff and with plenty of time for repeating your shots, this won't really be an issue. In all other, key areas (color / texture / PA /Noise) the 808 wins.

3 upvotes
vv50

your assessment is inadequate, DXO mobile defines Image Quality as both stills and video because, y'know, scientific, bias-free, protocol.

0 upvotes
Menneisyys

Yup, I know the final score also includes video - the one I don't at all use on my 808 because even my "old" iPhone 5 is, particularly under low light, significantly better.

However, in this very comment section, many (e.g., Petrogel) seem to have forgotten this very fact and they state the 808 has been completely beaten and the Z2 has better overall IQ than the 808. Which is certainly not the case if you take a closer look at the still IQ score pairs I've cited below. It's only at the

- VERY dubious flash (I really don't know how in Earth can DxO consider the Z2's flash better than that of the 808!) and

- the exposure

- the autofocus (not an issue if you pre-focus - I've shot tens of thousands of stills with my 808 and the percentage of keepers weren't significantly worse than with my iPhone 5 with shots using manual pre-focusing. It's only with blind autofocus (e.g., with selfies) that the likes of the iPhone 5 have delivered _significantly_ better results.)

(cont'd)

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
Menneisyys

... areas that DxO states the 808 is worse than the Z2. In all other areas, the 808 is better according to DxO.

0 upvotes
vv50

i should've ended my earlier comment with "end sarcasm"

1 upvote
Menneisyys

Speaking of the 808's flash, yesterday, I made tons of open-air "social" shots in the evening, with the 808. The subjects were typically at least 5-6 meters away. Everything was on auto, incl. the flash. I used CameraPro Qt in its 41 full-sensor Mpixel mode.

The 808 chose ISO 640...1000 for the shots. Of course, I did manual focusing before each shot. All the shots were good (again, if you carefully pre-focus, there won't be focus problems) and the subjects (people) pretty well lit by the Xenon flash. The, in addition to the (possibly) high brightness, other advantage of Xenon flash, namely, movement freezing, also worked just fine.

Now, do the same with the Z2's cr@ppy LED flash...

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
Petrogel

Menneisyys, read the title of the article and repeat after me …. Sony Xperia Z2 takes top spot

5 upvotes
vv50

"DXO lost their credibility when they've ranked 808 1st" - Petrogel
" i do too refuse to let a site guide me for what's good or bad product" - Petrogel

why mot argue with yourself?

1 upvote
Petrogel

Dude you are like a thriller, just when i think you're dead, you post a comment.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Petrogel

Why not go to your last status,
Silent or ignored ?

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 10 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Menneisyys

On the weekend, I've made over 700 full-sensor (41 Mpixel) 72% JPG snaps with the 808 (around 380 each day - with a fully topped battery, that's around the maximum available with CameraPro Qt with GPS on, with very-very moderate Flash use.)

99.9% of the shots didn't exhibit any focussing problems (of course, I pre-focussed every time). Only the camera shake turned out to be a problem with shots under the shutter speed of 1/30s. Tack-sharp images, albeit a bit of lacking in DR at times.

This all means this phone is a hell of a (stills - I don't use it for video, for which, apart from the lack of stereo / high-dynamics audio and significantly wider FoV, my iPhone 5 is much better) camera. The Z2 just can't produce not even similar, let alone better, IQ. As has also been proved by the DxO review, as I've proved in the test breakdown below.

0 upvotes
Dominick101

Friend... Menneisyys, let's not be bothered by all the Samsung/Sony/Apple fanboys. They're just blind and ignorant to the fact the the 808 has the best and largest sensor 1/1.2". Let them fuk off and enjoy their puny 1/2.3" sensor phones.

3 upvotes
vlad0

I just saw some samples from the Z2 .. not sure what DXO are talking about, but the 808 is still miles ahead in terms of raw IQ

5 upvotes
Juandante

It is very funny to see the amount of Fanboys here. Anyone agrees that the Samsung Galaxy S4 with its small 1/3 sensor have same if not better IQ than the old N8.

Same goes for this ancient 808 with tiny squeezy pixels, this is technology.

0 upvotes
Menneisyys

Well, it's naturally easy to be better for a 2013 flagship than a 2010 one WRT IQ, particularly if the latter - unlike the 808 - didn't sacrifice thickness / weight for IQ and, consequently, doesn't have as big a sensor as the 808. (Albeit 1/1.7" isn't THAT bad, either.)

The 808 is still in an entirely different legion, however. The Z1 is far-far away from it in noise / resolution at all ISO's. As the DPReview test scene still doesn't contain the Z2, only the Z1, here's a relevant (base) ISO50 comparison:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/33448355@N07/13757394875/

Which one of the two is better? After you answer the question, I tell you which phone is on the left and on the right.

1 upvote
Menneisyys

"Same goes for this ancient 808 with tiny squeezy pixels"

Lolz... the 808 still has far larger pixels than even the Z2. Which is certainly well reflected in the IQ differences.

1 upvote
Menneisyys

And WRT the Z2 vs. the 808, some comparison between the two models (the original scores are at http://connect.dpreview.com/post/7648926081/dxomark-mobile-report-sony-xperia-z2 and http://www.dxomark.com/Mobiles/Nokia-808-PureView )

Still image quality key areas:

Photo Artifacts:
Z2: 68 pts
808: 89 pts

Noise:
Z2: 84 pts
808: 88 pts

Texture:
Z2: 83
808: 84

Color:
Z2: 74
808: 80

I don't really see a lead for Z2 here. Do you?

What did make the Z2 "better" overall? In addition to video (Z2: 73; 808: 68), autofocus (Z2: 84; 808: 73). Something that, assuming you have time for pre-focusing, has no effect on the overall IQ.

And something that is plain unacceptable and really questions the entire testing methology: Flash:
Z2: 85 pts
808: 81 pts

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Menneisyys

Only this is what I can agree with, knowing the relative low DR of the 808:

Exposure and Contrast:
Z2: 88
808: 78

Nevertheless, in _all_ other still areas the 808 either beats the Z2 or has a dubious loss (see Flash above), autofocus aside. This is, however, only one area and, when shooting low-DR stuff and with plenty of time for repeating your shots, this won't really be an issue. In all other, key areas (color / texture / PA /Noise) the 808 wins.

2 upvotes
Petrogel

DxOMark Mobile report: Sony Xperia Z2 takes top spot ……
want it or not !!!!!!!
You can keep on enjoy shooting with your (placed 2nd) 808

2 upvotes
Petrogel
1 upvote
Menneisyys

"DxOMark Mobile report: Sony Xperia Z2 takes top spot ……
want it or not !!!!!!!
You can keep on enjoy shooting with your (placed 2nd) 808"

Oh please... I've posted a detailed comparison of the individual scores. Not even the biggest SONY fanboys can state the Z2 has beaten the 808 in key areas like noise.

1 upvote
Petrogel

DXO did!!!

1 upvote
Menneisyys

"DXO did!!!"

No they didn't. See my detailed comparison of the color / texture / PA / Noise scores. Yes, FOUR *key* areas where the 808 has beaten the Z2.

1 upvote
Petrogel

if you compare an iPhone with your 808 in some of the areas the iPhone will excel that doesn't mean is better over your 808 …… or is it ?

1 upvote
Menneisyys

WRT speed and low-light video (particularly after switching to non-HD modes), the iPhone 5/5c/5s are significantly better than the 808. No contest there.

WRT still (and only still!) IQ, resolution and noise, the 808 is significantly better than ANY iPhones. No contest there.

In addition, the lens of the 808 is significantly wider than that of any iPhones, particularly when the latter shoot HD / full HD videos.

All this boils down to what you really need. Want a speedy cam or want to shoot in low light? Get an iPhone. Want as good still IQ, resolution and noise as possible? Get a 808.

1 upvote
MistyFog

@Menneisyys

You should do a few more blind tests (Z1 versus 808 without revealing which is which). Then we will ask @Petrogel to give his opinion which images are better. We will have a lot of fun.

2 upvotes
Petrogel

Or a Z2 wich is significant better from an 808

2 upvotes
Petrogel

MistyFog why don't you join the DXO labs to perform tests that are more convenient to the results you'd like to get?

2 upvotes
MistyFog

@Petrogel

Nah, I'm still a bit old school. I trust my own eyes and I trust my own brains. Stubborn me, I refuse to let an authority tell me which picture looks better or to accept shoddy work.

Hey Petrogel buddy, you being so enamored and fascinated by DXO's scoring, why don't you send them your resume? No technical knowledge required, only prerequisite is marketing skills to get "contributors" for those reviews.

2 upvotes
Petrogel

Dude if "you're still a bit of old school" as you say you are, buy yourself a pair of hypermetropia glasses and check your 808 photos again, as for the marketing skills, there is nothing more catchy than the 39mp coming out from a smartphone sensor.
Dxo was just fine as long as 808 had the lead, but now there is no technical knowledge or requirements needed to join the team?

MistyFog dude i also trust my own eyes and i do too refuse to let a site guide me for what's good or bad product, but the last two years for the 808 or the last 8 months for the 1020 there were people (in here) exalting big pixel count as the main feature for a better Image Quality, so please save the lesson for somebody else…
Nice talking to ya !!!

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
MistyFog

@Petrogel

I fear you may be the one in need of eye prescription. May I suggest that you test out Mssrs Mennesyys's comparison photos and indicate which one is better, and he will tell you which picture is from Z1 and which is from 808. This might be good enough for an instant eye test before you consult an optician this weekend.

Regarding the 41Mp, I don't recall anyone making a big deal out of the huge pixel count. Except for a certain Petrogel fella who can't seem to get over it. As far as I can tell, anybody who is familiar with photography is praising the image quality due to the large sensor. Only noobs still keep harping on the pixels.

Have a great weekend, let us know how that instant eye test works out.

2 upvotes
Petrogel

Mistydude
Why don't you check this site (more accurate than any one in here) : http://www.dxomark.com/Mobiles/Sony-Xperia-Z2-overview-Revised-model-takes-first-place-in-Mobile-rankings

Instant, but most of all valid eye check (and won't cost you a thing)
Great weekend to you too, 808 fandude

2 upvotes
MistyFog

@Petrogel

I did, mate, and everytime I visit that site my eyes get blinded by the Z2's LED flash. It's so damn bright it stings. Xenon's got nothing on LED, man. But strangely I only get this funny effect at DXO or other Sony sites. Everywhere else the Xenon is always brighter. How bout you mate?

Edit: oh, why am I not surprised that your posts invariably lead RIGHT BACK to DXO? I said I don't trust them because I got my own eyes to trust. Meanwhile, you trust them rather than trust your own eyes. Worse - you even get your eyes checked by them, and let them prescribe your corrective lenses. No wonder... LOLOLOL

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Petrogel

Mistyfog Dude
No i haven't checked the xenon over the led flash, (my labs were closed for preservation) but strangely i only get the funny persistence of people that use anything they can come up with, out of nowhere, only to justify their theory.
Mistyfella if i may suggest to purchase those hypermetropia pair of glasses (dude !! you didn't see we were talking about Z2 and you were pointing the Z1), there are no photos comparing "studio comparison chart" of the Z2 to 808, and something else, nothing is better cause you or Menneisyys or anybody else says so.
Are you sure you can tell the difference between Nokia's Xenon Flash and the Xperia's Z2 flash ?
Have you seen the brightness of a Z2 flash ?
(don't think so )
Edit: """prescribe your corrective lenses. No wonder… LOLOLOL"""

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
MistyFog

Seems like you are having difficulty keeping up with the discussion. Let me make it easier for you. Both the Z1 and Z2 LED flashes scored much higher than the 808's Xenon. I'm not quite sure what exactly changed from Z1 to Z2's flash to justify the Z2 getting an extra point (but like I pointed out earlier, all they need to do is simply renumber the Z1 to Z2, or Z2 to Z3, and DXO is bound to give them extra points just for the renumbering). There are plenty of comparisons between the 808/1020's Xenon versus the Z1's LED flash, of course those tests clearly proved how wimpy the Z1's LED flash is. But when you read Sony-paid websites, the result will of course be totally different. This is expected.

2 upvotes
Petrogel

Mistyfella It seems you're right there are some difficulties communicating , what i am talking about is the absolute picture value, the image quality, in which Νοκια 808 lost "the scepters" long time ago firstly by the Samsung S4 and now with the Sony Xperia Z2.
As for the flash, till it's proved that both Z1and Z2 use the same led flash , i'll have my objections.
Now about who pays whom, if i'm not mistaken Nokia used to pay well known photographers on the same sites ( the same sites you accuse, as being Sony-paid) to comment on or even write articles about how great the 1020/808 are, something that i've found really ridiculous

1 upvote
MistyFog

I'm not just talking about flash, image quality, Z2, etc. I'm talking about DXO's credibility. Your statement about 808 supposedly losing it's crown to the S4 then now the Z2, is fatally flawed for one simple reason: it's (again) quoting the assessment of a deeply flawed reviewer with rather questionable thinking. As an example, I cited the flash comparison between Z1 and the 808(or 1020) where there's been plenty of one-to-one (or even many versus many) comparisons done before. We know how much better xenon is compared to LED. But DXO gave the Z1's LED much more points. With it's credibility at stake I'm going to question its scoring for the Z2 as well. If you look at DXO's own qualitative descriptions, it seems that the Z2's flash got more 'cons' and almost the same number of 'pros'. Check out the 'four mysteries' that I cited earlier for details. And mind you: these inconsistencies that I have pointed out are entirely based on using DXO's own words against itself, or DPReview's words against DXO's. The reviews are not even "internally consistent" which is stupid.

1 upvote
Petrogel

Mate !!! i've never liked Dxo's sensor ranking as i've never liked the 808 fanboys pointing out at me the first place 808 had at the Dxo "top 10". This is my moment and i'm enjoying it.
So ………"DxOMark Mobile report: Sony Xperia Z2 takes top spot"

P.S Get yourself a glass of wine and enjoy your weekend !!!!!!!!

0 upvotes
Menneisyys

"i've never liked Dxo's sensor ranking as i've never liked the 808 fanboys pointing out at me the first place 808 had at the Dxo "top 10""

Try shooting a bit with the 808 and the Z2 and you'll see how immensely better the 808 is, IQ-wise.

0 upvotes
Dominick101

808 is still king when it comes to IQ, period.

3 upvotes
Petrogel

"DxOMark Mobile report: Sony Xperia Z2 takes top spot"

0 upvotes
Menneisyys

"DxOMark Mobile report: Sony Xperia Z2 takes top spot"

Again: that top spot is heavily influenced by some things not having to do anything with still IQ (the strongest point of the 808):

- video
- autofocus (assuming you can and *do* manually pre-focus, the 808 will almost always deliver well-focused images)

1 upvote
Carnivore99

I don't care what the camera tests prove, I'm not buying another phone unless it comes with Symbian.

2 upvotes
Petrogel

Menneisyys
Again: DxOMark Mobile report: Sony Xperia Z2 takes top spot.
808 strongest point scores 81 just like Xperia, 81 points.

- Video : both Xperia Z1 and Z2 dominate the list (for the time being)
- Autofocus : Dxo noted (as one of the disadvantages -Cons-) that: "Autofocus can be better, especially at close range."
so Who's on the top spot ?

Comment edited 38 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Menneisyys

Petrogel, you may not have understood my point. I stated the 808 is still much better in, regarding still image quality, *key areas*. Some of them:

Photo Artifacts:
Z2: 68 pts
808: 89 pts

Noise:
Z2: 84 pts
808: 88 pts

Texture:
Z2: 83
808: 84

Color:
Z2: 74
808: 80

What did make the Z2 "better" overall? In addition to video (Z2: 73; 808: 68), autofocus (Z2: 84; 808: 73). Something that, assuming you have time for pre-focusing, has no effect on the overall IQ.

And something that is plain unacceptable: Flash:
Z2: 85 pts
808: 81 pts

Only this is what I can agree with, knowing the relative low DR of the 808:

Exposure and Contrast:
Z2: 88
808: 78

Nevertheless, in _all_ other still areas the 808 either beats the Z2 or has a dubious loss (see Flash above), autofocus aside. This is, however, only one area and, when shooting low-DR stuff and with plenty of time for repeating your shots, this won't really be an issue. In all other, key areas (color / texture / PA /Noise) the 808 wins.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 10 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Petrogel

Menneisyys you haven't understood that being better in "some" areas, doesn't make 808 a better camera, exposure contrast and autofocus (specially the autofocus, as you can fix everything else in post editing programs) ARE the "key" features of a camera

0 upvotes
Menneisyys

"as you can fix everything else in post editing programs"

Really? I'd prefer slow / unreliable autofocus to noise / low resolution. The latter cannot really be fixed in post. The former can _fully_ be avoided by carefully pre-focussing or shooting at least two shots of the same subject.

Again, I haven't had focus problems with my 808 shots I've carefully pre-focused. This means the superiority of the Z2 in this regard isn't as important as you try to make it to be.

Comment edited 34 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Petrogel

DXO says that autofocus is one of the disadvantages of 808

0 upvotes
Menneisyys

"DXO says that autofocus is one of the disadvantages of 808"

Yes, I know. This is what I've been talking about all the time, by explaining that it hardly has any effect on the IQ if you either shoot two+ shots of the same subject and/or carefully pre-focus.

Comment edited 39 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Petrogel

In that case even your iPhone takes a better photo.

0 upvotes
Menneisyys

I know the advantages of iPhone's camera well enough. (After all, I've written several camera apps and published tons of detailed articles on the iPhone cameras - see http://www.iphonelife.com/werner.ruotsalainen ) So I know there are areas (action shooting; autofocus speed; low-light video shooting etc.) where it's better than the 808.

When low-noise, high-detail shots are needed and you have time for careful manual pre-shooting setup, however, the 808 trounces the iPhone5.

0 upvotes
Petrogel

Well with the Xperia Z2 you can do that …… careless
;-)

0 upvotes
Menneisyys

The Z2 still can't beat the 808 in IQ, resolution and noise.

0 upvotes
Petrogel

Soryy but just did (at least at DXO labs)

0 upvotes
Menneisyys

Did they?

Photo Artifacts:
Z2: 68 pts
808: 89 pts

Noise:
Z2: 84 pts
808: 88 pts

Texture:
Z2: 83
808: 84

Color:
Z2: 74
808: 80

No comment.

0 upvotes
Petrogel

They did
Sony Z2 vs Nokia 808 : 79-77

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Eclectant

What is the product cycle with Sony? They launch Z1 , three months later Z1s, barely two months later Z2.....

0 upvotes
MistyFog

It doesn't matter. The Z3 could have the same exact camera (perhaps add some color filters), and DXO can be trusted to bump it further up the charts by a few more points. In fact, I was reliably informed that DXO has already prepared the next headline: Sony Xperia Z3 maintains top spot, gap widens.

3 upvotes
Lars Rehm

The Z1s is only the US version of the Z1, more storage but otherwise identical if I remember correctly...

0 upvotes
Marcus Antonius

Does the Z2 offer full manual control like the Nokia 1020 or 1520?
Does the Z2 offer shooting RAW?
Does the Z2 offer OIS?
No further questions your honor..

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
7 upvotes
Ryan_Valiente

Nope.
Nope.
Nope.

Does the Z2 beat every phone in the DxOMark tests? Yes.

4 upvotes
MistyFog

In an amazing development, Blackberry's Q10 unexpectedly shot to the top of the camera rankings in an extensive review by Pay4YourScore.com.

Bearing chilling resemblance to another much better-known camera reviewer, this relatively new camera ranking also assigned scores that bore no resemblance to the narrative. It was even more brutal to the 808, noting the impressive image quality but giving it 0/100 scores for texture and noise. The BB Q10's final score of 80 was just slightly ahead of the Z2 but enough to make it the top camera phone.

3 upvotes
Menneisyys

"Does the Z2 beat every phone in the DxOMark tests? Yes."

Wrong. See my detailed analysis.

0 upvotes
agentlossing

I think this stat needs a little clarification, as this camera sits neck and neck with the Nokia 808 Pureview in terms of image quality - it's the camera's ability to shoot 4K video that bumps it above the Nokia in their completely arbitrary overall "score."

For those who don't shoot video, I don't think this camera is worth the premium over the less expensive Nokia 1020, unless you want to pay the extra for a somewhat faster phone.

5 upvotes
Menneisyys

"For those who don't shoot video, I don't think this camera is worth the premium over the less expensive Nokia 1020, unless you want to pay the extra for a somewhat faster phone."

Yup. And there are some other and, for the final IQ in many cases (e.g., shooting static stuff), absolutely irrelevant areas the 808 loses to the Z2; for example, autofocus. (78 vs 88)

That is, a single number doesn't tell all...

3 upvotes
Arup65

The NOKIA 1020 that I owned previously could never match my older 808 which I regretted selling, only the Z2 and Z1c has matched the 808 so I happily own both and have got rid of the 1020. As for 1020 being a better value, I am sorry to disagree, its a Windows phone, dual core with ordinary hardware and screen and build quality unlike the premium water and dust resistant go anywhere Z2 and Z1. Also the Z2 has cutting edge hardware along with camera and Android and sells in same price as the Nokia 1020 here in India.

2 upvotes
Menneisyys

Yup, the 1020 isn't a match for the 808. Nevertheless, WRT effective (true) pixel-level resolution and noise, I don't think the Z2 is, either. That is, the 808 remains the king when it comes to pure stills IQ.

Of course, the Z2 is still a very tempting cameraphone for people liking Android. Nevertheless, it still misses OIS - the main reason I wouldn't personally buy it, the LG G2 and G Pro 2 having proved how effective non-Nokia OIS can also be.

0 upvotes
Scottelly

O.K. DXOMark tests a cell phone, but they won't do a text on a full-blown DSLR? Sigma deserves more credit. The SD1 is STILL a cutting-edge camera, capable of capturing incredibly sharp photos, sharper than any other camera with an APS-C size sensor . . . and DXOMark has had years to test the sensor. Maybe the challenge is just too much for them.

2 upvotes
zodiacfml

I would prefer it that way. DXO giving low scores on the SD1 wouldn't give it justice. One more thing, I find more elegance in the Quattro's new sensor which I reckon would bring back the Foveon feel.

0 upvotes
Joe M.

I love my Z1S and I switched from a Nokia 810 which I really liked but my Nokia was slowing with newer aps, I first looked at the Nokia925, but no expendable memory slot and no replaceable battery. Nokia no longers offers either of those. I did have to give up my replaceable battery. Really either very few or No Smart Phones a offer replaceable batteries anymore.
I will switch back to Nokia when they come back to reality and add Expandable memory back to their phones. 16gb is not enough. especially when you download aps, updates and music and movies.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 10 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
agentlossing

Unless you go 1520, which I did - it's a 6" screen phone, i.e. huge. However it is lightning fast and has expandable memory.

0 upvotes
Joe M.

I looked at that one but as amazing as it is. I didn't like the 6 inch screen size. I am still getting used to the 5inch screen on my sony compared to my Nokias 810's 4.5 or was it 4.3 inch screen.

0 upvotes
mrdancer

Blackberrys still have replaceable batteries, extendable memory card slots, all the good stuff. They also have a great OS. Not as many apps as Android, but many android apps can be sideloaded onto Blackberry. And if the apps are native to Blackberry, they work/look SO much better than android or iApps, but few developers are working specific to BB. For Blackberry, it has been too much, too late - not sure how much longer they will be hanging around...

0 upvotes
sbacana

I stopped after iphone 5s being better than nokia 1020. They've gone a little too far...

6 upvotes
Rick_Hunter

Thanks... I'll keep using my D600 and my Zeiss ZF.2 lenses for photography...

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
7 upvotes
Dapple 101

Great news! Thanks for sharing.

12 upvotes
Ryan_Valiente

Yep. I carry those everyday in my pocket.

2 upvotes
OBI656

Mr. Dominick101, DxO is hiring so I think you should apply.

1 upvote
Dominick101

Well it's ok that dpreview gives rubbish scores and I don't care. They have lost all my trust anyway.

1 upvote
Dominick101

DXO lost all their credibility which is for sure. Look into the fine details of their scores between 808 and Z2 and you will see how mismatch their comparison is. If you look further into the scores of iphone5s and 1020, you will, too, be shocked. DXO being a reputable site puts out bias rubbish scores which are most of the time subjective to the tester/user.

7 upvotes
Petrogel

DXO lost their credibility when they've ranked 808 1st

4 upvotes
Menneisyys

"DXO lost their credibility when they've ranked 808 1st"

Oh come on... try shooting with a 808 for some time and you'll see how great it is. Of course it has its shortcomings (speed; Symbian) but I guarantee there isn't any smartphone with better effective overall resolution than the 808. Particularly if you use it in the nonstandard 41 Mpixel mode (available via CameraPro Qt, without even having to "hack" the device).

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
TrojMacReady

The 808 is great in many areas, but DR is its weakest point. To mask/avoid relatively high read noise (affecting shadow), it meters extremely high, with lots of clipped highlights (and even some midtones) as a result in almost every shot.

1 upvote
Menneisyys

Yup, the DR of the 808 isn't anything to write home about; fortunately, unlike in iOS, you can dial in exposure compensation, and that settings is sticky over app restarts (both in the stock Camera client and CameraPro Qt; I use the latter because of the full-sensor, 41 Mpixel mode without any hacking).

With a -1/3 or -2/3 exp. comp., you can easily get rid of most of the burnt-in highlights and still have a relatively (phone-wise) noise-free image.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
Dominick101

Mr Petrogel employee of Sony?

2 upvotes
Petrogel

To Menneisyys
-"DXO lost their credibility when they've ranked 808 1st"-
Well i was a little bit harsh to 808, yes it has a good IQ for a 2year old phone but it was a terrible phone (Symbian). and can't be compared with a good point and shoot compact camera

To Dominick101
No, not as far as i know !!

1 upvote
Menneisyys

"it was a terrible phone (Symbian)"

I'd say it depends. It delivers orders of magnitude better battery life than, say, the iPhone 5, assuming the same usage. I have both and, consequently, I do know the difference.

"and can't be compared with a good point and shoot compact camera"

It has much better resolution than anything else P&S, particularly when used in the nonstandard 41 Mpixel mode, period. Of course, noise / DR / video / stabilization-wise, it may be (significantly) worse. But that pixel-level resolution is simply not achievable by anything else in the non-DSLR category.

Comment edited 22 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Petrogel

Menneisyys
We've been doing this the last two years, and it's pointless, the only thing 808 or 1020(which is a lot worst compared to 808) can offer is only, useless big pixel count, nothing else, better IQ only compared with other smartphones.
Now when it comes to comparison with a compact point and shoot camera, these camera phones don't stand a chance, it's not only the stabilization or the video, it's the the size of the lenses the zooming ability, the texture, the fast autofocus, the colors, the high iso or the low noise, want it or not P&S cameras produce better Image Quality

1 upvote
Menneisyys

Yup, I agree the 808 does lag in several areas. However, I (still) use my 808 for static, non-high-DR, well-lit scenes where I value resolution over DR / SNR / autofocus speed. Under these circumstances, the 808 is still unbeatable by any P&S camera, incl. even expensive, enthusiast ones like the Sony RX100 (II).

1 upvote
Petrogel

So now that Sony have beaten 808, has taken the lead over any other P&S camera(even the Sony RX100-II), hasn't it?

Comment edited 9 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Menneisyys

"So now that Sony have beaten 808, has taken the lead over any other P&S camera(even the Sony RX100-II), hasn't it?"

Of course it hasn't.

1, it hasn't beaten the 808 in every category.

2, as I have pointed out above, the 808 is "only" better than any P&S in some well-defined areas; most importantly, effective resolution. In which the Z2 is even worse, meaning the latter can't really beat the likes of RX100.

And, of course, the Z2 lacks (compared to enthusiast compacts) in the usual areas: DR, SNR, IS etc.

1 upvote
Petrogel

I know it's hard for you to accept it (it's obvious) , but it's true, 808 is not on the first place, -i repeat-, 808 is on the second place,
"Sony Xperia Z2 takes top spot " (as Dxo posts).
It looks like big pixel count is not enough to be better.

1 upvote
Menneisyys

"I know it's hard for you to accept it (it's obvious) , but it's true, 808 is not on the first place, -i repeat-, 808 is on the second place,
"Sony Xperia Z2 takes top spot " (as Dxo posts).
It looks like big pixel count is not enough to be better."

Please see my breakdown of the individual scores I've just posted as answers to other comments. Those certainly shows the 808 is still considerably better at key areas than the Z2.

1 upvote
Petrogel

Menneisyys your repeatedly posts are one more prove of how hard is for you to accept the obvious

1 upvote
Menneisyys

"Menneisyys your repeatedly posts are one more prove of how hard is for you to accept the obvious"

YOu obviously haven't understood my detailed posts.

1 upvote
Petrogel

You obviously haven't understood the title and the details of the article .

1 upvote
Menneisyys

Photo Artifacts:
Z2: 68 pts
808: 89 pts

Noise:
Z2: 84 pts
808: 88 pts

Texture:
Z2: 83
808: 84

Color:
Z2: 74
808: 80

No comment.

1 upvote
Petrogel

Sony Xperia Z2 79
Nokia 808 77

1 upvote
AndreSJ

Oh how Reviews like this annoy me so, their is a new phone every minute, very rarely there is a 'best' camera phone.

In comes S5 and HTC one M8

3 upvotes
a1strank

Put the 1" RX100 sensor in that thing and just take my money

4 upvotes
Petrogel

Why mot full frame ?

2 upvotes
lost_in_utah

Why mot medium format?

2 upvotes
Petrogel

Medium format sounds more tempting,

0 upvotes
Joe Federer

Too bad you can't get it in the US. :(

1 upvote
Matt1645f4

I wouldn't touch a Sony phone i've had sony for years when they had ericsson at the end but now they are crap ive sent my Sony xperia t back 3 times with various faults i never had a prob with a Nokia or an iPhone the camera may be grea but if you cant make calls whats the point.......

0 upvotes
Jogger

Wow, you mean I'm not able to make call at all on the Z2.?? Thanks for the warning.

0 upvotes
Lars Rehm

you might have had problems with your T3 but I had the Z1 for a while and found it to be a great phone. I would not be surprised if the Z2 is even better. Between the One M8, S5 and Z2 I think I'd go for the Sony.

7 upvotes
KonstantinosK

I use an Xperia Acro S for over a year, which at the time of buying was the best dust and water resistant phone at the market (IP57 rating). So far it's faultless and it has take quite a beating, especially at the beach. It's rugged yet elegant and when it gets dirty I wash it at the tab. The camera is average, especially with today's standards, but its fine for me as I don't really have great expectations from a phone camera and I love tweeking my stupid little snapshots with Snapseed anyway...
http://instagram.com/_konstantinos_#

1 upvote
Arup65

Circa 1998 SONY Zuma, SONY CMD 2020, SONY Xperia Mini Pro, SONY Activ, SONY Go, SONY ZR, SONY Z and Z1c in the family all ticking and surviving hits,moisture and the new Z1c taking awesome pics making me leave my RX-100 and NEX-7R at home most of times unless I need to do some serious pixel peeping.

0 upvotes
Menneisyys

Cool, but the lack of OIS is still a dealbreaker for me. And that of future upgrades - Sony will surely stop supporting this model after about 18 months.

I stick with the 808, which still delivers more detail and wider FoV, particularly in its full 41 Mpixel mode.

Comment edited 27 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
Lars Rehm

Does Nokia still support the 808? ;)

9 upvotes
Menneisyys

Of course they don't. But the 808 is pretty much an exception - Nokia's WP8+ models are well supported past 18 month; so are the Nexus phones and those of Apple.

3 upvotes
vlad0

Plenty of community support for the 808 tho.. and its a pretty stable/complete device to begin with so it doesn't need all that much in terms of bug fixing, etc.

They are still updating the maps for it I think..

2 upvotes
MistyFog

Does DPReview actually endorse this rubbish review?

5 upvotes
Faisal Armand

First of all dxomark is the world's best professional camera reviewers. If they give a camera device whether it is a smartphone, dslr, mirrorless, or point and shoot a good score.. That means that one particular device truly has great image quality!

And if i'm not mistaken, dpreview and dxomark are actually partners.. Am I right?

No, they are not biased and calling them rubbish is just downright preposterous. It is you who just don't understand their measurements in assessing image quality, in case you don't know their industry standard test consists of taking 450-500+ pictures both in studio and in real life conditions. And they assess cameraphones in 8MP equivalent values, not in full resolution that one particular smartphone has.

Most of the pixel peepers only count noise levels, texture preservation, and sometimes artifacts in assessing image quality. And yes, 808 is better than Z2 in those regards, beating it with scores of 84 and 88 whereas Z2 has a score of 83 and 84. And 808 also scores far greater than Z2 in terms of image artifact with a score of 89 whereas Z2 only has a score of 68. And if you assess a image quality based on those 3 factors alone, then yes 808 is superior to Z2.

But in terms of exposure and autofocus, 808 loses badly to Z2.. (78 vs 88) and (73 vs 84) and those factors make 808 overall image quality is the same as Z2.

Also that overall rating represents a combination of photo score and video score.. And see for yourself, 808's video capability is inferior to Z2.

And here is their measurements to overall score =(overall photo score * 2/3) + (overall video score * 1/3)

Z2: (81*2/3) + (73*1/3) = 79.09 -> 79
808: (81*2/3) + (68*1/3) = 77.39 -> 77

Hopefully that clears up your suspicions.

7 upvotes
Lars Rehm

Have you used a Z2?

10 upvotes
Menneisyys

"But in terms of exposure and autofocus, 808 loses badly to Z2.. (78 vs 88) and (73 vs 84) and those factors make 808 overall image quality is the same as Z2."

Autofocus is typically one of the factors that has no effect on the IQ under special circumstances - for example, when you have plenty of time to pre-focus.

WRT my 808 shots (done in 41 Mpixel mode of Camera Pro Qt) with pre-focusing each time, almost all of them have been in proper focus. The ones my wife has been taken, on the other hand, sometimes are really out of focus (she is not really tech savvy and I found it pretty much impossible to try to train her to properly, manually focus before taking a shot) - then, the problems of the 808 autofocus indeed are relevant. But *not* in the case you can properly pre-focus.

Comment edited 11 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
MistyFog

Mystery #1: Titanic battle between LED flash versus Xenon flash

Z2's LED flash:
Pros:
- precise autofocus
- good exposure
- good color
- good WB
- good detail
Cons:
- WB slightly inaccurate when mixed with tungsten
- some NOISE
- slight vignetting

1020's Xenon flash:
Pros:
- good exposure (same as Z2)
- good color (same as Z2)
- good WB (same as Z2)
- good detail (same as Z2)
- LOW NOISE (woohoo! this was CONS for Z2)
Cons: N/A (wait, NO CONS???)

DXO says: Z2's LED CRUSHES 1020's Xenon, 85 vs 79 (wtf??)

12 upvotes
MistyFog

Mystery #2: Titanic battle in video stabilization - No OIS versus OIS

Z1's NO OIS... "crops a sizable portion of the frame", "works efficiently", "does a decent job" (Quote from DPReview)

1020's OIS: "1020's stabilized lens gives videos a professional, Steadicam-look that makes for a more satisfying recording than most competitors can manage" (Quote from DPReview)

The DXO god's decree: Z1's "No OIS" crushes the 1020's OIS, 59 vs 49.

The Z2's "No OIS" gets further elevated to 66. At this rate, will we see the Z5's "No OIS" reaching 100/100?

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
8 upvotes
MistyFog

Mystery #3: Titanic battle - video noise - 1/2.3" sensor versus 1/1.5" sensor

Z1's weeny sensor: "noise and noise reduction are well-controlled". "there is some noise visible", "there is more noise and loss of detail through noise reduction visible" (Quote from DPReview)

1020's 230% bigger sensor: "in low light, the 1020's big sensor really shines, delivering remarkably ungrainy video with a lot of detail" (Quote from DPReview)

DXO god says: weeny sensor CRUSHES 230% bigger sensor, 85 vs 53. This is the biggest margin so far (32 points!!!)

7 upvotes
MistyFog

Mystery #4: A serious, respectable(??) tester loves sensational, inaccurate headlines?

Headline: Sony Xperia Z2 overview: Revised model takes first place in Mobile rankings

Truth: DXO has not even bothered updating the scores even after major camera updates. For example, 1020 received the Black update with much better algorithm and most color issue has been rectified.

Does this matter? The 1020's Color score was 56 (photo) and 73 (video). The Z2's score is 74 (photo) and 79 (video). Okay, so assume that after Black update, the 1020's color score is the same as Z2. Note that if we use the average score of all phones instead, it would have been even higher. We will use the lower of Z2 and average of all phones.

3 upvotes
MistyFog

Further, let's assume we can trust DPReview's assertions with regards to video stabilization and video noise. Let's also assume the DXO scorers made a mistake on the Flash scores. Rightfully the 1020 should have higher scores than Z2 in these 3 categories; but for simplicity's sake let's just assume the 1020 has the same scores.

Where does that leave us? Yep, 79 points for the 1020.

3 upvotes
Menneisyys

MistyFog: ouch! Those are BIG mistakes on DXO's part! To call a LED flash better than a Xenon one? Come on, DXO... Even if you also take into account that the 1020's Xenon is significantly underpowered compared to that of the 808 (see http://allaboutwindowsphone.com/features/item/18320_Ultra-low_light_PureView_and_X.php ), it's still way better than anything LED-based, particularly WRT movement freezing.

3 upvotes
Menneisyys

"NO OIS... "crops a sizable portion of the frame","

That is one of the biggest problems with IIS tech. I want smartphone cameras to have as wide FoV as possible - after all, for social shots (and selfies with the wife), as wide FoV as possible is needed. (This is why I use the 41 Mpixel nonstandard mode of my 808 via CamPro Qt - those shots are _magnificent_!) IIS makes the FoV significantly narrower.

2 upvotes
citrontokyo

Misty fog you have waaaay too much free time.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Menneisyys

"Misty fog you have waaaay too much free time."

He did point out at least some functionality (e.g., autofocus) where the superiority of the Z2 offsets the image quality superiority of the 808.

1 upvote
vlad0

They might be good at reviews DSLRs, but they seem rather confused when it comes to mobile phone cameras.

2 upvotes
Total comments: 151
About us
Sitemap
Connect