>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
Manufacturer Discussion >
Nokia
> Nokia Lumia 920 PureView Thread
Bookmark topic
Indeed, nothing special. Just as I suspected. It's only for people who love doing long exposure time night photos with tripod, but then, why not use compact camera which have 20x better exposure time settings...
As for video recording, I must hear the soudn quality first, if it's regular just like on other phones, it's still pretty useless.
I still don't understand why people expect amazing quality from 1.4-1.1 micron pixels.. they are all pretty much the same, negligible difference here and there. Its just not going to happen. There is only one exception to the rule.. 808.
The 808 will destroy the 920 @ 800 iso.. guaranteed, even without a tripod.
As far as long exposures.. what is the point when your photos will be full of grain and noise ? There are several examples of long exposure shots from the 808 taken by esato users, and.. ya those are proper, and I am sure the 920 will not be able to produce such results.
As far as the sound recording, it has the same mic as the 808 (140 decibels, etc).. key point here is .. there is only one, so no stereo. The 808 will remain the best sound recording device for quite some time.
[ This Message was edited by: cu015170 on 2012-10-31 17:25 ]
--
Posted: 2012-10-31 18:23:03
Edit :
Quote
[ This Message was edited by: Bonovox on 2012-10-31 19:42 ]
--
Posted: 2012-10-31 18:54:38
Edit :
Quote
I Think Recording Videos With Audio Mono, Is a Limitation Of
Windows Phone 8 !
Since Besides
920 PureView LITE,
Ativ S And
8X Also Record Videos With
Audio Mono !!!
--
Posted: 2012-10-31 19:06:20
Edit :
Quote
On 2012-10-31 19:06:20, Guarulhos wrote:
I Think Recording Videos With Audio Mono, Is a Limitation Of
Windows Phone 8 !
they probably ran into problems with Win NT ya.. just like they did with the PureView tech. RTOS is the way to go.. they have a lot of work to do if they want to apply their technologies on Windows.
On 2012-10-31 18:54:38, Bonovox wrote:
they were good.
Can you please share them ? I am yet to see an image from the 920 that is not average in terms of quality.
here is another one.. i don't even know what's going on in the middle of the frame
[ This Message was edited by: cu015170 on 2012-10-31 18:30 ]
--
Posted: 2012-10-31 19:24:12
Edit :
Quote
[ This Message was edited by: Bonovox on 2012-10-31 19:42 ]
--
Posted: 2012-10-31 19:47:07
Edit :
Quote
What makes you think that the 920 will take significantly better pictures than your 800.. or a 900 for that matter ? I am just curious..
Technically there is no reason for them to be able to do so.. unless Nokia made some progress on the jpeg compression front, I don't see how the 920 will be able to take "much" better pictures @ 1.4 micron pixels.
I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you
--
Posted: 2012-10-31 20:13:30
Edit :
Quote
And here is another sample.
Lumia 920:
http://cdn-static.cnet.co.uk/[....]umia-920-camera-test-large.jpg
iPhone 5:
http://cdn-static.cnet.co.uk/[....]0-camera-test-iphone-large.jpg
Yup, 16:9 format on 920 is not helping it, but again, very average performance.
Has this person not got steady hands??
I don't think it's a matter of shaky hands, it's the 920 that makes photos with that weird blur.
--
Posted: 2012-10-31 20:31:09
Edit :
Quote
^ thanks for posting those.. ya, there was a reason why they didn't show any daylight photos from 920. Do you remember when they launched the 808 ? They shot the whole marketing campaign with the phone, and showed off a bunch of samples.. because they were confident in the product, which is not the case with the 920.
Nokia knows that they are far off the benchmark...
--
Posted: 2012-10-31 20:42:35
Edit :
Quote
Why were those night shots taken in auto mode??
--
Posted: 2012-10-31 20:44:50
Edit :
Quote
The 920 was supposed to be amazing in auto mode for low light.. I thought that was the whole point of OIS
--
Posted: 2012-10-31 20:50:04
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
