News Forum Phone database

> New Topic
> Reply
< Esato Forum Index > Manufacturer Discussion > Nokia > Lumia 1020 vs 808 PV vs any potential rival. Bookmark topic



It can still be way more professional than that. That's for sure.

1. Can you explain why did DP go for different ISOs?! Even if the two phones have different base ISO (which isn't the case), they should have still gone for same ISOs.

2. ISO 50 is not the base ISO of the 808. 100 is the base ISO. That's as far as I know. And if stands true, this means when you choose ISO 50, the camera meters for ISO 50 but shoots at ISO 100 and stops down to 50 through software manipulation. This limits the DN. In such a studio test with artificial lighting you won't notice this limitation on the 808. And also, ISO 50 doesn't deliver less noise than ISO 100.

3. This test is just another confirmation of all the sample comparisons we had on this thread so far. Be it uploaded by you, Steve, GSMarena, or this from DP. You still didn't reply to why in that store comparison shot the 1020 resolved more detail than the 808 with no applying of any PP!

The 1020 is simply suffering oversharpening in almost all of its photos. In such a studio test, it will be even more apparent. You are totally lost to differentiate between the bad job Nokia did with PP applying all this excessive sharpening, and true sensor noise!
There is something called sharpening halos. This is very apparent on the cards area you quoted. Notice the transition from the white card to the black background. You see a blue line inbetween. This is the sharpening halo.
And also the sharpening graining (has more of a nature like a jagged detail than actual noise graining as you should have seen in the example I showed you previously). It's apparent all over the image test. This jagged transition is caused because excessive sharpening means the contrast between individual pixels is higher to give the perception of sharpness. When applied in excess as is the case with the 1020, this will result in this artificial lines and grains.

4. Can you use the same studio test and explain to us why the Canon G15 blows the 808 away and every other smartphone in that test under any condition?! Since you are so obsessed in sensor size.
It has a 1/1.7" sensor, and a 5x zoom lens! If you don't know, fixed focal length lenses should have much higher optical quality than zoom lenses. In smartphones it is not the case but I will explain to you why it is so after you comment on the G15 vs 808 DP studio test.

5. Profesional tests such IMAtest or DXOmark, don't rely on human eye judgment. One could pixel peep, and with a trained eye make out all the difference between PP effects and natural noise. But it's an eye straining task, and time consuming as well. As well as unreliable.
These tests use well tested, reliable, and reputable software that measures all this. And the results obtained are simply unquestionable. Well questionable only by blind fanboys who think their cameraphones outdo DSLRs or highend compacts.

6. All this big sensor high res sensor PV technology from Nokia was all to achieve lossless zoom. This is not the right way to achieve a higher IQ! Nokia never claimed that. And no one does that anyway.
Oversampling is a by-product (workaround) to get a higher IQ if one doesn't wish to zoom. But oversampling was not the purpose of this technology, lossless zoom without the need of a huge lens module was all the purpose for this.
So don't push this technology way beyond its reach!

7. If Nokia indeed address the ridiculous oversharpening in the Black update, the 1020 will blow the 808 out of the water. Two to three months and you'll see for yourself.

8. Why is it that I can't compare the two images on that test for high ISO and night simulation?



Are you trying to deliver the joke of the decade? Where do you guys come up with these crazy theories?!


--
Posted: 2013-10-26 22:10:07
Edit : Quote


please continue but just imagine how many beautiful photos you could have made instead of writing all those words after searching for a tiny flaw in the fifth pixel on the third row
--
Posted: 2013-10-26 23:51:38
Edit : Quote



EDIT: Corrected Nice to Next.

NEXT weekend I'm looking forward to have a good collection from a shootout with the Lumia 920 and Nikon D7000. The purpose isn't to compare both cameras. Just upload what I do with both at hand. Will upload images to Imageschack and link them to the 920 thread.

D7000 will be shot in RAW and processed in LR. I will keep 920 images untouched unless it skewed some images by a big margin that begs for correction.

None will be left on auto unless the scene requires nothing to be changed on the 920.. Otherwise, I never use auto or scene mode with the DSLR.. Will have a tripod for both as well.

The purpose is more to show how both of these cameras are supposed to be used and for what audience and use cases they were developed. Not a direct IQ comparison or anything of the sort. Will not shoot every scene twice with each camera respectively. Never saw a comparison like this before on the Internet so looking forward to it..

--
Posted: 2013-10-27 00:05:38
Edit : Quote


Another Internet joke spread around is that the JPEG processing on the 808 is done in real time and hardware based due to separate image processor, while 1020's is software based and not done in real time!

This "theory" was initiated by Steve. Can't tell what he was thinking but it's a total joke.

Taking a RAW data and developing it to JPEG using certain set of algorithms results the same regardless what processor is used! Time might differ if one processor is faster, but other than that nothing changes.

On the 808, because Symbian still ran on the old ARM architecture which couldn't handle such hard processing, especially for video, Nokia had to add another separate processor to help and not take over the whole work btw! It mostly does the downsampling for the video and does little for photo processing.

On the Lumia, with the new ARM architecture and much faster processor, Nokia only had to tweak the Qualcomm processor to overwrite the 20MP limit for photos and apply their processing algorithms.

Had they used same 808 algorithms for instance, same JPEGs would have came out.

Now Steve's idea is that on the 1020 the full res is first saved, then the algorithms are applied to resulting the oversampled image and save it as well. While on the 808 the oversampled picture is directly processed and saved.

This is true, but the purpose is to have both images saved in order to enable the feature of "shoot first zoom later".. As this whole PV technology is basically all about lossless zooming.

On the 808 the image is also first captured in full res and oversampled, when in PV mode the 808 doesn't capture directly oversampled image. There is no such thing. Difference is that the phone doesn't save both samples at the same times. When done with the full res RAW data it is disregarded. While on the 1020 that full res RAW data is also processed into JPEG. So two parallel JPEG processings are done at the same time. And that's why it takes the 1020 so much shot to shot time. It processes same RAW data into two JPEGs.


--
Posted: 2013-10-27 00:20:31
Edit : Quote


^Yep....make compare.

I no longer shoot with mirrorless Panasonic G1 (standing in the closet), but the show compared to 808.

808 ClearView(TM) technology



Panasonic G1 by RAW

--
Posted: 2013-10-27 07:09:04
Edit : Quote




+1
--
Posted: 2013-10-27 23:12:12
Edit : Quote


I haven't been on here in a few days, but has everyone seen this ? Nokia to bring back 808 quality to the 1020

Like ive always thought, any short comings in the 1020's camera are probably software based rather than an issue with the optics.
--
Posted: 2013-10-27 23:25:45
Edit : Quote


Yes I read that the next update which was called Bitter Sweet Shimmer is now called Black they promise more natural colours and better image processing
--
Posted: 2013-10-28 00:28:00
Edit : Quote



Work link is here
http://blog.gsmarena.com/noki[....]he-old-oversampling-algorithm/
--
Posted: 2013-10-28 08:16:18
Edit : Quote




How many times you have to share these off-topic photos here and remind us that you ditched your G1 for the 808 for reasons we still fail to get?

1. Given that mirrorless cameras were introduced as a mobility solution specially for travel and vacation, comparison photos with the best cameraphones are interesting and reasonable to make. But at least share photos taken of the scene at the same time if you are comparing IQ!

2. Anyone who owns a G1 ought to upgrade by now. It's an outdated camera with a two generation old sensor at least. So it should sit in your closet regardless.

3. No one uses a cameraphone or a mirrorless camera only for landscape photography at mid day under bright sunlight! Actually these cameras are meant for vacations, kids, pets, and any occasional family or private moment one would capture and keep. So I think it's meaningless to compare landscapes under such conditions where even low end compacts nowadays deliver satisfying images for any casual user. And if we are to judge the two photos you shared in the premise of dedicated landscape photography, both are very poor.

4. What about high ISO and flash? Care to share such images? Because most of the time ISO 100 is not gonna be used! Not to count many other parameters and features where the limitation of a cameraphone against even such an outdated camera become too big to overlook.

--
Posted: 2013-10-28 13:09:46
Edit : Quote

---

New Topic   Reply

Forum Index