>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
Manufacturer Discussion >
Nokia
> Nokia Lumia 920 PureView Thread
Bookmark topic
so,ok then will wait for sim free. But Phones4U here will sell them sim free I read and am sure you'll find them online. But am also confused as carrier branding is very restricted on WP and also how can a minimal bit of branding affect the camera??
_________________
Material things don't matter,but Rock n Roll does!!!!
Nokia Lumia 800 White
[ This Message was edited by: Bonovox on 2012-11-04 18:52 ]
--
Posted: 2012-11-04 19:48:00
Edit :
Quote
That's nice to know. It would also explain why some reviewers seem very impressed by the camera and some don't.
So hopefully my unit that should be coming in the next few days will do a better job than some of those reviewed units.
[ This Message was edited by: Yakkaimono on 2012-11-04 19:07 ]
--
Posted: 2012-11-04 20:07:12
Edit :
Quote
Am pleased to hear that too
--
Posted: 2012-11-04 20:13:00
Edit :
Quote
The carrier branded phones will be updated but just a bit later as always.
At
@false_morel, really interesting read, the man behind the camera is the key to a good pic. And what Nokia does, in comparison to other manufacturers , is to allow the user to play around more with the settings (or at least they have previously).
--
Posted: 2012-11-04 20:37:07
Edit :
Quote
false_morel thanks for the info!
I am still waiting for an image that would show me some potential, and I haven't seen one yet. All the low light photos are the usual mix blur and noise, but.. more pics are coming in every day so we will see how it goes.
a picture is worth a thousand..
I know what the 808 can do.. and I haven't seen a photo from the 920 that can produce a similar result, let alone a better one.
This is shot at 0.3 seconds with the 920 at 800 iso with a slight bump in EV
This is shot at 0.23xxx seconds with the 808 @ 800 iso
I just don't see how the 920 can produce something similar to that.. I will know for sure once I get mine.
[ This Message was edited by: cu015170 on 2012-11-04 19:57 ]
--
Posted: 2012-11-04 20:55:52
Edit :
Quote
Yeah but that 808's photo you quote doesn't feature the same darkness seen in the 920's photos!
Two completely different lit scenes!
In the 808's photo the sky still had the blues in it. It's at twilight.. Whereas the 920 photos are at night.
I looked the times the photos were captured at.
The 808 was shot at around 19:15 same as the first two 920 photos. The fourth one was at 21:00..
But not sure these are the same places. And notice that one 808's photo was early October, still at daytime saving, and the 920's photos were shot early November after the daytime saving.
If you have info about the places, you can help us figure this out.
But one thing for sure, two different light scenarios here.
--
Posted: 2012-11-04 23:23:51
Edit :
Quote
This one says alot. Also in the harbour shot there is alot more light from inside the buildings aswell as the sky compared to the 920 shot of the dark street
[ This Message was edited by: Bonovox on 2012-11-04 23:01 ]
--
Posted: 2012-11-04 23:59:32
Edit :
Quote
This review here Pocket Lint says the camera is great and has a few images. They highly rated the phone as a whole except the moaning bit at the start about how heavy and big it is. Now,I held the dummy model and it is not that big compared to the Galaxy Note 2 it's small. The weight I am sure ain't gonna bother me as my Lumia 800 is quite heavy but don't bother me. Here is the review
http://www.pocket-lint.com/review/6042/nokia-lumia-920-windows-phone-review
--
Posted: 2012-11-05 03:23:00
Edit :
Quote
Yes, the 808 photo and 920 are in completely different conditions.. like I said, we have to wait for a proper direct comparo and see which system works better for low light.. Best case would be both combined in one.
Here is one 9_destiny took at 2112 .. pretty dark, and the quality is way better than anything I've seen from the 920
http://www.esato.com/phonepho[....]ureview/201209142114355dVH.jpg
2.7 seconds exposure .. obviously the phone was sitting on something, but still.. I don't think the 920 would produce a better result, handheld or not.
Bonovox you would like these .. Way better than the 800 in low light. It also shows that if have anything moving in the frame, it will be blurry... as expected with longer exposure.
[ This Message was edited by: cu015170 on 2012-11-05 03:24 ]
--
Posted: 2012-11-05 04:14:37
Edit :
Quote
With 2.7" SS of course the 808 will achieve way better results than the Lumia 920!
Or if it gets to 1" or 1.5" for instance..
But for these shutter speeds one needs a tripod. With the 920 we're still talking about point and shoot.
Notice the huge difference between the two photos above you posted. The 920 delivered a very usable photo, while the Lumia 800 delivered something unusable.
On 2012-11-05 03:23:00, Bonovox wrote:
This review here Pocket Lint says the camera is great and has a few images. They highly rated the phone as a whole except the moaning bit at the start about how heavy and big it is. Now,I held the dummy model and it is not that big compared to the Galaxy Note 2 it's small. The weight I am sure ain't gonna bother me as my Lumia 800 is quite heavy but don't bother me. Here is the review
http://www.pocket-lint.com/review/6042/nokia-lumia-920-windows-phone-review
Actually Pocket-lint's review is the most negative towards the 920 so far!
They literally bashed the phone and recommended against it! All due to its weight!
They even went as far as claiming that the phone must be held with two hands! Utterly ridiculous!
I'm not sure if the one reviewed the 920 was a human or a chicken!
--
Posted: 2012-11-05 20:21:06
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
