>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
Manufacturer Discussion >
Nokia
> Nokia Lumia 1020
Bookmark topic
Does anyone here actually own a Lumia 1020 or plan on getting one???
--
Posted: 2013-09-17 20:41:32
Edit :
Quote
Afaik, everybody here are repeating and repeating, and repeating..... what they've read in reviews, some had a moment's "play" in a store, but nobody actually owns one
I'm going to buy one, but will have to wait, till it's available in the Netherlands, not sure yet, when this will be.
Last time with the Lumia 920, we in NL had to wait for several months, and then, after launch, I had to wait six more weeks, because I wanted the yellow colour, not every shop had them and, if available, only in limited amounts.
[ This Message was edited by: Marly on 2013-09-17 20:08 ]
--
Posted: 2013-09-17 21:06:44
Edit :
Quote
On 2013-09-17 20:41:32, Tsepz_GP wrote:
Does anyone here actually own a Lumia 1020 or plan on getting one???
I'll wait for Marly her user experience before I decide anything.
Reviews say nothing.
--
Posted: 2013-09-17 21:28:52
Edit :
Quote
On 2013-09-17 20:08:24, false_morel wrote:
On 2013-09-17 10:10:15, Sonysta wrote:
Damian Dinning’s feedback on the Nokia Lumia 1020 PureView !!!
pureviewclub.com/2013/17346
[ This Message was edited by: Sonysta on 2013-09-17 09:10 ]
I wonder what those stating that the 1020 is no competition to the 808 would say after reading this piece from Dinning..
The difference between the two phones is obvious: different philosophies used for processing.
Even on sharpening, I tend to agree with Nokia's approach over the request of using less sharpening..
The reasoning for this is all obvious as well. Cameraphones are all about the average Joe not the photography enthusiasts. I would never use a 1020 or an 808 to shoot a wedding, or a sports event, or a pro like portrait photography, or of course use it as primary camera even if my DSLR means more space and hassle carrying it around!
With the 808 Nokia knew it won't sell mainstream and mainly addressed at the loyal Nokia photography fans and those hardcore photographers who would use the 808 as a secondary compact camera. So they didn't want to disappoint them.
But with the 1020 they wanted to sell mainstream. And the mainstream wants an iPhone-like camera. Sharp, vibrant colors..
And it makes sense for a compact anyway.
I would never post-process an image from my phone. Come on! Will never waste time on that. Enough time spent on processing RAW content from my DSLR!
I want ready to share and occasionally print images. Either way in small sizes. So 5 MP makes perfect sense, as I would be sharing them online socially, or print them small.
So what's the need of pixel peeping to spot some noise and artifacts?! And what's the use of neutral coloring approach of I'm never be retouching them on PC?!
When I use neutral settings on DSLR in the rare cases I shoot in JPEG I know I will be readjusting the color slides afterwards. No serious photographer leaves an image in pale lifeless colors!
Think practically people not getting stuck in the abstract!
Of course there will always be room for optimizations and enhancements.. So Nokia have a job to bring in some new feature additions and optimize the camera output in some conditions where it skews the results..
But overall, the 1020 is the new benchmark. Live wit it!
1020 "Fake Pureview" is the new benchmark ?
Here the proof that 1020 is not the best cameraphone… Besides it being less than 808 Pureview in all situations, it is also less than the Xperia Z1 in photos at night or in low light.
http://www.sonymobile.com/glo[....]ults/xperia-z1/#camera-overall
P.S: The pictures speak for themselves !
#1020fakepureview
--
Posted: 2013-09-17 22:28:44
Edit :
Quote
How big is the difference in sensor size b/w the Z1 and the 1020 ?
--
Posted: 2013-09-17 22:31:42
Edit :
Quote
In my opinion is great !
Although the Sony be the manufacturer Xperia Z1 sensor and also sensors Lumia 1020 and are both BSI Sensor, Xperia Z1 has a sensor 1/2.3", whilst sensor 1020 has a 1/1.5", which in my opinion is something significant !!!
--
Posted: 2013-09-17 22:40:11
Edit :
Quote
Hi Sonysta, the question isn't that the 1020 is a "fake pureview" or isn't better than the 808 for its camera, the question also is it's the new benchmark of a new camera phone that
the people want to use.
this is what false morel wanted to explain some.
Who wants to use or buy a 808 now in 2013 ? 10 people on forums worldwide ?
Smaller sensor or not the 1020 uses the same technique as the 808 with 41 mp. there are differences including the stabilizer ...
--
Posted: 2013-09-17 23:08:21
Edit :
Quote
On 2013-09-17 20:40:33, cu015170 wrote:
All you have to do is look at the images... the 1020 comes close to the 808, but it does not surpass it. To me its pretty obvious.. otherwise, if I felt like it was an upgrade, I would have a 1020 by now since imaging is the most important aspect of a smartphone for me.
Unfortunately it is indeed a downgrade from the 808 overall.. its a shame since I was really looking forward to this.
The other disappointment is the Sony Z1 .. I was expecting big sensor, big pixels, and a Xenon flash.. instead we got 20 million 1.4 micron pixels, weak flash, and questionable jpeg processing in the initial firmware.
You I think I didn't examine some comparisons photos before I stated that conclusion?
I relied much on Steve's photos from AAWP as he's the most objective and professional among the huge bunch of ediotic journalists who know very little on photography. Next comes GSMArena and that's it..
DPreview Mobile site is good but they do no comparisons.. Only reviews..
Anyway, I tend to disagree with Steve on almost half of his conclusions when he compared both PVs..
While in pixel peeping, the Lumia 1020 tends to show a bit of oversharpening and the associated artifacts including artificial noise which people might mistake for natural sensor noise compared to the 808, as I said the 1020 fulfills its purpose as a compact camera way better than the 808.
All you need to do is print a 13x18 photo from both phones without retouching and no one in his full mind would the 808's result over the 1020's.. Or share some photos on Facebook or through the cloud in low res and let people tell you which are better..
The 808 tends to be too soft at times, and lacking vibrance and contrast as well.
Not ready to share or print results.. While giving minimal noise the photos still need to be retouch, sharpened at times, or fiddling with the vibrance, saturation, and contrast sliders at other times..
And when it comes to night time, while the 808 is obviously superior with its Xenon flash over the 1020's flash unit, with flash off the 1020 does a significantly better job. With the help of OIS when the conditions need it..
And as to the flash, 1020 is still enough to do a well enough job, especially compared to normal smartphones which are useless in low light flash portraits..
And the OIS in video is alone a decisive factor.
So even if one rules out that the 808 runs on a dead OS with very limited usability and apps selection, as a camera the 1020 is better equipped and suited for purpose of this category of pocket cameras..
As to Sony, never expected much from their Z1.. But still waiting for proper reviews.
The difference between sensor sizes is huge btw.
But if anything, Sony are known to be kings to overprocessing their JPEGs and delivering a naughty job. Even over their lineups of compact and mirrosless cameras..
They are however the best in delivering on auto mode. Their smart algorithms for this mode are still uncontested..
That's why they usually win a lot of photography ignorant users which rely on auto mode all the time..
--
Posted: 2013-09-17 23:39:26
Edit :
Quote
On 2013-09-17 22:28:44, Sonysta wrote:
On 2013-09-17 20:08:24, false_morel wrote:
On 2013-09-17 10:10:15, Sonysta wrote:
Damian Dinning’s feedback on the Nokia Lumia 1020 PureView !!!
pureviewclub.com/2013/17346
[ This Message was edited by: Sonysta on 2013-09-17 09:10 ]
I wonder what those stating that the 1020 is no competition to the 808 would say after reading this piece from Dinning..
The difference between the two phones is obvious: different philosophies used for processing.
Even on sharpening, I tend to agree with Nokia's approach over the request of using less sharpening..
The reasoning for this is all obvious as well. Cameraphones are all about the average Joe not the photography enthusiasts. I would never use a 1020 or an 808 to shoot a wedding, or a sports event, or a pro like portrait photography, or of course use it as primary camera even if my DSLR means more space and hassle carrying it around!
With the 808 Nokia knew it won't sell mainstream and mainly addressed at the loyal Nokia photography fans and those hardcore photographers who would use the 808 as a secondary compact camera. So they didn't want to disappoint them.
But with the 1020 they wanted to sell mainstream. And the mainstream wants an iPhone-like camera. Sharp, vibrant colors..
And it makes sense for a compact anyway.
I would never post-process an image from my phone. Come on! Will never waste time on that. Enough time spent on processing RAW content from my DSLR!
I want ready to share and occasionally print images. Either way in small sizes. So 5 MP makes perfect sense, as I would be sharing them online socially, or print them small.
So what's the need of pixel peeping to spot some noise and artifacts?! And what's the use of neutral coloring approach of I'm never be retouching them on PC?!
When I use neutral settings on DSLR in the rare cases I shoot in JPEG I know I will be readjusting the color slides afterwards. No serious photographer leaves an image in pale lifeless colors!
Think practically people not getting stuck in the abstract!
Of course there will always be room for optimizations and enhancements.. So Nokia have a job to bring in some new feature additions and optimize the camera output in some conditions where it skews the results..
But overall, the 1020 is the new benchmark. Live wit it!
1020 "Fake Pureview" is the new benchmark ?
Here the proof that 1020 is not the best cameraphone… Besides it being less than 808 Pureview in all situations, it is also less than the Xperia Z1 in photos at night or in low light.
http://www.sonymobile.com/glo[....]ults/xperia-z1/#camera-overall
P.S: The pictures speak for themselves !
#1020fakepureview
Dude you shared the article where Dinning who doesn't work at Nokia anymore and uses an 808 as his own personal smartphone at the moment stated that the 1020 is the new benchmark and you then you tend to say the exact opposite? Did you read that article?
Anyway, speaking cameras only, yes 1020 is the benchmark. If we are to talk still image quality.
Nokia need only adjust the WB in some conditions where it tends to go yellowish in some scenes on auto..
This is the only major thing needs to be addressed and Nokia will address through an update..
Adding more features and addressing the snap to snap time should be also on the to do list..
Other than that, the addition of OIS, the new superbly designed camera app, and highly useful additional camera lenses or applications, are enough to settle the battle really.
As to Sony, do you have any unbiased comparisons to share? because no one is taking a comparison done by Sony seriously same as no one should take a comparison done by Nokia or any OEM seriously as well..
--
Posted: 2013-09-17 23:50:33
Edit :
Quote
On 2013-09-17 23:08:21, davidsic wrote:
Hi Sonysta, the question isn't that the 1020 is a "fake pureview" or isn't better than the 808 for its camera, the question also is it's the new benchmark of a new camera phone that the people want to use.
this is what false morel wanted to explain some.
Who wants to use or buy a 808 now in 2013 ? 10 people on forums worldwide ?
Smaller sensor or not the 1020 uses the same technique as the 808 with 41 mp. there are differences including the stabilizer ...
He does not use the same technique but a similar technique !
Both the images in full resolution or mode pureview of 1020 are lower than the images obtained from the 808 !
The question is one... 1020 is the successor to the 920 and not the 808 Pureview !
Why is it so hard to understand ?
--
Posted: 2013-09-18 00:17:32
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
