Smaller sensor size than 808 pureview

vlad0

New member
Oct 9, 2012
1,069
0
0
Visit site
Is 1020 limited to taking 5MP or 38mp shots?
That's a big gap - and some might argue that 5mp doesn't quite do it.
808 had 8mp at least in between.

They could enable that in a software update later.. the 808 also defaults to 5mpix.. you have to go into creative mode to get the 8mpix mode. One major difference no one talks about is that the 808 shoots at 85% jpeg compression in automatic mode, and the 1020 shoots at 95%.. to get 95 on the 808 you have to go into creative mode.

So, the 5Mpix pics from the 1020 will be bigger on average in terms of file size fore sure.

If you compare the 808 pictures to 1020 the 808 pictures are less noisy, more sharp and contain less artefacts. Especially the portrait pictures of the 1020 samles contains heaps of artefacts while the 808 pictures are smooth.

Also the 808 sensor supports ISO 50, while the 1020 only supports ISO 100. If you compare pictures of the 808 with ISO 50 and ISO 100 you see a big difference in noise there as well. Not supporting ISO 50 is a hige drawback for the 1020 because of f2.2 most daylight pictures are done with about 1/2000 secs. 1020 lacks huge potential there compared to the 808.

Ya, but look at that shutter speed.. its way better than the 808
 

JustToClarify

New member
Mar 11, 2013
276
0
0
Visit site
^ how did you get the 56% figure ?

It makes more sense to me in millimeters..

808 is @ 10,67 x 8,00mm

1020 is @ 9,00 X 7,00mm

The difference isn't that big, but still.. it results in smaller pixels

huh now I'm confused as some measures don't look right there, either it's not 1/1.2" vs 1/1.5" either it's not your measures :D even in your case it's 35% bigger

now if I look better if pixels on 808 are exactly 25% bigger(if it's the exact measure) then area should be roughly ~56% bigger no?

Ya, but look at that shutter speed.. its way better than the 808

big sensor >>>>> shutter speed

no chance 50% longer exposure(4/2.7 hope I got that right lol) will yield better result than having bigger sensor
 

vlad0

New member
Oct 9, 2012
1,069
0
0
Visit site
^ I am more impressed with how fast the shutter on the 1020 is.. the 4 sec thing.. it will be so grainy, it would be hard to look at.

As far as the sensor size the Nokia white paper says
1/1.5”

Which should be 9x7 mm unless I messed up the math

original.jpg
 

Michael Spencer

New member
Jul 13, 2013
83
0
0
Visit site

Daniel Rubino

Editor-in-chief
Staff member
Jan 19, 2006
1,031
14
38
Visit site
Probably it compensates, but it's not sure better. We have to see comparatives. The big deal would have been BSI sensor and preserving the bigger sensor size.
Right, which is why you then throw in OIS to the mix for longer exposures. They have also all new algorithms for color processing and noise reduction.

Look, when it comes to digital photography, sensor size will always be too small unless you're sporting a full-frame or medium format Hasselblad. The reason why Nokia put a smaller sensor (than the 808) is to make the phone itself thinner and smaller. While the 808 took great photos, it is also significantly more chunky....and that's without the OIS rig (which is even more important for video, which a lot of people overlook).

The trade off with going smaller is they put in BSI (awesome) and OIS (even more awesome). Toss in six lens elements and new algorithms for low-compression JPG processing and the 1020 will go beyond the 808.

I spoke with numerous members of the Nokia photography team, saw samples, tried them myself and I don't' see anything that they did as negative. Even side by side 808/1020 shots showed the 1020 being sharper.

Ultimately, we have to wait until we have it in our hands but I find a lot of this hand-wringing over specs on paper premature. It ignores a lot of behind the scenes stuff.
 

JustToClarify

New member
Mar 11, 2013
276
0
0
Visit site
808 in auto mode is set to be smooth not sharp, if you raise the sharpness it's another story, even Galaxy S4 gives a tiny bit sharper picture than 808 in automode but sharpness is not everything

also can you explain why do you think that BSI is awesome? Logic tells that DSLR makers would be first to jump on it if that was the case...

it's just a way to pack more pixels into a sensor without increasing the sensor size, but the tradeoffs are significant and I don't like them, at all
 

Juanma Herrera

New member
Mar 4, 2013
48
0
0
Visit site
Right, which is why you then throw in OIS to the mix for longer exposures. They have also all new algorithms for color processing and noise reduction.

Look, when it comes to digital photography, sensor size will always be too small unless you're sporting a full-frame or medium format Hasselblad. The reason why Nokia put a smaller sensor (than the 808) is to make the phone itself thinner and smaller. While the 808 took great photos, it is also significantly more chunky....and that's without the OIS rig (which is even more important for video, which a lot of people overlook).

The trade off with going smaller is they put in BSI (awesome) and OIS (even more awesome). Toss in six lens elements and new algorithms for low-compression JPG processing and the 1020 will go beyond the 808.

I spoke with numerous members of the Nokia photography team, saw samples, tried them myself and I don't' see anything that they did as negative. Even side by side 808/1020 shots showed the 1020 being sharper.

Ultimately, we have to wait until we have it in our hands but I find a lot of this hand-wringing over specs on paper premature. It ignores a lot of behind the scenes stuff.

Of course I will buy the phone when it releases in my country (Spain), but I'm a little bit dissapointed because of the sensor size reduction. I would have had an 808 but I didn't because of Symbian. I've been waiting for this Lumia 1020 for a long time. I think this phone will be awesome, but it could have been ever better with the bigger sensor same 808.

Improved sharpness in 1020? OK, but I can do it in Photoshop, and not oversaturating colors. 808 images look really pure, natural. In my experience, these new BSI sensors (is Sony the manufacturer?) are very noisy because of the tiny pixel size. They capture more amount of light, right, but losing detail, creating artifitial sharpness, and with a lot of noise,

This is a niche product, and as a photography enthusiast I was waiting for a really improvement over 808. I don't care about the phone thickness, even I preferred the 1020 to be as thick as the camera hump in the entire back and carry a 4000 mAh Battery. I don't care it is not a 4-kernel Snapdragon 800, 1080p display... I just care about the camera and Windows Phone. And I think reducing the sensor size is not something good. BSI sensors are marketing. Less noise in BSI sensor (I've read it in the 1020 white paper). LOL, it's a fake, actually 1.12 microns BSI sensors are Pure noise.

OIS is a good improvement for video and for pics in low light with no objects moving.
Better shoot controls? OK, I already have them in mi Lumia 920 (proshot app)
Upgraded ISO levels? Amber update is the answer

I love the new Lumia 1020, but it won't be the perfect photography phone I was waiting it to be. Even if future comparatives reveal 1020 is better than 808 in every different light situations (I doubt it), I will continue wondering how better could have been the new improvement (OIS, WP, BSI, 6 lens) mounted in a bigger sensor with 1.4 microns pixel size. No doubts about this would be far better than 808 for sure in that case, but actually with the 1020 specs I simply can't be sure and I need to see comparatives.

Sorry for my english. I hope you to understand :$
 

JustToClarify

New member
Mar 11, 2013
276
0
0
Visit site
Improved sharpness in 1020? OK, but I can do it in Photoshop, and not oversaturating colors. 808 images look really pure, natural. In my experience, these new BSI sensors (is Sony the manufacturer?) are very noisy because of the tiny pixel size. They capture more amount of light, right, but losing detail, creating artifitial sharpness, and with a lot of noise,

yupp Sony makes them, and since their Honami is announced with 1/1.5" sensor...I wonder if it's this same sensor only with smaller resolution

BSI sensors are marketing. Less noise in BSI sensor (I've read it in the 1020 white paper). LOL, it's a fake, actually 1.12 microns BSI sensors are Pure noise.

glad I'm not the only one who noticed that
 

John20212

New member
Feb 27, 2012
565
0
0
Visit site
For the ultimate camera phone Nokia should have stuck to the bigger 808 sensor size, instead of trying to please ATT and others with making the phone thinner. I would have prefered it to be flush with the camera hump and have a bigger battery and microSD with the 808 sensor size; that would make it flawless.
 

vlad0

New member
Oct 9, 2012
1,069
0
0
Visit site
Before you read this, I just want to disclose that personally I think that the 1020 is an engineering marvel in many ways.. we are really picking apart very small details that most people won't care about. Also, this is all based on my personal observation and knowledge.. I don't have any professional experience or expertise in the matter.

They have also all new algorithms for color processing and noise reduction..

Well, so far from what we can see those new algorithms are not as good as the old ones. There seems to be more grain/noise in the jpeg compared to the 808..

You could clearly see that the jpeg signature on the 1020 is from the same family from which all other Lumia phones came from. The 808 and the N8 came from a different one.. Personally I prefer the more natural/smooth look of the Dinning era.. I think its better to have natural color reproduction to which you can choose to add saturation, than a saturated one which you have to make more natural.. its a difficult task.

While the 808 took great photos, it is also significantly more chunky....and that's without the OIS rig (which is even more important for video, which a lot of people overlook)...

OIS is very important for video, and I agree 100% with you..overall the 1020 will be much better for video capture, no matter the difference in IQ. It would be negligible since we are talking about 2Mpix images being captured 30 times every second.

However, I can't agree on the more chunky part..

The 1020 is 6 mm taller, 11 mm wider, and more importantly takes a bit more or at least as much volume as the 808.. so when you put it in your hand or your pocket, it will take more room.

The 808 is at: 95.5 cc
The 1020 is at: 96.9 cc

The most impressive part about the 1020's dimension is it's weight.. its 11 grams lighter than the 808.

Source: Nokia 808 PureView vs. Nokia Lumia 1020 - GSMArena.com


BSI (awesome)

The jury is still out on that one.. if it was indeed that awesome, most high end compacts and DSLR would've moved away from FSI a long time ago. I am still to see a photograph taken with a BSI sensor that tops the N8 or the 808 in terms of raw IQ .. the 1020 might be the first one to beat the N8 by using all sorts of other clever tech.

I recommend reading this paper by Aptina explaining the difference b/w FSI and BSI. I've read it at least 3 times, and for the part its over my head, but I think I got the basic idea, and I can see why the OEMs started pushing BSI sensors over FSI.

BSI allows you to use smaller than 1.4 micron pixels, as the light channels/tubes which guide the light trough the front side (metal) of the FSI sensors can't be that small.. it gets messy. So as the OEMs had to increase the megapixel count, but still keep the same tiny sensors, they opted for BSI sensor and dipped below 1.4 micron pixels.

The case with the 1020 confirms this theory as it uses 1.12 micron pixels as opposed to 1.4 microns on the 808. So.. they kept the megapixel count, but at the same time made the sensor smaller.. its a workaround.

I am not saying that with time BSI won't yield real world benefits, but at this point.. I think its more of a compromise than anything else..

Here is the paper: http://www.aptina.com/news/FSI-BSI-WhitePaper.pdf



Toss in six lens elements and new algorithms for low-compression JPG processing and the 1020 will go beyond the 808

Making the lens more complex doesn't necessarily make it better..

From what I've seen so far, the optical system on the 1020 is not as good as the 808.. there is visible softness on the edge of the frame, which doesn't exist on most 808s.

Example: http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/cam/nokia/lumia_1020/2013071119456ov0Ac.jpg

50oPW4u.jpg


qMd79zb.jpg


This might also be caused by the auto focus system.. we might have to wait and see. I noticed it on several of the official Nokia samples.

As far as going beyond the 808.. in certain condition, maybe, but overall.. doubtful.



Even side by side 808/1020 shots showed the 1020 being sharper..

They are a bit sharper on default settings, but you can pump up the sharpness on the 808 and you will get a similar result.. but I was never a fan of the over sharpened look, no matter the source.

Here: http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/cam/nokia/808_pureview/201305172149id083t.jpg

15mpix image from the 808 with pumped up sharpness.. I very much doubt that the 1020 can do better.

Again, just like with the color reproduction, I would rather have a smooth image I can add sharpness to, than an over sharpened one that I have to make smoother..
 

Juanma Herrera

New member
Mar 4, 2013
48
0
0
Visit site
I think the softness in the edges could be because of the OIS. Some Lumia 920 and some HTC One also have these problems.

And I would have preferred same pixel count (41 mpx) but in 808 sensor size, it's keeping the pixel size in 1.4 microns, and, why not, includying BSI tech.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
322,910
Messages
2,242,883
Members
428,005
Latest member
COME ON WIN ANDROID (ADI)