950 camera much better than 930?

batab

New member
Oct 14, 2015
24
0
0
Visit site
Now here's a brain teaser - have you actually considered the fact that along with increasing the sensor size they also increased the size of the individual pixels on that sensor? So that increase in sensor size doesn't actually mean that the amount of pixels increased in same ratio as the size.

no need to be offensive bro, i'm only reporting the official specs and i'm assessing a logical consequence of the different specifications. Obviously the device will need some accurate testing to see if the image quality is really better than its predecessor or not but this is another point. And by the way, my brain worked just ok for my mech. eng. PhD few weeks ago, so i guess it still does. Although i can say something stupid and wrong for sure, there are other way to express your different opinion i guess.

Anyway, i know what pixel size is and i know that a 1/2.4" f 1.9 is much better in low light than a 1/2.5" f 2.4 both because the sensor size and the aperture. No matter how big is the pixel. If you are taking a photo at 5 or 8 mpx using over sampling, both the photos will have the same output resolution but the first is taken with a bigger sensor, hence one real pixel of the image will corresponds to a larger area of the sensor (and of course there is also the effect of the aperture). The difference should be even bigger if the photo is taken in a 16:9 format and the 95x series sensor is really a true 16:9 as the full size of the sensor will be used, something that does not happen for the 930 sensor.

Oh and just to let you know, I'm using a Lumia 930 since day one and I'm in no way saying that the 930 sensor is bad.
 
Last edited:

RumoredNow

New member
Nov 12, 2012
18,134
0
0
Visit site
The 1.9 aperture worries me for the depth of field. I tend to take long shots of vistas quite regularly. More so than low light, no flash.
 

JPDVM2014

New member
Sep 11, 2011
382
0
0
Visit site
The 1.9 aperture worries me for the depth of field. I tend to take long shots of vistas quite regularly. More so than low light, no flash.

Same here. I don't want bokeh and shallow depth of field in all of my shots. I'm sincerely hoping that MSFT puts the features from the refocus app into the camera app. It would help mitigate the problem (if it even is a problem) as long as you have a steady hand/tripod.
 

r2SN

New member
Oct 13, 2015
80
0
0
Visit site
I'm just hoping Microsoft is done with maximum shutter speed of 4 sec. Considering other android flagships "with manual controls" such as G4 which has max shutter speed of 30 sec, I think for windows flagships shutter speed should be increased (iso 12800 is quite a feat for mobile camera). Well if i compare my Lumia 730 to 925,1020,1520 and 930 which are a class apart all have max shutter speed of 4sec. What the hell??
 

Con Georgiadis

New member
Jan 10, 2014
272
0
0
Visit site
For your information i tweet @jalakarhu...the man behind Lumia 950 camera's
and i asked some details.He told me the following
1.max shutter speed is 4 sec.The reason? He said we didn't want to go higher because there be some quality tradeoffs.
2.camera has a native 16:9 sensor
3.the oversampled image is now 8mp.
4.image quality is better than Nokia 808 and Lumia 1020.
 

TK2011

New member
Nov 21, 2012
379
0
0
Visit site
The 1.9 aperture worries me for the depth of field. I tend to take long shots of vistas quite regularly. More so than low light, no flash.

You don't seem to understand how DOF works. At this sensor size and lens focal length, f/1.9 will give to infinite DOF as soon as you focus on something beyond couple feet away. i.e. There's nothing to worry about for your landscape photos. Shallow DOF come in only if you focus on something really close.
 

Zachary Boddy

Staff member
Aug 3, 2014
2,366
11
38
www.windowscentral.com
It's very exciting. I've been playing with my Lumia 830 since it just now got full Lumia Denim (about freaking time) and I'm very pleased with the improvements and it's a very nice camera but these phones overshadow it JUST a tad (that was sarcasm, these phones are looking to be true camera powerhouses and are starting to make my phone feel it's "mid-range" tag).
 

r2SN

New member
Oct 13, 2015
80
0
0
Visit site
I don't think better image quality than the 1020 is a turnoff at all.

Well sure better image quality is always welcome but the turnoff has been due to less shutter speed (limited to 4sec) . I mean for a flagship it should be increased to some higher value seeing that midrange device 730 to 930/1020 and now 950 has the same shutter speed. Especially when higher speeds can help reduce the noise in images in low light/night (considering the use of tripod)
 

StevoPhilo

New member
Oct 7, 2013
284
0
0
Visit site
Well sure better image quality is always welcome but the turnoff has been due to less shutter speed (limited to 4sec) . I mean for a flagship it should be increased to some higher value seeing that midrange device 730 to 930/1020 and now 950 has the same shutter speed. Especially when higher speeds can help reduce the noise in images in low light/night (considering the use of tripod)

Oh I get it. I do photography as well, but there comes a point where if you're going to bring a tripod you're going to bring a DSLR. I love the 1020 as a point and shoot with awesome quality, but I can't compare it to my A6000. It'd be nice to have, but I don't have steady hands and I definitely don't carry a tripod all the time.
 

r2SN

New member
Oct 13, 2015
80
0
0
Visit site
Oh I get it. I do photography as well, but there comes a point where if you're going to bring a tripod you're going to bring a DSLR. I love the 1020 as a point and shoot with awesome quality, but I can't compare it to my A6000. It'd be nice to have, but I don't have steady hands and I definitely don't carry a tripod all the time.

One day will get my own SLR but right now as a student will have to work with the phone especially when I can pretty much experiment with all camera controls leaving aperture and learn most of the photography techniques using the "Lumia"...☺. Well for the case of tripod +shutter speed that is required cause I am really getting hooked to night/stars photography sooo...
 

RumoredNow

New member
Nov 12, 2012
18,134
0
0
Visit site
You don't seem to understand how DOF works. At this sensor size and lens focal length, f/1.9 will give to infinite DOF as soon as you focus on something beyond couple feet away. i.e. There's nothing to worry about for your landscape photos. Shallow DOF come in only if you focus on something really close.

Based on my experiences comparing the 1520 @ f/2.4 vs the 928 @ f/2.0 (and an 830 @ f/2.2), there was a very noticeable softening in long shots when comparing side by side. I can't find the spec on 950 XL, but am assuming the same 26mm focal length...

http://forums.windowscentral.com/de...mia-camera-shootout-928-vs-1520-vs-830-a.html
 

TK2011

New member
Nov 21, 2012
379
0
0
Visit site
Based on my experiences comparing the 1520 @ f/2.4 vs the 928 @ f/2.0 (and an 830 @ f/2.2), there was a very noticeable softening in long shots when comparing side by side. I can't find the spec on 950 XL, but am assuming the same 26mm focal length...

http://forums.windowscentral.com/de...mia-camera-shootout-928-vs-1520-vs-830-a.html

Well, sensor size is different so aperture value alone is not directly indicative of relative DOF. OK, let's do the numbers:

L1520:
Sensor size = 1/2.5" ---> 35mm crop factor = 6 ---> Circle of Confusion (CoC) = 0.00444
Lens focal length in 35mm equiv. = 26mm ---> actual focal length = 26/6 = 4.3mm
Lens aperture = f/2.4
Punch in above numbers to DOF calculator and you get hyperfocal distance of 5.7 feet.
In other words, if you focus on something 5.7 feet away, everything from 2.85 ft to infinity should be in focus.

L928:
Sensor size = 1/3.2" ---> 35mm crop factor = 7.7 ---> Circle of Confusion (CoC) = 0.00346
Lens focal length in 35mm equiv. = 26mm ---> actual focal length = 26/7.7 = 3.38mm
Lens aperture = f/2.0
Punch in above numbers to DOF calculator and you get hyperfocal distance of 5.4 feet.
In other words, if you focus on something 5.4 feet away, everything from 2.7 ft to infinity should be in focus.

Numbers tell me it's actually slightly easier to achieve infinite DOF with the 928 than with the 1520. My guess is that the sharpness difference for distance subject that you mention is probably due to some other factors such as L928's lens performance shortcoming, user error in selecting focus point, and/or camera autofocus SW issue.

For L950/XL, I don't have the lens focal length, but if we were to assume the same 35mm-equivalent focal length of 26mm, we should get hyperfocal distance of about 7.6 feet. So, yes, it's a bit further out but not by much.
 

batab

New member
Oct 14, 2015
24
0
0
Visit site
Well, sensor size is different so aperture value alone is not directly indicative of relative DOF. OK, let's do the numbers:

L1520:
Sensor size = 1/2.5" ---> 35mm crop factor = 6 ---> Circle of Confusion (CoC) = 0.00444
Lens focal length in 35mm equiv. = 26mm ---> actual focal length = 26/6 = 4.3mm
Lens aperture = f/2.4
Punch in above numbers to DOF calculator and you get hyperfocal distance of 5.7 feet.
In other words, if you focus on something 5.7 feet away, everything from 2.85 ft to infinity should be in focus.

L928:
Sensor size = 1/3.2" ---> 35mm crop factor = 7.7 ---> Circle of Confusion (CoC) = 0.00346
Lens focal length in 35mm equiv. = 26mm ---> actual focal length = 26/7.7 = 3.38mm
Lens aperture = f/2.0
Punch in above numbers to DOF calculator and you get hyperfocal distance of 5.4 feet.
In other words, if you focus on something 5.4 feet away, everything from 2.7 ft to infinity should be in focus.

Numbers tell me it's actually slightly easier to achieve infinite DOF with the 928 than with the 1520. My guess is that the sharpness difference for distance subject that you mention is probably due to some other factors such as L928's lens performance shortcoming, user error in selecting focus point, and/or camera autofocus SW issue.

For L950/XL, I don't have the lens focal length, but if we were to assume the same 35mm-equivalent focal length of 26mm, we should get hyperfocal distance of about 7.6 feet. So, yes, it's a bit further out but not by much.

for L950/XL you still have 26mm focal length so your calculation is ok. And the sensor size is 1/2.46" to be accurate.
 

Blacklac

New member
Nov 10, 2011
1,965
0
0
Visit site
They seemed to be pretty proud of the post processing this time. Big change from the 1020 and 1520/930 releases. Yes, they got better over time, but they still were rough at times, color processing, over exposing, etc...

Posted via Note 4/Nexus 7 (2013)/Lumia 1020/ Lumia 2520
 

Rodrigo Mendes

New member
Jul 9, 2013
676
0
0
Visit site
Not sure yet, the phone is not in the hands of many people besides the reviewers... Once the phone is released then maybe we'll know for sure.

The ICON/930, is not a true 20mb camera as it cant take a full 20mp picture, just a 15/16mb picture (don't remember the exact numbers), if the 950 can take a true 20mp camera, then it might be hair better.

Anyway about it, the 929/930's camera is very impressive, if it's going to be better, maybe by a little, not by a ton.....

No, mate, Lumia 930 have 20MPX. You have to choose 4:3 format for reach 20MPX pictures, but most of people use 16:9 format.

Anyway, aparently Lumia 950 have a lower aperture size, but that's not quality guarantee. Theoretically can take more brighter pictures on the dark. Not always better.

Lumia 950 have three leds and each led have a different color to make skin tone more natural. That's a HUGE improvement compared to 930.

Probably Lumia 950 would be a much better camera than 930 at night and sightly at day. But if Lumia 950 have the same post process problem that Lumia 830 and Lumia 930 have, would not be a better camera at all.

Hope Microsoft have a better camera team than Nokia or at least remember their good old days (808 and Nokia N8).
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
322,902
Messages
2,242,867
Members
428,004
Latest member
hetb