Shifting from 808 symbian to lumia 1020

Bahamen

New member
Nov 20, 2012
272
0
0
Visit site
Hi Jeetu,

I have upgraded to the Lumia 1020 from the PV 808 and I like you have been a big Nokia fan for a long time but would advise to read ever paper online in regards to the Lumia 1020 and WP8 as even very simple thing you would have taken for granted on the 808 can be a issue on the 1020 I.e moving files from PC to mobile and editing, no file explorer, poor battery life, camera is NOT as good as the PV and I don't care what anyone has to say, very limited apps, 1020 take far too long to take a snap from locked screen when camera button is held down, no voice control without network connection, Maps and navigation is a toy compared to Ovi Maps and be warned when syncing poi, NO usb OTG plus the 808 can handle 64gig SD card and has interchangeable battery and that's just off the top of my head.

I have had my 1020 for three weeks now and can't tell you of a single advantage to upgrade from PV 808 to the Lumia 1020 so think long and hard mate.

I have had the 808 prior to upgrading to the 1020. After 1000 pictures taken with the 1020, I have not missed my 808 a single bit. Not the camera, not the OS. Not once have I thought "gee if only I had the 808 I would get a better image". No, the 1020 is actually a far better camera for me.

Here is how I would summarize it:

1. Daylight images: 1020 = 808 (roughly equal)
2. Macro: 1020 >> 808
3. Lowlight images: 1020 >>>> 808
4. Video: 1020 >>>>>> 808

It's not even close.
 

Bahamen

New member
Nov 20, 2012
272
0
0
Visit site
Take shooting in the night , i dont carry a tripod with me and the 1020 is allowing me to shoot around 2 seconds hand held and producing clean images that can be used , with the 808 i would struggle and the shots would be blurry at lower speeds then 2 seconds

Exactly! In lowlight, the 1020 is totally killing the 808. Everyone who claims that 808 is better prefer to avoid talking about lowlight images, and they claim that OIS only gives minor benefit. I've even debated with someone who claimed that OIS is useless because he can easily hand-hold the 808 for 2.7 seconds. Turned out he meant resting the 808 on a balcony supported with just one finger to qualify it as "handhold".

And then, you have those who claim that if you are serious about photography, you will bring a tripod around. My answer to that is: How many people own a DSLR? Of those who own a DSLR, how many bring them out? Of those who bring out their DSLR, how many bring a tripod along? Yes, a tiny tiny minority. And that's the pecking order, if you are going to bring an extra device/accessory, you might as well bring out the DSLR instead of the tripod.
 

vlad0

New member
Oct 9, 2012
1,069
0
0
Visit site
In terms of low light, the 1020 might give you a better shot handheld, but even then anything under 1/20 would have some blur. But if you rest the 808 on something, or have a tripod.. again on a per pixel and noise ratio level will produce a jpeg with higher IQ.

Here, and make sure to click on it for full resolution.



I am yet to come across a cleaner low light image from the 1020...

@vlad0: Nokia has always built excellent cameras that can fit into a phone form factor, and the 808 is probably pushing it in terms of thickness. With inclusion of OIS, the overall thickness would have increased significantly even with a 1/1.2" sensor, let alone a 1" sensor. So, we have to give Nokia a lot of credit for being able to engineer a 41MP camera with OIS capabilities which is even thinner compared to the 808.

Now, if you totally don't care about thickness, and you just want a giant DSLR that can make calls, then you should write to Samsung to launch the Samsung Galaxy S4 DSLR. Samsung is known to create ridiculous products like that, so maybe they can fulfil your fantasy. I hope they do. And I hope you will share a picture of yourself answering a call on that DSLR.

If you do care about thickness, Nokia's (or future Microsoft) imaging team is the ONLY one that will deliver this. You can safely trust that 1020's BSI 1/1.5" sensor is the optimal sensor size that they were able to squeeze into a phone form factor, given current technology. You can trust that if they could put a 1/1.2" sensor, they would have. Perhaps with graphene or nano-tech, they will be able to give you a 1" sensor. And you can trust that they are working on making better and/or thinner cameras for future generations. But at least recognize that Nokia works with image quality and design elegance in mind.

If you just want a freak cameraphone device, go look for Sony/Samsung instead.

Yes, I don't care how thick the phone is :) The senor in the 808 is not that much smaller...

1 inch sensor comes to 12.8 x 9.6mm vs the 1/1.2" on the 808 which comes to 10.67 x 8.00

So they will have to accommodate for 2.13mm width and 1.6mm height on top of the 808's hump/casing... something tells me that with a bit of clever engineering they might be able to keep a similar profile. Of course, they will have to skip the OIS.. and to be honest, having a 1" sensor beats any other feature :)

I am hoping that Microsoft steps up, tells the carriers to suk it, and give us a proper cameraphone .. I would buy it unlocked directly from them.


Speaking of 1" sensors, the Sony RX100 is the best compact using one of these, and here is how the 808 stacks up in certain situations. The 808's pics are resized from full resolution to match that of the RX100

808: http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/cam/nokia/808_pureview/201310021911seJM3n.jpg
UEwCi2H.jpg

RX100: http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/cam/sony/dsc_mer/201310021912RDy6tK.jpg
xNCwcZM.jpg

808: http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/cam/nokia/808_pureview/201310021913EU3CeV.jpg
R7bXYla.jpg

RX100: http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/cam/sony/dsc_mer/201310021913qTQZ1x.jpg
pBwB5nx.jpg

808: http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/cam/nokia/808_pureview/201310021914FW7214.jpg
GSJbGgW.jpg

RX100: http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/cam/sony/dsc_mer/201310021914X471RH.jpg
630h16l.jpg

808: http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/cam/nokia/808_pureview/201310021914s2mVQ7.jpg
TJ1InHS.jpg

RX100: http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/cam/sony/dsc_mer/2013100219143IWhr9.jpg
gIM6Qt7.jpg

808: http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/cam/nokia/808_pureview/2013100219153Nv9yq.jpg
A2WYBJM.jpg

RX100: http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/cam/sony/dsc_mer/201310021915g44N6b.jpg
xIjRgUT.jpg



..... the z1 is pretty bad from what iv seen

The Z1 has issues with the camera... I've looked at plenty of images and I am not impressed at all.
 

jeetu4444

New member
Sep 3, 2013
596
0
0
Visit site
Guys one question. ..wen I transfer all my stuff frm 808 to to 1020 will all my bookmarks, notes, other stuff will transfer....coz I have impt notes in it...
 

JustToClarify

New member
Mar 11, 2013
276
0
0
Visit site
I have had the 808 prior to upgrading to the 1020. After 1000 pictures taken with the 1020, I have not missed my 808 a single bit. Not the camera, not the OS. Not once have I thought "gee if only I had the 808 I would get a better image". No, the 1020 is actually a far better camera for me.

Here is how I would summarize it:

1. Daylight images: 1020 = 808 (roughly equal)
2. Macro: 1020 >> 808
3. Lowlight images: 1020 >>>> 808
4. Video: 1020 >>>>>> 808

It's not even close.

yeah that's for you(as you have already stated), but how do you know that the user asking will be using only auto mode? In manual mode 1020 is no match for 808, except for video where it also doesn't have 12x zoom and oversampling and what not.
 

Nick_1020

New member
Mar 4, 2013
1,014
0
0
Visit site
Guys one question. ..wen I transfer all my stuff frm 808 to to 1020 will all my bookmarks, notes, other stuff will transfer....coz I have impt notes in it...

I don't think it's possible to sync bookmarks to the 1020 and notes are not compatible afaik. However, OneNote is a fantastic alternative and with SkyDrive/Office, you should be well covered.
 

jeetu4444

New member
Sep 3, 2013
596
0
0
Visit site
Guys its a matter of choice...both r gr8 cameras....both have their positives and negatives. ..let just be happy both r by nokia... :).
.iam happy I will have both ;)
 

vlad0

New member
Oct 9, 2012
1,069
0
0
Visit site
At this point I really don't care who makes them or what OS they are running.. all I look at is the image quality :) The rest of the smartphone features in most smartphones post 2012 overlap for the most part.. at least for me they all do the same thing, so the camera is the important differentiator.

I take 20-30 photos per day, and with the 808 about 80% of those are spot on.. really nice clean images that I get to enjoy on a big screen, and since they are very neutral/natural to begin with I can easily play around with them in photoshop or whatever. Also the xenon flash is very consistent, the focus.. less so, but you just learn how to deal with it at night. For the most part tho.. great night/bar pics.
 

antiochian2010

New member
May 11, 2013
451
0
0
Visit site
1. Daylight images: 1020 = 808 (roughly equal)
2. Macro: 1020 >> 808
3. Lowlight images: 1020 >>>> 808
4. Video: 1020 >>>>>> 808

It's not even close.

I would take exception on Macro..

Mine would be:

Macro: 1020=808

First - Macro is the only setting where I actually utilize a full hi-res shot. Everything else I now shoot as 'pro' 5MP. At full res, the 1020 images have significantly more grain than the 808.

However, the one advantage the 1020 has - and it's huge - is manual focusing. The 808 gave me phenomenally gorgeous Macro, but sometimes I had to spend a lot of time to jimmy it to focus correctly; the 1020 you can set, then shoot - and even though the image is not 100% to par with the 808 it's still pretty damned good - enough for me to get rid of my 808. The other unexpected benefit of the 1020 in Macro mode is the gorgeous bokeh effect it gives the blurred out background. So while I really want to rate 1020<808, these two macro features I think make it deserving of equal status..

1020:
9921131575_0ee1c8dff8_b.jpg

808:

10160312663_96989ac47b_b.jpg

1020:
10160144684_7c144af576_b.jpg

808:
10160387416_21b6f41df9_b.jpg

1020:
10160247944_c6c7e6e636_b.jpg

808:
10160276794_a7816f2e1b_b.jpg

Like they say.. it's physics, baby!
 
Last edited:

Bahamen

New member
Nov 20, 2012
272
0
0
Visit site
yeah that's for you(as you have already stated), but how do you know that the user asking will be using only auto mode? In manual mode 1020 is no match for 808, except for video where it also doesn't have 12x zoom and oversampling and what not.

Please do not assume. I never said that my comment was only for auto mode. The only caveat to my comments is "no tripod, no SteadyCam, no artificial support, just good old handholding".

Of course I am familiar with all manual settings and I use that to my full advantage, both for 808 and 1020. I know when to adjust the WB when the yellow tint thing comes up in the 1020.
 

Bahamen

New member
Nov 20, 2012
272
0
0
Visit site
I would take exception on Macro..

Mine would be:

Macro: 1020=808
Like they say.. it's physics, baby!

No, the 1020's real BIG advantage in macro lies in the minimum focusing distance. You can get MUCH closer to the subject with the 1020, whereas the distance for 808 is much further away. So you need to rely less on digital zooming with the 1020.
 

Bahamen

New member
Nov 20, 2012
272
0
0
Visit site
At this point I really don't care who makes them or what OS they are running.. all I look at is the image quality :) The rest of the smartphone features in most smartphones post 2012 overlap for the most part.. at least for me they all do the same thing, so the camera is the important differentiator.

I take 20-30 photos per day, and with the 808 about 80% of those are spot on.. really nice clean images that I get to enjoy on a big screen, and since they are very neutral/natural to begin with I can easily play around with them in photoshop or whatever. Also the xenon flash is very consistent, the focus.. less so, but you just learn how to deal with it at night. For the most part tho.. great night/bar pics.

For me, almost all the 1020 images are spot on. There may be the occasional yellow thing particularly indoors, but usually setting the WB to florescent would fix it. I will leave that WB setting on until I move on to the next area with different lighting condition.

The big difference is that nearly all the 1020 lowlight images are spot on, while the 808 is more like hit-or-miss... either some colour issue with the 808 in lowlight, or motion blur.
 

Nakazul

New member
Feb 5, 2012
335
0
0
Visit site
Interesting discussion. I saw a review on YouTube comparing the 808 VS the 1020 and my conclusion of that one was that no matter the lighting, both cameras have different strengths and that they both are great. Sometimes the shots made by the 808 got lightning and sharpness wrong, and so did the 1020 with color being a problem. But overall the 1020 performed better. When the 1020 got the picture right it kicked the 808 in the scrotum.
But also the picture quality comes down to taste. So I see the 808 and 1020 as different cameras with different strength with the 1020 winning in the long run, mostly due to it being newer and today more developed technology. Just the nature of things I guess.
 

Nick_1020

New member
Mar 4, 2013
1,014
0
0
Visit site
Interesting discussion. I saw a review on YouTube comparing the 808 VS the 1020 and my conclusion of that one was that no matter the lighting, both cameras have different strengths and that they both are great. Sometimes the shots made by the 808 got lightning and sharpness wrong, and so did the 1020 with color being a problem. But overall the 1020 performed better. When the 1020 got the picture right it kicked the 808 in the scrotum.
But also the picture quality comes down to taste. So I see the 808 and 1020 as different cameras with different strength with the 1020 winning, mostly due to it being newer and today more developed technology. Just the nature of things I guess.

I always wondered what was hidden under that hump and now I know :)
 

Bahamen

New member
Nov 20, 2012
272
0
0
Visit site
In terms of low light, the 1020 might give you a better shot handheld, but even then anything under 1/20 would have some blur. But if you rest the 808 on something, or have a tripod.. again on a per pixel and noise ratio level will produce a jpeg with higher IQ.
I am yet to come across a cleaner low light image from the 1020...

This is mostly due to 1020 prioritizing sharpness over noise reduction in their downsampling algorithm. Damian has indicated that if you run the 1020's image through post-processing, the result will be very similar to that of the 808's. From the looks of it, the difference is more software than hardware.

Yes, I don't care how thick the phone is :) The senor in the 808 is not that much smaller...
1 inch sensor comes to 12.8 x 9.6mm vs the 1/1.2" on the 808 which comes to 10.67 x 8.00

If it were that easy, everybody would be doing it. Even Sony's best attempt is just a clip-on thick and bulky lens. It is not so much the AREA of the sensor that is the problem. It is more the thickness of the LENS to be used together with a larger sensor.

[/B]So they will have to accommodate for 2.13mm width and 1.6mm height on top of the 808's hump/casing... something tells me that with a bit of clever engineering they might be able to keep a similar profile. Of course, they will have to skip the OIS.. and to be honest, having a 1" sensor beats any other feature :)

I'm sure Nokia engineers are plenty clever. After all, your beloved 808 was their brainchild. As for OIS, I disagree with you. It is an extremely useful feature for lowlights. As I mentioned earlier, I do not carry a tripod everywhere I go. Even if I brought my DSLR, I would still leave the tripod behind. What you're saying is, leave the DSLR at home but bring along the tripod instead? Doesn't make sense. If the new OIS technology can replace the tripod and make your life easier, why not? If you carry a bunch of stuff with you everytime you go photographing, why bother with phone-cams? You're better off bringing your entire DSLR rig with you since you obviously don't mind the inconvenience.
 

vlad0

New member
Oct 9, 2012
1,069
0
0
Visit site
This is mostly due to 1020 prioritizing sharpness over noise reduction in their downsampling algorithm. Damian has indicated that if you run the 1020's image through post-processing, the result will be very similar to that of the 808's. From the looks of it, the difference is more software than hardware.

The thing is that on the 808 you have a choice on how sharp you want your image. There is a scale for sharpness from -5 to +5 .. so its up to the user. On +5 it will be as sharp or sharper than the 1020. They should provide a similar setting on the 1020 for those of us who prefer less noise over sharpness..

Also, most 1020s I've see blur the edges of the frame, I would say about ~15% of the frame is soft, where with the 808 that's more like 5%.. so the overall sharpness of the whole frame might be about the same, even if you don't manually push the sharpness to the maximum on the 808.

If it were that easy, everybody would be doing it. Even Sony's best attempt is just a clip-on thick and bulky lens. It is not so much the AREA of the sensor that is the problem. It is more the thickness of the LENS to be used together with a larger sensor..

I know its much harder, but considering that they got up to 1/1.2" .. I am sure they can go a bit higher, not for mainstream, just as an "enthusiast device"

I'm sure Nokia engineers are plenty clever. After all, your beloved 808 was their brainchild. As for OIS, I disagree with you. It is an extremely useful feature for lowlights. As I mentioned earlier, I do not carry a tripod everywhere I go. Even if I brought my DSLR, I would still leave the tripod behind. What you're saying is, leave the DSLR at home but bring along the tripod instead? Doesn't make sense. If the new OIS technology can replace the tripod and make your life easier, why not? If you carry a bunch of stuff with you everytime you go photographing, why bother with phone-cams? You're better off bringing your entire DSLR rig with you since you obviously don't mind the inconvenience.

All I am saying is that I would take a bigger sensor over OIS any day.. You will be taking advantage of the big sensor in all possible scenarios, where the benefits of OIS are only at low light.

Now, for video.. that's another story.

whereas the distance for 808 is much further away.

You have to be 5 cm. further away with the 808... I suppose in macro terms that is a lot.
 

jeetu4444

New member
Sep 3, 2013
596
0
0
Visit site
I think with camera sensor tat big OIS is very impt...I have tried night shots with increase is ios...but fotos cme blurry. ..have to keep hand very steady wic is very difficult. ...wen I get my 1020 will do full test between 2 fones...till then iam just counting my days to get my lumia 1020 beast
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
322,916
Messages
2,242,890
Members
428,005
Latest member
rogertewarte