First, thanks for coming back and responding. I'll address your points individually below. Let me start by saying that a lot of the shortcomings I found were relative to what exists in the Android space, that is true. I also outlined what my 'mobile photographer' philosophy entails and the Nokia/Windows offerings don't meet that standard. Don't even come close, really. Not all of that is related to the camera. Some of it relates to the OS and the app landscape but I did note that as well.
First of all, that title in your blog is rather provocative. With that 'hype' label I presume that you must have done some research on the 1020, beyond just "41MP", "OIS" and "RAW". You must have read the reviews and various people's comments. The relevant timeline - Nov 6, 2013 - means that the 1020 has already been out for several months and much has already been known about it. You must have seen the many many samples.
Sure it's provocative. That's entirely the point. It's a title designed to try to generate views and attention. That's a known strategy for writing article titles. Not just for blogs. Newspapers and magazines have been doing it for decades. Yes, I saw samples others posted.
Surely you must know the general consensus that the 1020's images tend to be more vivid, contrasty, saturated, punchy. Some people may prefer a more natural look, others may absolutely love it. This is highly subjective.
Sure it's subjective. And yes I know what several other reviewers found. But, what I didn't know until I got the phone is that there are no options to adjust those parameters in the camera app. To me, that's a natural inclusion. The fact that Nokia didn't include them is, in my view, a mistake.
My point is: If your preference was for more natural look, and if you had known the 1020 produces more saturated and boosted colours, then why the heck did you buy and review it? Of course the end result is exactly predictable - you are going to dislike it and bit** about it. So why did you even bother?
See comment above. I disagree that the end result is predictable.
Further, you already knew by the time you purchased the phone, that RAW capability was coming to 1020 which would address that colour saturation issue, so that regardless what your personal preference is you have the full flexibility to make your own adjustments. Again, why bother coming out with that article knowing that a solution is already imminent?
Why bother? That's like the old question 'should I upgrade now or wait since a new model will be coming along in a few months'? It's a circular question that leaves people stuck in the mud. I wrote the review at the time I did because that was the state of play at that time. The Black update was originally scheduled to be released before the end of 2013 but was pushed back. I got the Black update on my phone last weekend. I've been out testing it the last few days and will be doing an extensive write-up on it as a follow up to the original review. Preview: It's pretty damned good - for a phone - and is a large leap ahead of the JPEG capability.
That whole article sounds like a poorly researched "gotcha!" piece. You did not even bother to find whether there are any third party photo gallery apps before dissing the phone. And frankly, you come across as being too eager to diss it. How good is that HD Photo Viewer app, that is a separate issue. The point is that you did not even bother looking for it. I note that your account is newly created with this thread being your first post at WPC. Perhaps you could have created an account earlier to ask for recommendations about third party photo gallery apps before writing that article?
Poorly researched? No. I'll take issue with that. I did, in fact, try to find other gallery apps and HD Photo Viewer didn't show up in my search. It's possible that the search string I used (and I don't remember what the exact search string was now) didn't cause it to appear in the results. I will grant that. But the fact remains that there are no good gallery apps, comparable to what is available for the iPhone or Android, in the WP app landscape. Yes, my account is newly created. No, I didn't have an account under another name to look for gallery app suggestions.
And what's very surprising for a photographer - you've only made scant reference to image quality. Most of your photos are Facebook thumbnail sized that hides the flaws from the HTC One X. In that solitary 100% crop from the HTC One X, you can clearly see "blockiness and blotchiness" in the HTC One X's photo while the 1020's is much better. You noted that the HTC is noisier but you sure didn't dwell too long on this. How about giving credit to the Nokia where credit is due? Why complain about "blocky and blotchy" only for the 1020 in 38MP mode at 100% crop? Surely you are aware that the Nokia downsamples to 5MP in order to produce a cleaner image? Surely you are aware that being stretched to 100% at 38MP means that you have cropped in much further than any other cameraphones are even capable of (without being severely pixelated)?
Well, I made several comments about image quality. My point was; however, that the image quality of the Nokia, overall, wasn't really any different from the HTC I was comparing to and, in several ways, it wasn't as good. Why complain about blocky and blotchy only the 38MP images? Because Nokia touts the quality of its sensor and resultant image quality of the full sensor. Yes I'm aware that the 5MP images are downsampled and I discussed that fairly extensively by saying it appears they're using a pixel averaging methodology rather than pixel binning. Nokia isn't talking so it's difficult to know for sure. You are not 'stretching' anything when cropping in to 100%. You are are not rezzing up the image at all, simply taking a small slice of the full size image. The bockiness I found is odd and disturbing. WRT the size of the images, all the images in the article are able to be zoomed to a larger image. There are limitations on image size when using Wordpress so it's not possible to post full size images. What you see in the HTC image you're referring to is a difference in noise. And I did note that the noise performance of the Nokia was better.
We can summarize your article as follows: saturation, colour, saturation, colour, saturation, colour, saturation, colour, photo gallery, tech support. WAIT - what the heck does tech support have to do with the 1020's supposed hype??
Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes and.... yes. :grin: Colour and saturation (contrast too) are key components of image quality. The white balance issues are also key to image quality and colour accuracy. Tech support isn't a component of image quality but it is something that users care about and that Nokia offers next to nothing in the way of tech support is something that should be noted.
Image sharpness, noise and zoom? Nah, these aren't important for Commercial and Fine Art Photography.
I addressed sharpness, noise and zoom in the article. I noted that the images are oversharp - to me. I discussed the better noise performance relative to the HTC, particularly in night shots and I did note that the night shooting capability was quite good. Zoom? You don't think I addressed the zoom? I have to ask if you read the entire article. I absolutely addressed the zoom capability and said that it was very good. I showed examples compared to the HTC to prove how good it was. I also discussed why it is as good as it is. As far as whether these are important to me as a commercial and fine art photographer; of course they are. But.... I'm also not going to be using a phone camera for client work.
Again, thank you for coming back and providing me with your feedback. I do appreciate it. You've noted no factual errors in the article so I won't be going back and making any changes from that standpoint. I will go back and clarify further the difference in the noise on the comparison of the two 100% crops because I think that's an important point. Well, I supposed the gallery app could be a factual error but I also had a caveat in the article to say there were no 3rd party gallery apps 'that I could find'. And as I said yesterday, HD Photo Viewer really isn't that good so it can't be recommended. You can say I didn't search, but I did. You'll just have to take my word for that. Yeah, I know, fat chance, right? :wink: Everything else you've noted are items that are subjective in nature. I understand that. I stated right upfront in the article that I didn't agree with many other reviews of the camera that were out there. I've had other users; including WP app developers, tell me they have similar feelings about the 1020.
Now, as I also said, I have been working with the RAW capture capability and will be doing a write-up on that in the next couple of days. It's going to paint quite a different, and much more positive, picture (punny, I know) of the capabilities of the 1020. And what it will show is that the camera isn't so much the issue as the onboard JPEG conversion engine that Nokia has programmed. Based on what I've seen so far, while I wouldn't still use the camera for client work, it does appear to be quite a capable camera with RAW capture. Not, certainly, up to DSLR, M43 or other compact MILC level, but still pretty good.
Here's something else to keep in mind when you're reading other reviews as well. Many of the review sites are dependent upon camera and gear manufacturers to send them equipment to review. As such, they can't be as forthcoming about problems or issues. They have to put as positive a spin on a piece of gear as they can.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram