Low light Pics Iphone 6 Plus v.s. Nokia Lumia 1020

[rubenwidjaja]

the iphone with ISO 500
the Nokia Lumia 1020 with ISO 4000
well all was set up
how could in same light condition with same aperture f2.2 the ISO is par so different??
come on, fight fair man

 

[Artur Verdini Meireles1]

Can you send us an original highres (or RAW) 35 MP photo of Nokia Camera app ? - I would like to see it ...

EDIT: if you do not send it, then it is hard to believe that your photo is even taken by Nokia Camera app. - there is just too little details for 35 MP photo (some is oversampled to 5 MP) ....

Yes I really took with Nokia C?mera. The 1020 pics h?s 16MB. The Iphone 6 Plus has 1.5MB

I downloaded the original high res pics to onedrive.
https://onedrive.live.com/?cid=F1A7E6EFC476D37F&id=F1A7E6EFC476D37F!137

 

[Artur Verdini Meireles1]

the iphone with ISO 500
the Nokia Lumia 1020 with ISO 4000
well all was set up
how could in same light condition with same aperture f2.2 the ISO is par so different??
come on, fight fair man

Im being fair like I said before both were on auto mode.
PEOPLE WHY WOULD I LIE?!?! WHAT DO I GET BY LYING? DAMN!

 

[Artur Verdini Meireles1]

Are you sure that you used "Nokia Camera" app ? - that your photo does not look like Nokia camera oversampling photo ...

Anyway, waiting your originals ...

Jaripi, I took the the pic file from iphoto and downloaded straight to onedrive.

 

[Karthik Naik]

wow people really are desperate
the number of cheap tactic threads like this these days disappoint me
Lumia 1020 and the other carl zeiss and pureview lumias>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>iphone and other phones especially in low light
you want to justify your "perfect" phone-iphone 6,dont use unfair means etc
give credit where due

tommorow apple will say iphone 6 can replace DSLRs and people will fall for it
when its pureview its actually close to DSLR level
your arguement is invalid im sorry to say
dont believe me,see pureview club

 

[Live2Deliver]

OP, I'm not going to debate if they are fakes, I will assume those are real 1020 and iP6 photos.
But god do you know you made a serious mistake by saying iP6 > 1020 by comparing those two photos?
they are clearly at 1020's favour if not for you not focusing it right or turning off that focus assist light!

Im saying this because that iP6 photo has hell lots of noise compared to that brighter exposed 1020 shot, even when it is using ISO500 which is wwwwwwaaaaayyyyyy lower than 1020's ISO4000.
iP6 iSight camera is 8MP. You took that photo at 3MP. even using a lower res (oversampling) there is still so much noise.
*Noise is not affected by focusing as it is what the pixels sensor sees and processes.

Get your focus right first in the future before even trying to compare ANY photos from ANY cameras!

These are the 1020 lowlight I know. One has flash.


You are focusing in lowlight wrong!

 

[Dratwister]

You should say that iPhone6+ has better focus than Lumia 1020, not just iPhone6+ is better than Lumia 1020, cause it isn't.
And yes, the focus mechanism of iPhone6+ is better than Lumia 1020, which is the main cause of Apple to adopt phrase focus. If it cannot outpace Lumia 1020 even with that focus mechanism then I have a bad news for Apple.

After all, I don't think Lumia 1020 missed focus on this shoot, do you turn on the assist AF light? Or you cannot turn it on in this situation?
In the end, compare an in focus photo with an out focus photo isn't fair since it doesn't define quality images from device.

P.S: enjoy your phones I'll use iPhone6+ for low light occasions when I must not turn on assist AF light and leave all other cases to Lumia 1020.

 

[Artur Verdini Meireles1]

A reply from Macrumors user:
"Originally Posted by Xeyad View Post
I have a Nokia 1020, and I've been taking pictures with iPhones for years now, and while the camera is absolutely incredible and I think the overall quality and detail beats the iPhone, the 1020 has 3 main problems: (1) consistency. (2) speed. (3) color accuracy. All these problems are actually co-related with each other.

The picture is proof that the Nokia 1020 has trouble taking good photos constantly. If you look at PUREVIEW PHOTOGRAPHY - HOME you can see some truly fantastic pictures taken with the 1020 in low light and they do look better than what the iPhone can do; it's a pure hardware advantage. And I've personally taken some photos in the dark and they've impressed me that a phone can do this. However, like the photo you have and some photos I have, the 1020 could sometimes have trouble to focus and bring all the light it could, and then turns images into utter sumdgy crap. But trust me, the Nokia 1020 could do much better than what this picture shows, and it can do better than what the iPhone does.

Speed of course is the biggest issue with the 1020. The Snapdragon dual-core processor just cannot handle taking 41-megapixel shots fast. Opening the camera takes long, saving the photo takes even longer, so the speed between shots is super slow, and it's nearly impossible to take action shots of a kid or a pet playing. You can resort to the "action shot" mode, but that only takes 5-megapixel photos and lowers the quality by a lot. WindowsPhone 8.1 made a bit better, but still way too slow. The iPhone easily takes better photos in action, while the Nokia has better quality in taking landscape or stationary photos.

I also face a few problems with color accuracy sometimes. Again, the 1020 photos aren't consistent, so sometimes you get photos with brilliant colors, and other times you get pinkish whites and overly-saturated red. But of course, with color, there's nothing that cannot be fixed with few editing.

As comparing the 1020 and the iPhone, I've been a huge fan of iPhone photography for years now, and Flickr and Instagram on iOS are decades better than what WindowsPhone offers, and actually, I send my 1020 photos to my iPhone to upload to Instagram, because Instagram on WP degrades the quality A LOT. And there are editing apps on iOS that WP will never dream of having. The iPhone is a better phone camera in terms of taking quick shots of something you saw on the street, or taking a slow-mo video, but the hardware of the 1020 is better, and you can get better results. The 1020 is mostly suited for landscapes, or portraits of people, as you can zoom in and not lose any quality. The 1020 is also capable of RAW images, which is huge. Video is almost the same, but the 1020 has better sound to my ears and has options to record audio at 100Hz or 200Hz, which is pretty impressive again.

But when people complain about the camera protrusion on the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus, I tell them "just see the Oreo biscuit that's sticking out of my 1020"

 

[Artur Verdini Meireles1]

OP, I'm not going to debate if they are fakes, I will assume those are real 1020 and iP6 photos.
But god do you know you made a serious mistake by saying iP6 > 1020 by comparing those two photos?
they are clearly at 1020's favour if not for you not focusing it right or turning off that focus assist light!

Im saying this because that iP6 photo has hell lots of noise compared to that brighter exposed 1020 shot, even when it is using ISO500 which is wwwwwwaaaaayyyyyy lower than 1020's ISO4000.
iP6 iSight camera is 8MP. You took that photo at 3MP. even using a lower res (oversampling) there is still so much noise.
*Noise is not affected by focusing as it is what the pixels sensor sees and processes.

Get your focus right first in the future before even trying to compare ANY photos from ANY cameras!

These are the 1020 lowlight I know. One has flash.
View attachment 85155View attachment 85156View attachment 85157View attachment 85158View attachment 85159View attachment 85160

You are focusing in lowlight wrong!

Did you also used auto-mode? The problem with the 1020 is the consistency of taking good photos. Sometimes it does Sometimes it doesnt.

 

[Live2Deliver]

Did you also used auto-mode? The problem with the 1020 is the consistency of taking good photos. Sometimes it does Sometimes it doesnt.

Full auto. I never had a problem with consistencies with this beast of a camera.
Learn how to use it.

 

[stephen_az]

People really need to chill out. The photos do not appear to be fakes but that also does not mean they are representative of either camera. In fact, the EXIF data suggests both cameras were pushing the limits of hand held, low light photography - getting into the range where shutter speeds were low enough that a shaky hand, poor technique, or lens/sensor defects not evident under normal lighting can make a difference. Reality is larger sensors with more megapixels then also amplify errors, whether the errors are related to shake, overall technique, or things like lens or other hardware/software defects. On that front, stick an inferior lens on a high MP DSLR and take a look at the results. It should suffice to say they usually are not pretty. BTW, depending upon how jpgs are uploaded to OneDrive can further exasperate problems.

The EXIF data also give some clues that the 1020 may be defective. At a minimum, the camera did not appear to have made the correct choices for balancing ISO, shutter, and aperture when determining an optimal exposure. The vertical GPS coordinate is also lacking. Most 1020 images I have see either have no GPS data or have all three dimensions. BTW, that is a really good reason to remove EXIF data from images produced by a camera phone (or any georeferencing device). Unless edited out, you are telling people stuff that is awfully close to home (pun intended).

Beyond all of that, the OP could have avoided some of the negativity by choosing a title for the thread would have been less likely to push peoples' buttons. This is not iPhone vs 1020. It is closer to: I am getting weird results with 1020; or I have a low light problem with my 1020; or what am I doing wrong; etc., etc. Instead you chose a title that conveys an objective comparison follows, when (in fact) you show only one image with little narrative detail. Since you also don't appear to know what EXIF means that would imply a low skill level on the part of the photographer which is simply not consistent with objective comparisons.

Long and short of it is you may want to take care in how you post threads in an enthusiast forum and talk to Nokia about your low light results. The flip side is there are some people here who would do well to a) pull back from the hostility/negativity; b) keep in mind it still is just a phone so there is no reason to respond like someone insulted your child; and c) ask questions and then listen to the answers instead of arguing/implying misinformation.

 

[Artur Verdini Meireles1]

Full auto. I never had a problem with consistencies with this beast of a camera.
Learn how to use it.

I got very good results with the 1020 in low light enviroments and concerts. I had this "bad" experience taking a picture in low light in my bedroom and I just shared with you guys. Or ALL your low light pictures are amazing?!?!

 

[Jaripi]

I got very good results with the 1020 in low light enviroments and concerts. I had this "bad" experience taking a picture in low light in my bedroom and I just shared with you guys. Or ALL your low light pictures are amazing?!?!

Sorry, but your photos just did not look the proper ones ... well, I still wonder them:

Lumia 1020 - ISO 4000, but with longer exposure time 1/3 s. (lack of details of 35 MP)
iPhone 6 - ISO 500 and exposure time only 1/4 s. (3.15 MP instead of 7.99 MP photo)

 

[realwarder]

Sorry, but your photos just did not look the proper ones ... well, I still wonder them:

Lumia 1020 - ISO 4000, but with longer exposure time 1/3 s. (lack of details of 35 MP)
iPhone 6 - ISO 500 and exposure time only 1/4 s. (3.15 MP photo)

It's easy to move and blur in anything over 1/40 s. So this is easy blur-ville. In fact, just the pressure of pressing the camera button can blur a shot. Touching the screen is better but far from perfect. Only way to guarantee getting perfect photos on ANY camera at this speed is to use a stand.

edit: Looking back at the actual photos, it's more of a focus issue. EXIF should show if the focus light was used or disabled..

 

[Artur Verdini Meireles1]

It's easy to move and blur in anything over 1/40 s. So this is easy blur-ville. In fact, just the pressure of pressing the camera button can blur a shot. Touching the screen is better but far from perfect. Only way to guarantee getting perfect photos on ANY camera at this speed is to use a stand.

edit: Looking back at the actual photos, it's more of a focus issue. EXIF should show if the focus light was used or disabled..

Try to take a picture in a dark room of a TV screen(TV on) in auto mode on Iphone and try on a 1020 and see which one looks better.
I repeat once again: the problem with 1020 is the consistency of colour and focus.

 

[Bahamen]

The flip side is there are some people here who would do well to a) pull back from the hostility/negativity; b) keep in mind it still is just a phone so there is no reason the respond like someone insulted your child; and c) ask questions and then listen to the answers instead of arguing/implying misinformation.

Perhaps I may venture to suggest an explanation for this. Even outside of this forum, there have been plenty of so-called tech journalists or reviewers who have published plenty of garbage when it comes to iPhone vs 1020 camera comparison. It's really a shame that this is happening even among people who should know better or people who are expected to be professional.

And we have trolls/fanboys who deliberately venture into rival forums to try provoke a reaction. And then we have innocent newbies who may not know what they are doing, or not being articulate enough, and I do believe OP belongs to this category. But I can understand how seeing this happen over and over again can wear down anybody's patience.

 

[Skamath]

So basically the OP just want to down the Lumia 1020 because the auto mode is not consistent (the processor speed isn't fast enough?) and will quote who/whatever which supports his opinion... This is going to be long if you guys keep replying to this thread. So, I'm just throwing my last comment here, not worth my time further.

Look for GSMarena.com "Six-way camera shootout: Smartphone roulette" comparison article, since I can't post links yet.

Buy LG G3 if OP wants a consistent auto setting pictures, else, learn how to take a picture with the 1020.

You mean this one Six-way camera shootout: Smartphone roulette - GSMArena.com

 

[Karthik Naik]

You mean this one Six-way camera shootout: Smartphone roulette - GSMArena.com

gsmarena is usually massively biased one phone at a time,i dont trust their reviews

 

[gpobernardo]

Guys, chill down a bit. It's not like we created these cameras with our own hands to get all pumped and caught up in the tension.

The truth is that better and better phones will be released as new hardware and technologies are developed - nothing remains "the best" forever. BUT the fact that many (not just in this thread) are comparing the camera of a newly announced phone with the camera of a phone that is almost a year OLD says something good about the older phone, right? Yet one can argue otherwise how a lower resolution phone compares with a monster. :angel:

If I was asked to choose which camera is better between the L1020 and the iPhone 6+, I wouldn't be able to give an answer because I don't have an iPhone 6+ and, thus, I can't give the "challenger" a fair trial. But I DO have THE L1020, and I'm loving how I can zoom in at distant subjects and take high-resolution videos. At the same time, I'm a bit uncomfortable not being able to take high frame rate slow-motion videos, and in how my i-family criticizes the white balance in my photos. Yet, despite these, I'm still happy with the L1020, and at the end of the day that's what matters.

As for low-light conditions, I especially like the challenge of holding the camera as still as I can, and I enjoy the satisfaction of viewing a nicely executed photograph when the photo comes out crisp and bright - the process gives the photograph more meaning.

Whatever hardware you have, make the most out of it. I remember the days when I tried my best at photography with only a 0.3MP fixed-focus camera! Now at 41MP (actually 34 or 38 depending on aspect ratio), I could finally take shots I only used to dream of... without carrying a bulky DSLR around.

The comparisons will always come; "writers" will write and "reviewers" will review. Page views will increase and somewhere along the line revenues will be generated. In the end, what matters is how well you use what you have. Would you rather spend time comparing, wondering, bashing, criticizing, arguing, proving and disproving than do your best in taking good photographs?

 

[Laura Knotek]

It appears that all possible angles of discussion have already been explored, so this thread is now closed.