920 vs 1520 photos

[JD_Morecraft]

Ok so I went into the AT&T store today and put a memory card into a 1520 to see what the camera can do. I have seen posts where people are asking for different photos to compare phones. So here you go.

920
https://skydrive.live.com/embed?cid...=4C2A6DB264165BA!3019&authkey=ABm0AVDM39njwkg

1520
https://skydrive.live.com/embed?cid...=4C2A6DB264165BA!3020&authkey=AOw-yMdFZlAxbw0

 

[PB_H]

It's very hard to compare two different size files 5376 x 3024 vs 3552 x 2000 when you "view original"

Photos were taken close to the same view but more window light with the 920 and that effects exposure and grain.

This is a much better comparative view.

 

[quachhanthanh]

I can see that 1520 's photo is sharper, more clear and less noise than 920 's photo.
But i think u should take 1520 with shutter speed 100, so the photo will be more detail and bright.
What ISO did u take in that photos?

 

[PB_H]

920
1/120 sec ~ f/2 ~ ISO 160
1520
1/60 sec ~ f/ 2.4 ~ ISO 125

Both:
auto exposure
Exposure bias: 0 step
Metering mode: Average
Flash mode: No flash, auto

Crop and photo info: Olympus Viewer 3 software

 

[Moiz Mian]

Even though the 1520 is less grainy, you still can't read any of those pamphlets any clearer than in the 920. Seems like the level of detail is the same for both

 

[PB_H]

Even though the 1520 is less grainy, you still can't read any of those pamphlets any clearer than in the 920. Seems like the level of detail is the same for both

But the 1520 file would benefit from noise reduction, sharpness and blur and distortion correction software where the 920 wouldn't,
it would just look more muddled, and if you added saturation to the 920 file to bring it up the density of the 1520 it will be a very soft blur,
with even less detail.

 

[alllies]

With 1020 you can right?

Even though the 1520 is less grainy, you still can't read any of those pamphlets any clearer than in the 920. Seems like the level of detail is the same for both

 

[PB_H]

Look at the full photo, that crop is a small part of that and look how far away it was taken, I doubt you'd be able to read that using any phone's camera considering how small the sensors are...using zoom on a 1020 you might but not one taken like that.

 

[michail71]

I did a quick in store test between the 1520 and the galaxy mega. The zoom detail appeared to be significantly better on the 1520.

I was kind of disappointed in the mega after handling the 1520.

 

[kevm14]

I see slightly more detail and a lot less noise in the 1520. I sized both the same. 920 on the left, 1520 on the right. Would have been nice for them to be taken at the same ISO and shutter speed.

 

[Moiz Mian]

I see slightly more detail and a lot less noise in the 1520. I sized both the same. 920 on the left, 1520 on the right. Would have been nice for them to be taken at the same ISO and shutter speed.

https://iglnma.dm2302.livefilestore...7rfu-nXMsIwqdeB5irjgbc/920 vs 1520.png?psid=1

I think the 1520 was taken with a lower iso, which may account for a little bit of the noise, but the difference is almost night and day, so it's clear that the larger sensor is working, on the other hand, Nokia might have reverted to more noise reduction in black, hence the lack of extra detail in the pictures.

 

[Moiz Mian]

Look at the full photo, that crop is a small part of that and look how far away it was taken, I doubt you'd be able to read that using any phone's camera considering how small the sensors are...using zoom on a 1020 you might but not one taken like that.

Maybe not in this scene, but I've played with the 1020, and i'm sure you'd be able to see the text on that pamphlet.

 

[vlad0]

The 1520 is better.

 

[JD_Morecraft]

I only had time to do default settings. The guy at the store started trying to get me to quit when he saw what I was doing.

My Android friends are pissy because all they can get is 13mp.

 

[PB_H]

Maybe not in this scene, but I've played with the 1020, and i'm sure you'd be able to see the text on that pamphlet.

Take a picture next time you have a chance don't use zoom, set to 16:9 and take a picture at least 15 yds away from a pamphlet and lets see.:smile:

 

[PB_H]

I think the 1520 was taken with a lower iso, which may account for a little bit of the noise, but the difference is almost night and day, so it's clear that the larger sensor is working, on the other hand, Nokia might have reverted to more noise reduction in black, hence the lack of extra detail in the pictures.

You think ? the file says it was, I posted the specs. :wink:

920
1/120 sec ~ f/2 ~ ISO 160
1520
1/60 sec ~ f/ 2.4 ~ ISO 125
Part of the issue with the clarity of the 1520 is the shutter speed, @ 1/60 sec even with the best OIS, enlarged enough you see moment
and the second set of cropped pictures shows movement with the 1520. Look at the dps on the right box, that is camera movement.

 

[rubenwidjaja]

wah nice
1520 better for me
it's so clear and less grain

 

[michail71]

I only had time to do default settings. The guy at the store started trying to get me to quit when he saw what I was doing.

Makes no sense if you're there to evaluate a product for purchase. Unless they have a corporate policy about no photography. Perhaps a Microsoft store would be more accommodating.

 

[PB_H]

Makes no sense if you're there to evaluate a product for purchase. Unless they have a corporate policy about no photography. Perhaps a Microsoft store would be more accommodating.

Then you go do it, don't look a gift horse in the mouth unless you're willing to provide a better horse... :smile:

 

[michail71]

I actually think the noise reduction looks a tad too high on the 1520 shots. It shows in the hair and clothing as they look too smooth.

Still, an amazing camera overall. Do these cameras have RAW formats available?