That is, after all, what a lot of us were led to believe we were paying a premium for.
There are several issues around this.. at least the way I see it.
One is the way Nokia decided to use the brand "PureView".. for some reason they thought it would be a good idea to use the name since it got a lot of praise and coverage from the media as soon as they presented the tech at MWC in Barcelona in February.. after that they got a bunch of imaging awards for it, so there is a lot of positivity associated with the name.
The problem is.. the name "pureview" was based on the technology in the 808, and it makes perfect sense there.. The results they were getting, were noise free pixels, cleaner.. purer.. so therefore "PureView" ..
quote from their own white paper:
So.. yes in that sense you are right, a lot of people were led to believe that the camera will bring amazing detail/performance, based on the original pureview product. I think using the pureview brand name for the 920 was a mistake.. they should have called it something else, and kept the PureView branding for the "real deal", but its their technology, their marketing, they can do whatever they want
Now the second part is ... well its us the consumers. I think we should be a little better educated when it comes to purchasing a product that we rely on every day. If you do some research, you would have found out that provided the dimensions of the phone, the sensor, and the lens, would not allow for anything "amazing" when it comes to detail. Again, a big part of that is the fact that the imaging industry has been telling everybody that more megapixels is better, and that is it. No one ever talks about sensor sizes, pixel sizes, etc.
I knew that the 920 won't provide anything even close to the 808 the moment they said that it will be around 10mm thin. Then they said it has a 1/3" sensor, and then I was 100% that the results will be average for the most part.
Don't get me wrong, the OIS works great, and it does let more light in... but the quality remains average. And also, no matter how well they can optimize the jpeg processing, your best bet is "on par" with the iPhone 5 in daylight. There is simply no way to get even close to the 808.