iPhone 6 vs Nokia 1020: Better imaging all around from Apple - Friday October 10 2014

[ArcticArrow]

Phone 6 vs Nokia 1020: Better imaging all around from Apple
iPhone 6 vs Nokia 1020 - DxOMark



First of all, I have just ordered my 1020, so I dont have real samples to judge. But based on my extensive research on 1020 before, I think there are certain points from this review which are false.


1.

While the Nokia 1020 excelled for Video exposure and contrast, with good texture under bright lighting conditions, it wasn’t a match for the iPhone 6 in any of the other video categories. Video from the Nokia 1020 displayed noticeable row noise and blocking artifacts, with autofocus oscillations visible during refocusing, and walking movements remaining uncorrected by the stabilization system.

Seriously, " in any of the other video categories"??? Really? and "walking movements remaining uncorrected by the stabilization system", I really want to see how good the iPhone 6 without OIS can prove this??

I thought the OIS in Nokia 1020 is really good for video taking. I guess they are just blaming the slow focus of nokia 1020 here. While slow focus is one thing, but the OIS is another thing. It really depends on the video scene, fast moving object across the screen in low light will be bad for Nokia 1020, but other than that, the OIS should be a big boost. They never talked about it.

2. The Flash on iPhone 6 is better? Well ok I undertand the iPhone has a True-tone flash, and the Xenon flash might be too bright and kill the WB. but still, it's just a 50-50, why would the iPhone flash be better?

3. Most importantly, I see marketing intention here!!

because SERIOUSLY! What kind of image is this?

check this.



against



so 64 vs 80, and 56 vs 80. Why would they set the base for the bar charts differently?? Is it obvious that they just want to let people think the Nokia is way behind the iPhone 6?

I have reason to believe that they intentionally adjust the baseline in order to make ppl think the Nokia 1020 is so ****.

So it's a professinal web site I guess? DXOMark? and they use this small tricks like the bar chart to confuse the customer??


I would love to see the feedback from real user.

 

[Qtweeder]

Re: iPhone 6 vs Nokia 1020: Better imaging all around from Apple

OIS was better in 1520 than 1020 for me, can't speak for any other area.

 

[belodion]

I can only say that I wouldn't necessarily agree that the seven criteria they use are the best way to assess the performance of a camera. Perhaps in the laboratory, yes, I've no idea, what do I know? but in the real world, I find the best way of assessing a camera is to look at the photos it takes.
I'm sure that the iPhone cameras are very impressive performers, certainly from what I've heard, and from seeing a friend's iPhone 5c photos....but nothing would make me wish to part company with my 1020, that Emperor of Camera Phones.

Posted via Windows Phone Central App

 

[theefman]

My response is, Cool story, bro.


Sent from my Surface Pro 3 using Tapatalk

Sent from my Surface Pro 3 using Tapatalk

 

[manwe]

yeah that review is rubbish. the iphone 6 definitely takes great pictures. i've played around with one, and once again, it beats the L1020 at speed and at default settings with ease..but we all knew that.

for everything else, yes the lumia 1020 is still better.

and by the way, i only heard video stabilisation is bad from people that switched to the 1520. i never had a 1520 (i briefly had the iphone 6 but i use a L1020) but on its own the 1020 does take surprisingly stable videos.
my 2p.

 

[psiu_glen]

Another point that should be re emphasized I think:

If you are buying the 1020, you had to seek it out. It is a niche device. A little bit of off white balance is not a big concern, because you are most likely going to be post processing those shots anyway (and in all likelihood, the hires ones, on your computer). The iPhone takes great shots for a cellphone. The 1020 is quite literally playing in another league with it's sensor size, xenon flash, OIS, mp count...

No reason not to enjoy either one of them, they have strengths and weaknesses and should be matched to their intended user.

If my wife had a smartphone...well, ot would either be an iPhone or a Lumia. Probably an iPhone.

I, on the other hand...have three Lumia's.

 

[Jarip]

Here is something to read about this case (also about DxO review, some might be more or less false):

http://forums.windowscentral.com/phone-wars/316173-8.htm

Just check a link about iPhone 6 color problems too ....

http://www.tomsguide.com/us/iphone-6-ios8-camera-problems,news-19585.html

 

[stephen_az]

I hate to tell everyone who wants a year old phone with an excessive pixel count to magically rank at the top but DXOMark is not a shill for Apple and they also do use objective matrices. Before saying X, Y, or Z is false, how about taking five minutes to go to their site (DxOMark by DxO Labs - DxOMark) and examining the breadth of their reviews for all types of digital cameras, lenses, etc.. People really need to get over their hybrid inferiority/superiority complexes and accept that you are using a year old camera with year old technology. You also need to face the fact that pixel count alone has never guaranteed that a camera would rank as having the best image quality. If you don't like the results then don't read the review. Coming here though to argue about whether your personal opinion trumps the testing of a respected organization that does objective testing of imaging technology and partners with the industry across the planet comes off as (at the very least) silly.

 

[stephen_az]

Another point that should be re emphasized I think:

If you are buying the 1020, you had to seek it out. It is a niche device. A little bit of off white balance is not a big concern, because you are most likely going to be post processing those shots anyway (and in all likelihood, the hires ones, on your computer). The iPhone takes great shots for a cellphone. The 1020 is quite literally playing in another league with it's sensor size, xenon flash, OIS, mp count...

No reason not to enjoy either one of them, they have strengths and weaknesses and should be matched to their intended user.

If my wife had a smartphone...well, ot would either be an iPhone or a Lumia. Probably an iPhone.

I, on the other hand...have three Lumia's.

Being in another league re pixel count has never made a device a better camera and 1020 owners seem to be among the few left who obsess about something the industry abandoned several years ago. Bigger and more does not automatically equal better; hence the fact that the DSLR industry has (mostly) stopped pushing higher pixel counts. Image quality is a combination of multiple factors, of which pixel count is but one. BTW, most people here who spout xenon flash don't even know what it is beyond being the thing that flashes when you take a picture and certainly don't know its advantages AND disadvantages. As far as OIS goes, the technology has been around for years and there is nothing special about Nokia's implementation of it.

To put it another way, you can buy a twelve cylinder Jaguar but the only people who would claim it is better than an 8 cylinder BMW, Audi, or Mercedes are those who bought one and/or those who work for Tata Motors (or previously Ford). Point being you can shove more into almost any piece of technology but that does not make it better.

 

[Jaripi]

Being in another league re pixel count has never made a device a better camera and 1020 owners seem to be among the few left who obsess about something the industry abandoned several years ago. Bigger and more does not automatically equal better; hence the fact that the DSLR industry has (mostly) stopped pushing higher pixel counts. Image quality is a combination of multiple factors, of which pixel count is but one. BTW, most people here who spout xenon flash don't even know what it is beyond being the thing that flashes when you take a picture and certainly don't know its advantages AND disadvantages. As far as OIS goes, the technology has been around for years and there is nothing special about Nokia's implementation of it.

To put it another way, you can buy a twelve cylinder Jaguar but the only people who would claim it is better than an 8 cylinder BMW, Audi, or Mercedes are those who bought one and/or those who work for Tata Motors (or previously Ford). Point being you can shove more into almost any piece of technology but that does not make it better.

Just asking do you believe oversampling technology (to create oversampled image) ?

SlashGear 101: Nokia Lumia 1020 Oversampling and the 5MP “Sweet Spot” - SlashGear

 

[realwarder]

A website that doesn't show all of the facts behind a review is not one I can believe.

Flash is better on the iPhone (?) and yet the picture of the guy with a board shows a better balanced (without multiple massive flash shadow) on the L1020 compared to the iPhone.

 

[psiu_glen]

I hate to tell everyone who wants a year old phone with an excessive pixel count to magically rank at the top but DXOMark is not a shill for Apple and they also do use objective matrices. Before saying X, Y, or Z is false, how about taking five minutes to go to their site (DxOMark by DxO Labs - DxOMark) and examining the breadth of their reviews for all types of digital cameras, lenses, etc.. People really need to get over their hybrid inferiority/superiority complexes and accept that you are using a year old camera with year old technology. You also need to face the fact that pixel count alone has never guaranteed that a camera would rank as having the best image quality. If you don't like the results then don't read the review. Coming here though to argue about whether your personal opinion trumps the testing of a respected organization that does objective testing of imaging technology and partners with the industry across the planet comes off as (at the very least) silly.

They are critiqued quite fairly for never updating their reviews. They do a review on preview or at best release issue software, and leave it.

This isn't just mobile either -- they do that across the board.

But hey, if you want to single source your opinions because you found something to back you up, have at it.

 

[Sean Miller4]

I get tired of explaining stuff to apple fanboys or whatever you are that don't understand technology, yes most of these sites either paid by apple or the fanboys have to justify their purchase being a lot better than year old technology even though it isn't, and then people like you come in and defend it. There is so many things wrong with what you said I don't know where to begin.

Yes nokia was the first to put a floating sensor in a phone, yes it was around but not in phones so yes it was special. Yes nokia was the first to put camera sensors that big into a phone, most people will argue above MP that sensor size is the single most important thing in a digital camera. The cameras you speak of that have lower MP cause they stopped advancing that have sensors WAAAAAY bigger than iphone or nokia. That being said nokias 808 and 1020 have sensors that dwarf the new iphone by a mile in fact there are 5 or 6 phones on the market with bigger sensors, now like you said before that doesn't mean just having a bigger sensor means better pics, but combine that with nokias floating OIS and their lenses and yes it still takes better STILL pics and probably videos than the iphone 6 just because of the sensors and microphone, yes iphone now has a floating sensor but its camera sensor is still so small that it cannot let enough light in, in low light sitiuations to compete with the 1020.

In bright daylight yes even crappy phones with crappy sensors can take good pics, that isn't the point, the whole draw of a 1020 or 808 is its ability to take pics in sub par lighting which iphone 6 still trails even after a year and having more money than the whole world, because they are not willing to take a hit on margins to put a sensor in that big or possibly make a phone slightly thicker. That being said iphone 6 takes great pics probably top 5 in that category. yes 1020 has flaws and such but the technology in the 808 is much older than a year and that phone hands down spanks iphone 6 pics all over the place, so stop assuming everybody is a windows/nokia ****** and do some research about technology before claiming some ****** test site isn't biased, because plenty of sites have already stated still images and videos look better on an 1020, and lastly where the iphone 6 doesn't compete is the 1020 pics can be blown up and reprinted without losing quality which cannot be done on a 8mp sensor, the iphone 6 cannot zoom as far either its just not possible, the 1020 is literally a ground breaking device for a phone but most people either don't know how to use it or don't care about their pictures that much to buy them. The people that do care buy a nokia. The people that don't buy an iphone but please stop pretending like apple can win every category on a phone with their new phones and they cant and they wont. 1020 loses tons of categories but the one it doesn't lose is the camera, apple doesn't make phones to out spec everything else they make it the best all around or they try to and always have, 1020 is made to be the best camera phone not the best phone in general so their are some sacrifices to a sensor that big. Also contributes to how slow it loads its not the phone its the enormous pics it takes that makes it slow full of so much detail that other phones cant produce. Iphone 6 has a very nice OIS 8MP sensor probably the best 8MP phone there is, but best camera phone? sorry theres a lot of nokias ahead of it still even after a year or 2. By the time apple catches that Microsoft should be releasing the successor and apple will be behind again. PS iphone 6 takes GREAT photos one of the best out there combined with everything else it does, makes it the top phone or one of the top, but I prefer the best camera so I have a 1020.

 

[psiu_glen]

Being in another league re pixel count has never made a device a better camera and 1020 owners seem to be among the few left who obsess about something the industry abandoned several years ago. Bigger and more does not automatically equal better; hence the fact that the DSLR industry has (mostly) stopped pushing higher pixel counts. Image quality is a combination of multiple factors, of which pixel count is but one. BTW, most people here who spout xenon flash don't even know what it is beyond being the thing that flashes when you take a picture and certainly don't know its advantages AND disadvantages. As far as OIS goes, the technology has been around for years and there is nothing special about Nokia's implementation of it.

To put it another way, you can buy a twelve cylinder Jaguar but the only people who would claim it is better than an 8 cylinder BMW, Audi, or Mercedes are those who bought one and/or those who work for Tata Motors (or previously Ford). Point being you can shove more into almost any piece of technology but that does not make it better.

I sure haven't seen the cameras walk back to 2 megapixels either.

Megapixels are one factor. They can help with the reframing/oversampling. Can natively "zoom" a lot closer before exceeding the native resolution.

Yes, OIS has been around for years. But not very many phones (hell, cameras, to be fair) have utilized it.

Xenon: "Um...errr...oh yeah, well I think everyone is doody heads and don't know how to use it!" <sticks fingers in ears, closes eyes, blows raspberries>

This is like my 4 year old reasoning why he should get pie and watch TV instead of going to bed.

"Image quality is a combination.of multiple factors"

Yep. The 1020 does tend to fall down on nailing color right away. Thankfully, that is easily fixed, whereas your blurry shot with an LED flash has no hope. Where your shot with lower res leaves you no room for cropping in without a pixelated mess. That shot in the babies nursery with a nightlight where the tiny sensor just couldn't scoop up enough light while not being stabilized to do anything.

Good job picking "pixel count" out of that other league comment though.

 

[Karthik Naik]

another frightfully misinformed thread on this topic
seriously people,im disappointed with the rants and baseless threads this week in the forums

The carl zeiss and pureview lumias are the best camera phones out there
the only thing which comes close is Sony's exmor sensor,which frankly has overheating issues but still takes decent shots for an android, and LG G3
iphones and samsungs sensors are massively oversatured and unnatural
people will try to justify their purchase but an obvious thing is the pureview sensor is the true king of camera sensors for phones
give credit where due,critisize where due,not baseless claims
my brother has both the phones mentioned-iphone 6 plus and lumia 1020
i have a 720,820,Z10,Nexus 5 and i have compared them and even posted shots taken from my 720,my bro's 1020,iphone 6 plus
in low light- 720>1020>>iphone 6
overall- 1020>>720>>>iphone 6 plus

 

[Jaripi]

another frightfully misinformed thread on this topic
seriously people,im disappointed with the rants and baseless threads this week in the forums

The carl zeiss and pureview lumias are the best camera phones out there
the only thing which comes close is Sony's exmor sensor,which frankly has overheating issues but still takes decent shots for an android, and LG G3
iphones and samsungs sensors are massively oversatured and unnatural
people will try to justify their purchase but an obvious thing is the pureview sensor is the true king of camera sensors for phones
give credit where due,critisize where due,not baseless claims
my brother has both the phones mentioned-iphone 6 plus and lumia 1020
i have a 720,820,Z10,Nexus 5 and i have compared them and even posted shots taken from my 720,my bro's 1020,iphone 6 plus
in low light- 720>1020>>iphone 6
overall- 1020>>720>>>iphone 6 plus

You should look photos of new Lumia 830 too, surprising good ones:

Phone camera comparison: Nokia Lumia 830 vs Lumia 1020

Add: Lumia 635 vs iPhone 6 camera & photo comparison

http://fortheloveoftech.com/2014/10...parison-similar-specs-different-price-part-2/

 

[ArcticArrow]

That's why I post it here to see what others think about it and for discussion.

I have never argued that just bcause Nokia has more pixel so it should produce better image quality. The reasons that I dont agree have already been posted. Especailly about the video part as they said "in all videos situation". Oh and I was arguing about why would they change the baseline of the graph just to make Nokia 1020 far worse than iPhone, but in fact, the difference is the same as seen in other graph where Nokia is leading, yet they use the baseline of 0.

I dont know much about that website, but the way to create the graph to mislead people make me doubt about their true professionalism.

I hate to tell everyone who wants a year old phone with an excessive pixel count to magically rank at the top but DXOMark is not a shill for Apple and they also do use objective matrices. Before saying X, Y, or Z is false, how about taking five minutes to go to their site (DxOMark by DxO Labs - DxOMark) and examining the breadth of their reviews for all types of digital cameras, lenses, etc.. People really need to get over their hybrid inferiority/superiority complexes and accept that you are using a year old camera with year old technology. You also need to face the fact that pixel count alone has never guaranteed that a camera would rank as having the best image quality. If you don't like the results then don't read the review. Coming here though to argue about whether your personal opinion trumps the testing of a respected organization that does objective testing of imaging technology and partners with the industry across the planet comes off as (at the very least) silly.

 

[ArcticArrow]

well I just double check the website, and found that iPhone 5S has a higher mark than 1020 and 925 is just 1 mark below 1020.....

 

[drtek]

These *** clowns are on acid. Don't even use 1020 and Apple in the same sentence. Because it isn't even close.

 

[squire777]

I know some serious photographers that don't put much stock into DxOmark results. They usually just test the sensors, without looking at the entire camera performance, which doesn't exactly translate into real world cases.