Nokia Repeats same Mistake as with Lumia 800 Camera?

[jawesome]

I think the Carl Zeiss "lens" isn't the issue as their products are good. It's the rest of the stuff attached behind that lens and the software running it that's the issue. You could buy the best tires and put them on a Yugo but the car would still be sub par.

So no Windows Phones can have a high quality camera because the software isn't good enough? Simply not true. Nokia chose not to include a BSI on their camera and low light images suffer because of it.

Again... people making excuses because they fell for the hype.

 

[cwmont13]

So no Windows Phones can have a high quality camera because the software isn't good enough? Simply not true.

Trying to see where I stated in my post that WP phones can't have a high quality cameras due to software issues. I was referring to the 900's issues. The Titan, Samsung Focus/Focus S, have good cameras in them and the pictures are better quality than what I've seen so far from the 900 in what's been posted here on WPCentral and in reviews.

Nokia chose not to include a BSI on their camera and low light images suffer because of it.

That validates my statement that it's what's behind the Carl Zeiss lens that causes the 900's camera performance to be below expectations. Nokia was probably doing some cost cutting to get to the magic $99.00 price point. Some stuff gets left out BSI being one of them. I agree with you that low light images suffer because of it.

Again... people making excuses because they fell for the hype.

I'm not offering excuses. Nokia has been making a big deal out of the CZ camera in the 900 and advertising the device heavily as a premier WP7 device. Agree there is a lot of hype surrounding the Lumia 900 and WP7. Now the time has come for Nokia to put up or shut up. We have to wait and see what pans out but so far the camera is being reported as below average.

I was awaiting the release of the 900 because I want to make the switch to WP as I'm tired of the Android experience but I can't see moving to a device that has camera performance below what I currently have on my Samsung Infuse. Due to my job I need a phone that will allow me to take decent quality indoor and some low light pictures and send them to others. Which the Infuse does easily as long as I carry around spare batteries cause the battery life sucks big time.

I was thinking about moving right away to the 900 but I think the camera performance is going to be a deal breaker for me. Probably wait a bit and see what shakes out regarding the camera, or possibly have a look at the Titan II. Decisions, decisions.......

 

[peestandingup]

In trying to get to some magic number of $99 (instead of say $150-$200), they've ultimately gimped their "flagship" device. That price would have likely came down soon anyway, just like we're seeing the 900 going for free for new customers to $20 for upgrades right now (at Target), not even a day after release.

Point being, they're not going to win using camera guts & other internals that barely even rival my 1st gen Focus. Thats crazy to me. Aside from the design (which don't get me wrong, its very good), I can't think of a single reason why anyone would get this phone over any other high to mid range Windows Phone, and that includes the last gen models.

This is why most people who are in the market for a phone are gonna pass up the 900.

-Does it have a better camera than an iPhone (even last gen's) or a mid to high range Android device that you can all get for free to $100? NO

-A better screen? NO

-A better ecosystem? NO

-Internals? NO

Design? More of a personal taste. But yes, the design is pretty great.

OK, so this device is going to sell based solely on design? Probably not. It'll appeal to people who are already in the WP ecosystem (not many of us) & a few who just love the design & will take it because its different. But thats not exactly what they needed this thing to do.

Both Nokia & MS are failing in their own way IMO. MS isn't doing enough to attract developers, push updates & get caught up in general from being asleep at the wheel for years. They're stagnating any way you look at it (app numbers don't mean squat if most of them are garbage & the big names aren't there). And Nokia by trying to push mediocre last gen tech into the ecosystem, calling it new, & acting like it actually rivals what's currently on the market.

And I hate saying all this, I truly do. But I honestly don't think this is going to be a good thing for either company. Which is a shame because I really want something that overall rivals the iPhone experience & I really do think WP is a more thought out OS at its core. And I can't stand Android.

 

[freestaterocker]

People do care about cameras in smartphones.

Look. 720p/1080p video camera recording in smartphones basically cause the demise of flip video and Cisco discontinue it less than 2 years buying it.

Cameras function in smartphones will eventually replace point and shoot. It's not if. It's just a matter of when.

Saying that we all know Nokia history with their previous high end Symbian phones. We know nokia's camera history. Nokia's N series always produced excellent camera functions.

I know Nokia had to take some shortcuts/cost savings to get the price down on the lumia series.

But last year 2011. The Samsung S2, Apple iPhone 4s and HTC's 2011 8mp camera in various version of their android phones were considered top camera phones along with the N8 camera.

Honestly all they'd need to do is throw in a BSI sensor and they would've really had something... Is it a huge cost difference?

 

[mz89]

Just a heads up though people, the lens may be great but the camera can't be "skinned" by OEMs much. So like the Titan 2 has great pictures because of its BSI sensor and separate imaging component, but its a 100 bucks more. Nokia has their CZ optics and their algorithms, which can be fixed, but in the end they are working with MS hardware restrictions & limitations...an issue which wont be addressed fully until WP8 is released.

 

[RiseAgainst94]

People have been saying that the Carl Zeiss optics is a marketing scheme, this is not true. Nokia has full trust in the CZ optics, likely because of the amazing results in their Nokia N8. The N8 has the best photos of any smartphone every released and it was released in October of 2010. Yes, it does come equipped with Carl Zeiss optics (though 12 mp) and beats out the much anticipated HTC ONE X. Hopefully the same optics and sensor were put in to the Lumia 900 and rendering is at fault. If the case, photos are bound to look excellent after a few updates.

 

[kenosando#AC]

I think the post-processing is the issue. Before I snap the picture, the viewfinder shows a great picture. After the capture, it looks way worse.

Sent from my Lumia 900 using Board Express