or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Nokia unveils Lumia 920 with 4.5" display, PureView camera
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Nokia unveils Lumia 920 with 4.5" display, PureView camera - Page 4

post #121 of 239
This fall, I'm skipping the next iPhone and getting either this phone or the Samsung ATIV S with the 4.7 inch screen. Windows Phone 8 looks a lot more attractive to me than iOS6.
post #122 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

Nokia never really made much of an effort in the U.S. market. They only seem to release phones on AT&T and AFAIK have no CDMA phones in a country where over 60% of the population are on a CDMA network. The only WIndows phone on Sprint was the HTC Arrive which is now discontinued and no plans for any Windows 8 phone. I don't think Verizon has a Windows phone either ATM. All the companies you listed seem to have flagship models running Android. I just don't see how windows can survive if Nokia folds since the other companies seem to only support Windows very half heartedly.

Microsoft screwed the pooch on this one by waiting so late to release the new Windows phone. They used to have a very high percentage of users on the old WinMo release back in 2007 and it was actually pretty well liked and had tens of thousands of apps that suddenly became obsolete with the new OS. They needed a better strategy to bring all those users and app developers into their new OS but failed miserably. They gave iOS and then Android several years to steal all their old customers. I am one of them. I used to have a HTC Touch Pro then the Touch Pro II which were very good phones at the time. But Android made WinMo 6.5 look slow and obsolete so I made the switch and then switched again to iPhone when it came to my carrier. The first Windows phones were all mid-range type phone like the HTC Arrive and not until this new Nokia shown today has Windows had a flagship type phone than can compete with the likes of the iPhone or Galaxy S III in specs. 

Every other manufacturer other than Apple had a major problem. I say that because Apple was the first to apply a real heavy duty desktop based OS into a phone. There have been Linux phones, but they've been really cut down and don't really do that much. Apple's, of course, is UNIX.

So Apple could do what no one else could. Android came out a year later, after having its orientation changed from a BB copy to an iPhone copy. But that was it! Everyone else was using either realtime OS's for their phones, or in the case of RIM, a pager OS. All were very weak.

Microsoft was using CE in Win Mobile, and they had nothing else. People don't understand just how long it takes to develop a new OS—years! Even modifying an old one can take a couple of years; look at the problem RIM is having with QNX.

So Microsoft used CE for Win Phone. There's no doubt they knew it was just for a couple of years. There is no way that wasn't the plan from the very beginning. And there's no doubt they knew it wouldn't be compatable with its replacement. They had to know that from the first day they decided to do Win Phone.

But they were desperate. They needed something to compete with the new UI of iOS and Android, and they needed it as fast as possible. The only way was to go with CE and Metro from the Zune HD. After all, they had them already.

They could have saved a lot of trouble for users by using the version of CE that allowed multiple cores, etc. but it would have been too much work, as they hadn't used that for a phone OS. It would have allowed dual core wp7 phones, higher resolutions, and better graphics chips, and so could have allowed upgrades to wp8, if done right. But, no time.

So they got what they had and used it. And customers got the result. It was a placeholder for wp8. Now, the question is whether customers with old phones that aren't yet eligible for a replacement will receive a discount on a new phone.

I know, it was more information than you want, but I felt I should explain why we're seeing what we're seeing so late in the game. They had no choice.
post #123 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

That's exaggerating a bit. I think phones on par with the first iPhone would be the phones of today hadn't it been for Apple.

I doubt it very much. I remember the field of phones before the iPhone, and none of them were anything like it. Win Mobile phones had large screens for the day, because the pretend Windows UI had so many tiny things to poke at with the stylus that with a small screen, you couldn't get anything useful done.

A reason why it can be seen that I'm right is because of the several year lag other companies had in attempts to duplicate Apple's work. If phone were moving to Apple's model, other companies would have had them sooner, and they would have been much better from the start, but they didn't, and they weren't.

In fact, all the major producers stated that the iPhone wouldn't make it, and as it did, that it was a fluke, or a boutique phone, etc. We all remember the interview with Ballmer laughing that while Apple would sell millions of phones, Microsoft would have their OS on hundreds of millions (or however he phrased it).

People were criticizing the touchscreen. They criticized the touchscreen keyboard. They criticized everything. They criticized the idea of it acting as an iPod.

No, there wasn't a single company in the industry that had any understanding of this. They were all pretty much the same. Complex, hard to use, selling in what we now see as small numbers (a couple of million sales of a model was a big deal back then).

Anyone give free OS upgrades? Nope! Even updates? Nope, other than a small security fix, or a fix for a date problem. Usually, there was no upgrade at all. You had to buy a new phone.

There was no way these companies would get from where they were to where they are if it weren't for the iPhone. Like it or not, that's the truth. They just weren't mentally suited to go in the direction Apple went in.
post #124 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleSince86 View Post

Yecch... hideous. It hurts the eyes to even look at those phones and displays. As Steve Jobs said of Microsoft, they just have no taste.


You crack me up!

 

post #125 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waverunnr View Post

This fall, I'm skipping the next iPhone and getting either this phone or the Samsung ATIV S with the 4.7 inch screen. Windows Phone 8 looks a lot more attractive to me than iOS6.

Good for you!
post #126 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post

Agree - looks like a very nice device. Not sure about wireless charging - it is very convenient but supposedly very inefficient. What I'd  like is a stand or cradle with a magnetized connector. It would be great if the 9 pin connector in the new iphone could also be used with a charging base that didn't require 'penetration' in order to charge.

I wasn't too interested in wireless charging... but then I came across JBL speaker box that charges phone and plays music from the phone wirelessly. You just put your phone on top of the box (actually wireless playback works over some distance too). No docking ports, cables to break/damage. I think it is nice.

Now the question is, how long does it take to charge phone.
post #127 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gustav View Post

So, it has a better camera then.

 

I don't care about inductive charging. My toothbrush has it so they can waterproof the base because, you know, people like to keep their toothbrushes next to the sink. I see no reason why a phone needs it.

 

Augmented reality apps are not new. There are iPhone apps that do that. Maybe Nokia's is better, I don't know. I've never used one. Yelp and standard maps apps seem to work just fine.

 

Soooo... other than the camera, why should I give up my iPhone for this?

 

It actually doesn't (have a better camera).  

 

Despite what the article says, this camera is nothing like the 41 megapixel camera demonstrated last year.  In fact this camera has almost identical specs to the camera on the iPhone 4s, and works in the same way with more or less the same sensors.  It has optical stabilisation instead of digital (6 of one and half dozen of the other), but otherwise is a fairly standard camera much like you can find on any device lately. 

 

Anyway, "PureView" is a brand, (not a "technology" as the article states).   

post #128 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Why do you keep saying this? We don't make policy. Site owners do. We're entitled to our own opinions, for heaven's sake.

because it's confusing. because in your role as appleinsider.com global moderator you routinely disparage people for the same type of comments which you yourself post. you most certainly are entitled to your own opinions, but it seems that in your role as global moderator you would, you know, moderate, and then have a separate 'personal' login where you can express your personal opinions. i never know whether the comments you're making are in your capacity as official appleinsider.com global moderator or in your capacity as just another site user.
post #129 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post

The price should be easy. 920 = iPhone 5. The lower one is $100 cheaper. But i guess they might wanna see how advance iPhone 5 is and change the price accordingly?

I think they'll try to better that. One of Nokia VIPs said they want to make new Lumias more affordable (than typical price for that level, I'd presume?)... and undercutting direct competitors is always a bonus when you are playing catch up.
post #130 of 239
Nokia busted faking Purview ad:

http://www.idownloadblog.com/2012/09/05/deceptive-advertising-nokia-admits-to-faking-the-pureview-ad/

Watch the video. Hilarious. And they call the Siri ads deceptive.
post #131 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Napoleon_PhoneApart View Post

I don't think you're a racist, but maybe the guy works for Nokia? In any event, I could understand him perfectly.

I haven't seen video yet, but I'd guess he was somehow involved in design of new phone(s). It seems to be a trend, putting on stage creative people who actually were behind the product creation.
post #132 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by tylersdad View Post

Digital image stabilization. There's a big difference between digital (iPhone) and optical (Lumia) image stabilization.

While optical image stabilization can indeed be superior, Nokia has been caught faking stabilized video footage. So the extent of how much superior it is remains to be seen.

post #133 of 239

The floating image sensor looks amazing, the Nokia specific apps look really handy, we know Snapdragon S4 is the best CPU-wise SoC out there, in addition to the low power draw chip there's a huge battery and other optimizations, the screen changes hue in relation to the light you are in....Just really, really impressive in all. And now that WP has 100,000 apps, you can probably find what you need. 

Going to take a lot more than an elongated screen to rustle my jimmies after all this, your move iPhone 5. 

post #134 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

What chips are they using and are they over clocking?  Windows PCs tend to do over clocking from time to time, which might be a reason why they have reliability issues.




Uhhh what? The Snapdragon S4 chip in this phone is running at the designed frequency. No phone manufacturer has shipped a phone beyond the chips designed frequency. Some enthusiast PC OEMs do that, but for the most part they run at the designed frequency as well. Overclocking for the most part is user-end. 

post #135 of 239

The ad may have been from an SLR, but the phone camera is still a definite step forward, look at this

http://gizmodo.com/5940697/definite-proof-that-the-lumia-920s-pureview-camera-is-awesome

post #136 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

 

It actually doesn't (have a better camera).  

 

Despite what the article says, this camera is nothing like the 41 megapixel camera demonstrated last year.  In fact this camera has almost identical specs to the camera on the iPhone 4s, and works in the same way with more or less the same sensors.  It has optical stabilisation instead of digital (6 of one and half dozen of the other), but otherwise is a fairly standard camera much like you can find on any device lately. 

 

Anyway, "PureView" is a brand, (not a "technology" as the article states).   


There is no comparison between OIS and digital stabilisation.  You don't know what you are talking about.  The Nokia has an f2 lens while the iPhone 4s has an f2.4 lens, which should give it the edge in light gathering in low light situations. If the sensor area is larger than normal for an 8mp phone camera, the low light performance of the sensor could well be superior due to lower noise..  All in all just looking at specs and declaring that the camera is no better is shooting from the lip.

post #137 of 239
Originally Posted by Pooch View Post
…have a separate 'personal' login where you can express your personal opinions.

 

Seems disingenuous.


i never know whether the comments you're making are in your capacity as official appleinsider.com global moderator or in your capacity as just another site user.

 

… I think you can figure it out. 

post #138 of 239

Personally I think it looks like a nice phone .I agree that they should take a leaf out of Apple and release the product within a week.

 

Im due an upgrade so been waiting for the iPhone 5.   If its just a stretched version of the 4S with LTE (no use in the UK) no NFC etc, I think I will pass. Its an ugly mother****. I never thought I would say this but Apple seem to be spending more time in court than QA'ing their designs.

 

Still  I live in hope that Apple pull the rabbit out the hat, otherwise I may well just get the Lumia when it comes out

 

Heres hoping :)

 

 

 

 

 

 

iMac 27" 2.93ghz i7 MacBook Air 13" iphone4 ipod classic AppleTV 

Reply

 

 

 

 

 

 

iMac 27" 2.93ghz i7 MacBook Air 13" iphone4 ipod classic AppleTV 

Reply
post #139 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


yet you'll love it when Apple introduces it and think they invented it.

 

I love how nobody can criticize anything anymore without that bullshit statement being vomited out by people like you. Apple would never, ever do something like this and if they did, with the same implementation, I would also say it's stupid and useless. So instead of a cable going from the wall to the phone, its a cable that goes from the wall to a massive brick to my phone. Awesome improvement. 

post #140 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by realwarder View Post


There is.

 

This video looks pretty impressive to me: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cimDfEIEiu0&feature=BFa&list=PLgKNvl454BxeDMU2rPf3Y7rjegrzYwd7U

 

Yes, it is impressive. And also a complete fraud. The stabilized video was shot from a van with a camera rig. Woops. 

 

http://www.theverge.com/2012/9/5/3294545/nokias-pureview-ads-are-fraudulent 

post #141 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by haar View Post

name a product that is completely better than apple. (you cant because once you discount the price, either the design or the insides are better than others...)
um, because apple is the bestest (LOL)... er wise choice because it has the best products, and state-of-art to boot...

What is better for one isn't necessarily better for others.

I know people who believe products like:

Galaxy S3
Lenovo ThinkPad X1
Asus Zenbook Prime

just to mention a few... are best in their respective class, and that includes comparable Apple offerings. But like I said, it all depends on one's requirements and priorities.

If you are into gaming, for example, any gaming lappy could be better for you than any luxurious aluminium (or carbon fibre) laptop out there. It is not going to be completely better, but it will be better in things that matter to you. Likewise, Apple products are not completely better, though they can be better for one's needs - there will always be product with bigger storage, higher res screen, faster CPU or some other particular advantage.
post #142 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pooch View Post

because it's confusing. because in your role as appleinsider.com global moderator you routinely disparage people for the same type of comments which you yourself post. you most certainly are entitled to your own opinions, but it seems that in your role as global moderator you would, you know, moderate, and then have a separate 'personal' login where you can express your personal opinions. i never know whether the comments you're making are in your capacity as official appleinsider.com global moderator or in your capacity as just another site user.

I did point out to that before... and some others.

T.S., who might be perfectly agreeable companion in real, appears to me here at AI as power user - someone with moderator privileges, but no moderator responsibilities.

Yes, other moderators are biased toward Apple - after all, this is Apple fan site - but their opinions are more... moderate. As it should be.
post #143 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigpics View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Why is every Apple website reporting on this thing? Why do we care?

 

Because most of us don't want to live in a bubble....???

 

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fairthrope View Post

Bold move indeed. But Is this also a do-or-die release for Nokia?

 

If this is a the swansong, it is a beautiful swansong.

 

A little thick-ish looking (I don't know if that's illusion or fact) - but, based on lots of nice features, and to resurrect a 1964 political slogan, truly "A choice, not an echo."

 

(which I hate to tell Nokia, was Goldwater's swan song).

 

"In your heart you know [he's] it's right"... "In your head you know [he's] it's wrong".

"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #144 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postulant View Post

Nokia busted faking Purview ad:
http://www.idownloadblog.com/2012/09/05/deceptive-advertising-nokia-admits-to-faking-the-pureview-ad/
Watch the video. Hilarious. And they call the Siri ads deceptive.


Watch the first 20 seconds.  Clearly someone is videoing both people cycling along... likely on a large camera.

 

Edit: After watching the video slowly, it does look fake.  Until real units are on the street we'll never know just how fake.


Edited by realwarder - 9/5/12 at 4:59pm
post #145 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by filburt View Post

While optical image stabilization can indeed be superior, Nokia has been caught faking stabilized video footage. So the extent of how much superior it is remains to be seen.

Look at Anandtech.com. During hands-on time after presentation, Nokia set up some interesting low light scenes where people were able to actually compare available Lumias with their own phones. If other examples were pre-fabricated, those were not.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6236/hands-on-with-the-nokia-lumia-920-lumia-820

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=27605
post #146 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post


There is no comparison between OIS and digital stabilisation.  You don't know what you are talking about.  The Nokia has an f2 lens while the iPhone 4s has an f2.4 lens, which should give it the edge in light gathering in low light situations. If the sensor area is larger than normal for an 8mp phone camera, the low light performance of the sensor could well be superior due to lower noise..  All in all just looking at specs and declaring that the camera is no better is shooting from the lip.

 

Well, the point is that everyone *is* just reading the specs and shooting from the hip at this point.  Most of that shooting has been following Nokia's PR crapola and assuming this is a far better camera.  I was just pointing out that based on the released specs it's essentially in the very same ballpark as any other camera on a modern smartphone.  

 

Optical versus digital stabilisation is an argument that can go on forever.  All I can say is many industry people I have talked to say that it's "6 of one and half a dozen of the other" so that's why I repeated that.  

 

Overall, I'm forced to assume that this *isn't* a better camera than the iPhone 4S or if it is it is only marginally so.  The main reason I say that is Nokia's total misrepresentation of "purview" technology as well as the fact that they faked the video showing how good the camera is!  Those two things together imply quite strongly to me that this isn't a great camera.   

post #147 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post


I wasn't too interested in wireless charging... but then I came across JBL speaker box that charges phone and plays music from the phone wirelessly. You just put your phone on top of the box (actually wireless playback works over some distance too). No docking ports, cables to break/damage. I think it is nice.
Now the question is, how long does it take to charge phone.

wireless playback works over some distance, but this wireless charging doesn't.
So what's the point, wasting energy (for connecting via wifi) and limiting data bandwhith in order to avoid a plug that is on the phone anyways?

post #148 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by qualar View Post

@Tallest Skil Are you so blinkered that you would not even consider something non-apple even if it was better.  How old are you?

Although IMO it is important to see and understand what the competition is offering, you asked the wrong question. The right question is, would you consider a Phone running Microsoft? And the resounding answer would be NO! To even put the phrase "even if better" is laughable.
post #149 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I used to think so too. Canon invented optical stab. They licensed it to Sony for their camcorders. But Sony decided to use digital for their still cameras, and most other camera manufacturers did too. At first, it wasn't very good, but over the years got much better. It's pretty much equal to optical, except for very expensive glass and very high Rez sensors. But Nikon and Canon still go that way.
I don't see this as much more than a marketing ploy such as Carl Zeiss, Schneider, and Leica lenses on cheap cameras, and phone cameras.

Um... what still cameras are we talking about?

I'm aware of Sony stills using shifting sensor instead of shifting glass elements in lens... but that is not what they call digital stabilization, to my knowledge. Digital stabilization does not shift anything - it uses larger sensor than actual frame size, and then tries to crop the same frame wherever it is on the image sensor.
post #150 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by mac-user View Post

wireless playback works over some distance, but this wireless charging doesn't.

So what's the point, wasting energy (for connecting via wifi) and limiting data bandwhith in order to avoid a plug that is on the phone anyways?

Well... I can play music from my phone in my study (or living room) on speakers, while having phone on me. So I don't have to jump out of my recliner to grab a phone when it rings; yes, sometimes I'm that lazy.

But probably more important... My 3Gs (and my wife's) both have cracked plastic around the connector. We are using both Apple docks and Logitech speaker box... so I'm guessing we did that damage fiddling with connectors. 3Gs hard but brittle shell probably helped a bit. I guess it cannot happen with metal surrounding 4/4s/5 connector, but based on my current experience, I like idea of connector-less charging and playback. I also think it is cool, as I did when Palm introduced same tech a few years back.
post #151 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

I love how nobody can criticize anything anymore without that bullshit statement being vomited out by people like you. Apple would never, ever do something like this and if they did, with the same implementation, I would also say it's stupid and useless. So instead of a cable going from the wall to the phone, its a cable that goes from the wall to a massive brick to my phone. Awesome improvement. 

That's why they have a bunch of patents for that very same technology.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #152 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post

The Lumia 800 design, now the 920, is still the best looking phone out there, in my opinion. Now it has what sounds like a phenomenal screen - 4.5", 322ppi, RGB (no ugly pentile matrix here) and at 1280x768 resolution. Nokia apparently also have the best black levels in the business. They're also claiming the camera is the best out there too.

It's a stunning device for sure, and the OS looks lovely too. It even has NFC and wireless charging. I just wish I had more confidence that Win Phone 8 will actually take off, as if it's as still born as Win Phone 7 was then this will be a very beautiful museum piece before long.

It's not going to take off. Let's face it, it sucks and very few will be sold.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #153 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post

Um... what still cameras are we talking about?
I'm aware of Sony stills using shifting sensor instead of shifting glass elements in lens... but that is not what they call digital stabilization, to my knowledge. Digital stabilization does not shift anything - it uses larger sensor than actual frame size, and then tries to crop the same frame wherever it is on the image sensor.

All of Sony's cameras, both D-SLR's and compact cameras. In fact, as far as I know, every camera maker except Canon and Nikon use electronic stabilization.

Digital stabilization uses a larger sensor than is needed for the image. As the image moves around, it shifts the pixels around to stabilize it. There are a number of varying ways to do this depending on the manufacturer, but the concept is the same.

In the beginning, optical stab. Gave between 1.5 and 2.5 stops. Electronic gave between .74 and 2 stops. This depends on the focal length. The longer the lens, the more effective it is.

But today, optical gives between 2 and 3 stops, with a few giving up to 4 stops, very rare. Electronic stab. Goes about the same 2 to 3 stops. Effectively, neither is better any more. But optical is much more expensive. There are some advantages to optical, but we won't find it on these really cheap phone cameras from Nokia.
post #154 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post


Where has HTC copied Apple?

 

Unified search, slide to unlock, scrolling bounce and the other things they worked around to get around the import ban imposed by the ITC.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #155 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Unified search, slide to unlock, scrolling bounce and the other things they worked around to get around the import ban imposed by the ITC.

They also had to drop contextual recognition. That where the OS will recognize a phone number, a web address, etc.
post #156 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by daylove22 View Post

14 yrs old at best..all his comments are childish and Apple can do no wrong. 

Anyone on the net can be whatever they wish. That's the problem. 

 

philip

post #157 of 239

The stunning PureView image stabilization was faked, the boy is filming the girl, but she passes by a window which captures a camera van.

 

 

post #158 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

All of Sony's cameras, both D-SLR's and compact cameras. In fact, as far as I know, every camera maker except Canon and Nikon use electronic stabilization.
Digital stabilization uses a larger sensor than is needed for the image. As the image moves around, it shifts the pixels around to stabilize it. There are a number of varying ways to do this depending on the manufacturer, but the concept is the same.
In the beginning, optical stab. Gave between 1.5 and 2.5 stops. Electronic gave between .74 and 2 stops. This depends on the focal length. The longer the lens, the more effective it is.
But today, optical gives between 2 and 3 stops, with a few giving up to 4 stops, very rare. Electronic stab. Goes about the same 2 to 3 stops. Effectively, neither is better any more. But optical is much more expensive. There are some advantages to optical, but we won't find it on these really cheap phone cameras from Nokia.

OK. But my understanding is that Sony is using shifting sensor, so while not really optical, it is still mechanical stabilization, as opposite to digital which doesn't shift anything, but uses software algorithm to figure out and minimize shaking from the image.

Lens shift was initially considered better as it was optimized for every lens, but then it was (in theory) making lenses more expensive, and there was no way to apply stabilisation on lenses without built-in mechanism. Sensor shift is jack of all trades, working with any lens, but optimization is general rather than lens-centric.

http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/technology/technology/theme/alpha_01.html.
post #159 of 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post

OK. But my understanding is that Sony is using shifting sensor, so while not really optical, it is still mechanical stabilization, as opposite to digital which doesn't shift anything, but uses software algorithm to figure out and minimize shaking from the image.
Lens shift was initially considered better as it was optimized for every lens, but then it was (in theory) making lenses more expensive, and there was no way to apply stabilisation on lenses without built-in mechanism. Sensor shift is jack of all trades, working with any lens, but optimization is general rather than lens-centric.
http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/technology/technology/theme/alpha_01.html.

It's irrelevant as to whether it's pure digital, or part digital, in the way it's calculated, and then a mechanical part is moved. The big difference is that optical uses a rather expensive optical corrector moved by very precise motors, and the other involves the sensor. That's really the big deal.

Optical stab. does make lenses much more expensive. Much more. Hundreds of dollars more.

Some examples from Canon, the inventor of optical stab.:

The best known lens:

EF 70-200Mm f:2.8 IS II USM = $2,500. I have this lens, and it's a great one.

Same exact lens, but without stab.: $1,340

Of course, non pro lenses are very much cheaper than the pro versions. Their stab is Also cheaper, and doesn't do as well. Some of those lenses are in the mid hundreds and up. A. un-stab version might go for $200, and a stab version for $450.

This is one reason why optical stab isn't used by most companies, except for camcorders, most of the time, or at least for the more expensive models. But those lenses are very much smaller than ones for even 4:3 cameras.
post #160 of 239

I think it looks like a solid device.

 

Certainly a cut above anything in the android world.

 

I look forward to Apple's response next week.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Nokia unveils Lumia 920 with 4.5" display, PureView camera