So far, I've not read any intelligent comments about the pixel density of this camera. Folks, pixels do matter. They do make a better photograph, and here's why. How the heck are you going to put a zoom lens inside a thin phone? You aren't. So to compensate, you let your users Digitally Zoom. You can then save a 5MP photo, zoomed in like you had a real telephoto, and your photo will look great (not stupid like the software interpolated low-MP cameras do it).
What this means is that even Apple should follow suit, allow using to ZOOM in on what we want to shoot.
It's not about saving huge files. I don't want a bunch of 48MP files saved on a phone. But I do want to zoom. Who doesn't?
"Forget the awkward industrial design. Ignore the frustrating mess that is Belle. Take one picture with Nokia's 808 PureView and all will be forgiven. We dare you. It's difficult to relay exactly how thoroughly awesome this camera is and how stupendously phenomenal the resulting shots are. This device instantly obliterates every other cameraphone, while simultaneously giving most dedicated point-and-shoots the proverbial finger. It's that good. So what's the special sauce? How is this possible? Welcome to the world of software photography, where lenses and motors and hardware are replaced with algorithms and code and wizardry."
- Engadget June 26, 2012 review of Nokia 808 with PureView 41MP sensor
Megapixels above about 3 MP are pretty much irrelevant in a phone camera format. The crop factor of this unit's camera (4) is half that of the iP5 (8) which should lead to a 2-fold better signal to noise ratio. The drawback is shallower depth of field. Hardly likely to attract buyers in droves from the iPhone (a iP5 and DSLR combo is what I use if the trusty Nikon happens to be with me).
Incorrect. It's not the only factor by a mile, but what you say is factually incorrect if all other aspects are identical.
Wrong. It's especially wrong if "all other aspects are identical".
The quality of a sensor with regards to color, resolution etc is based on how many photons (light particles) land on a single sensor receptor.
With higher megapixels, each receptor becomes smaller, so less photons land on it. This results in images with more noise and artefacts, and worse color.
That's why "full frame" or even DX sized cameras have better image quality than compact cameras with smaller sensors, and medium format cameras (huge sensors) even better.
There is a sweet spot for every sensor size with regard to megapixels. After that sweet spot, more megapixels mean worse images.
The only way to raise this sweet spot is to improve the sensor electronics (lower the noise barrier, etc). This is the reason a newer camera model has better image quality than the previous generation, other things being equal. This only takes you so far, though. You also have the laws of physics and optics to stop you.
Now, in particular, 44MP on a cellphone sized camera (heck, even on a compact camera), is just marketing for idiots.
It has no relation with reality, optics, etc whatsoever.
To give you some context, $6000 full frame cameras that professionals use, with 10 or more times the sensor area, and much finer optics, are only around 26MP.
In-camera cropping, for those of us with a photography background.
And your theory of useable crops is true only if the optics can hold up their end of the image capture pipeline. What's this thing packing? A Hasselblad lens?
I bought the Nokia 808 the day it was released here in Switzerland. Until yesterday it was by far the best camera phone on the market, iPhone and all. The phones OS, well that's a different story, though for a Symbian phone it wasn't all that bad, the battery was nothing short of amazing. That amount of control you have when shooting in manual mode rivals that of most point and shoot cameras. Not to mention that it takes pictures extremely quick. There is also a pretty good sized community and following as of yet for the Nokia 808 that has improved not only the camera app but have released some very useful and creative camera apps.
The 808 takes 41-megapixels' worth of information and condenses it down to 5MP. In essence, 7 individual pixels are collated together and combined into one "superpixel". This process means you benefit from the same amount of light that would hit the much larger pixels of a 5MP sensor, if it fitted into the same physical footprint. You benefit from solid low-light performance and at the same time you can remove noise and digital artifacts from individual pixels through the oversampling process. It's all done at the raw sensor information level too, but its lightning quick utilizing a dedicated processor to get the job done. The result is a super crisp 5MP image that's much sharper, with greater detail than an ordinary 5MP sensor can achieve.
Though tons of megapixels is all great and all, it's really the size of the image sensor and quality of lens that makes the best photos, here is the lens assembly for the Nokia 808;
Samsung, Sony (ie iPhone) and then Nokia is at the bottom. The Nokia 808 and 1020 also allows for shooting in RAW and has optical stabilization, again for a camera phone, that's just cool. As the cliché goes, the best camera in the world is the one at your fingertips and I've taken terrific pictures that I wouldn’t have snapped otherwise because I simply wouldn’t have had a dedicated camera with me, merely an ordinary smartphone. And the 808 is no ordinary smartphone.
Coming back to Nokia 1020, I am extremely excited about getting my hands on one, I have already promised the 808 to my daughter. Yes it runs Windows 8 but for a personal phone I have no problems with it as it's a big step up from Symbian and to be honest I actually like the interface. Hopefully there will be as many custom camera apps for it then there are for the 808.
I'm sure your iPhone 5 takes great pictures and most of you think this is just gimmicky. Nokia used to be my favorite mobile company but lately they haven't produced anything that I would call worthy of note. This thing however is pretty mind blowing, speaking from experience with the 808, it takes amazing pictures and the 1020 just improves on that formula with an even better camera and UI, so I am going to award Nokia by purchasing one. I don't want to see Nokia go the way of the Dodo bird. I shudder to think of a world with just iOS and Android in it.
From what I've seen, it takes amazing photos for a phone. Take a look before whining about mega-pixels.
Rich, if you read the above thread, you'll see that the same quality (amazing) photos could be had for far less pixels. The large number of pixels limit how many the camera/phone can hold and how fast then can be sent out from the device. So, 41 Mp is a bad thing and in the end, just marketing.
Now all that said, if Nokia wants to make themselves a niche, marketing the device as a good camera-phone instead of a good smart phone is an interesting idea. The fact the phone is weighed down with Windows 8, and there are no apps to speak of, means Nokia needs something to make up for the shitty OS and lack of apps. Perhaps if they made an optional decent lens attachment that would weigh as much as the phone and triple the thickness of the assembly, they might attract some attention. Without that, they will only appeal to the ignorant and be shunned by those who know optics.
Rich, if you read the above thread, you'll see that the same quality (amazing) photos could be had for far less pixels. The large number of pixels limit how many the camera/phone can hold and how fast then can be sent out from the device. So, 41 Mp is a bad thing and in the end, just marketing.
Now all that said, if Nokia wants to make themselves a niche, marketing the device as a good camera-phone instead of a good smart phone is an interesting idea. The fact the phone is weighed down with Windows 8, and there are no apps to speak of, means Nokia needs something to make up for the shitty OS and lack of apps. Perhaps if they made an optional decent lens attachment that would weigh as much as the phone and triple the thickness of the assembly, they might attract some attention. Without that, they will only appeal to the ignorant and be shunned by those who know optics.
Wow, I bet if Apple used this technology in their iPhone 5s or 6 it would be hailed as the next revolutionary option and you wouldn't question it one bit. Have you even been to any of the shutter bug blogs, the Nokia 808 almost always get's high praise from the, "who know optics" crowd . Yes the new Nokia 1020 runs WIndows 8 but the OS isn't bad, it's actually pretty intuitive and all of the mainstream apps are available; Evernote, Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, News; CNN, Engadget, Pulse, News 360, games; Modern Combat 4, Asphalt 7, Armed!, ect. What apps are you looking for that aren't in the Windows Store. I don't have a Windows 8 phone yet but my 13 year old son does and he has the exact same apps that my daughter and husband have on their iPhone. He especially enjoys the Xbox Live app so he can keep in touch with friends and arrange weekly battles with his Halo clan and uses Xbox Glass for his games.
I'm not comparing Windows 8 to iPhone here, I'm just saying that there is absolutely nothing wrong with people using this mobile OS. Except for the lack of a file manager it's actually a pretty decent OS and I will enjoy it when my new Nokia 1020 arrives early next month.
The Nokia 808 has proven that Pureview isn't just a gimick, the burst mode for example at 8MP takes between 3 - 5 pictures a seconds, I have never seen that kind of speed with the same picture quality on any cell phone. The new 1020 even has hardware image stabilization and hardware zoom. I have played with almost every native camera app that exists, the Nokia's blows them all away by a huge margin. There is even a developers kit just for the camera app so you can add your own functionality. National Geographic has issued them to their field photographers and has even developed an app for the phone because of how they felt about this phone.
I'm sure your very happy with your phone and it takes great photos but this is on another level, itis a unique camera phone that honestly does what Nokia is marketing.
Just for fun take the phone out of your pocket and take a picture as fast as you can, by the time you get to your phone app I would have already taken 3 pictures that have begone syncing with my Skydrive and Instagram.
Wow, I bet if Apple used this technology in their iPhone 5s or 6 it would be hailed as the next revolutionary option and you wouldn't question it one bit.
I bet if you read the thread you would see that no one is complaining about the image quality, but the marketing use of 41MP. If Apple did this, they would get flamed as well, but Apple would not. They would advertise 5MP using 'SuperPixels' and then explain what a super pixel was, which is 41MP of data pushed into a 5MP output while allowing filtering of artifacts and distortion.
The fact that this is NOT a 41MP output, but is advertised as a 41MP camera while knowing that people will assume that megapixels means the same megapixels in every other camera sold. Maybe Intel should start offering 12GHz processors instead of 4-3GHz processing cores?
I bet if you read the thread you would see that no one is complaining about the image quality, but the marketing use of 41MP. If Apple did this, they would get flamed as well, but Apple would not. They would advertise 5MP using 'SuperPixels' and then explain what a super pixel was, which is 41MP of data pushed into a 5MP output while allowing filtering of artifacts and distortion.
The fact that this is NOT a 41MP output, but is advertised as a 41MP camera while knowing that people will assume that megapixels means the same megapixels in every other camera sold. Maybe Intel should start offering 12GHz processors instead of 4-3GHz processing cores?
So far, I've not read any intelligent comments about the pixel density of this camera. Folks, pixels do matter. They do make a better photograph, and here's why. How the heck are you going to put a zoom lens inside a thin phone? You aren't. So to compensate, you let your users Digitally Zoom. You can then save a 5MP photo, zoomed in like you had a real telephoto, and your photo will look great (not stupid like the software interpolated low-MP cameras do it).
What this means is that even Apple should follow suit, allow using to ZOOM in on what we want to shoot.
It's not about saving huge files. I don't want a bunch of 48MP files saved on a phone. But I do want to zoom. Who doesn't?
And your comment is not intelligent either. Zooming (actually cropping) is only one aspect. As I previously wrote, high pixel densities cause heat and heat causes noise, especially at high ISOs. So while you gain resolution, you then lose it due to the noise. Each new generation of sensors are better in this regard, but 41MP in a 1/2.5" or even a 1/1.65" sensor is overkill. 1/1.65", which is what the Leica D-Lux 4 and 5 used (but with a 10.1MP sensor) is only 11.9% the size of an APS-C sensor and 5.2% the size of a full frame sensor. Besides, if you can't get a "raw" format out of the phone (and I suspect you can't), then it's a bit moot anyway. I suspect the camera is using very high compression ratios to output the JPG, which will also decrease quality, although increase storage space.
In any case, the true test is in the results and until people get their hands on the phone, we don't know whether it's good or bad.
Note that Nikon's top of the line D4 body ($6000), is only 16MP and in DX (APS-C) mode, it's only 6.81MP. Canon's top of the line EOS-1Dx ($6800) is 18.1MP. It's their lower priced cameras that have higher megapixel counts. The MP counts are relatively low because these bodies are used by pros who need the highest quality. Which means being able to shoot at high ISOs with low noise. A highly packed sensor can't do that.
While developing a tiny 41MP sensor is quite an accomplishment (and I wonder whether Nokia developed it or whether it's third party and if so, who accomplished it), this is not about quality. It's about being able to market the idea that it has this 41MP sensor because "if the number is bigger, it must be better", especially with macho men who have no real understanding of the physics -- you know, "my amp goes to 11" and all that.
Nokia is absolutely obsessed with their camera technology, and that serves as a great distraction to all the other things that really matter to people in choosing a mobile device. Perhaps they should fully pursue their obsession, drop all the phone stuff, and go compete with Nikon.
I bought the Nokia 808 the day it was released here in Switzerland. Until yesterday it was by far the best camera phone on the market, iPhone and all. The phones OS, well that's a different story, though for a Symbian phone it wasn't all that bad, the battery was nothing short of amazing. That amount of control you have when shooting in manual mode rivals that of most point and shoot cameras. Not to mention that it takes pictures extremely quick. There is also a pretty good sized community and following as of yet for the Nokia 808 that has improved not only the camera app but have released some very useful and creative camera apps.
The 808 takes 41-megapixels' worth of information and condenses it down to 5MP. In essence, 7 individual pixels are collated together and combined into one "superpixel". This process means you benefit from the same amount of light that would hit the much larger pixels of a 5MP sensor, if it fitted into the same physical footprint. You benefit from solid low-light performance and at the same time you can remove noise and digital artifacts from individual pixels through the oversampling process. It's all done at the raw sensor information level too, but its lightning quick utilizing a dedicated processor to get the job done. The result is a super crisp 5MP image that's much sharper, with greater detail than an ordinary 5MP sensor can achieve.
Though tons of megapixels is all great and all, it's really the size of the image sensor and quality of lens that makes the best photos, here is the lens assembly for the Nokia 808;
Samsung, Sony (ie iPhone) and then Nokia is at the bottom. The Nokia 808 and 1020 also allows for shooting in RAW and has optical stabilization, again for a camera phone, that's just cool. As the cliché goes, the best camera in the world is the one at your fingertips and I've taken terrific pictures that I wouldn’t have snapped otherwise because I simply wouldn’t have had a dedicated camera with me, merely an ordinary smartphone. And the 808 is no ordinary smartphone.
Coming back to Nokia 1020, I am extremely excited about getting my hands on one, I have already promised the 808 to my daughter. Yes it runs Windows 8 but for a personal phone I have no problems with it as it's a big step up from Symbian and to be honest I actually like the interface. Hopefully there will be as many custom camera apps for it then there are for the 808.
I'm sure your iPhone 5 takes great pictures and most of you think this is just gimmicky. Nokia used to be my favorite mobile company but lately they haven't produced anything that I would call worthy of note. This thing however is pretty mind blowing, speaking from experience with the 808, it takes amazing pictures and the 1020 just improves on that formula with an even better camera and UI, so I am going to award Nokia by purchasing one. I don't want to see Nokia go the way of the Dodo bird. I shudder to think of a world with just iOS and Android in it.
Excellent review. Can I buy the camera without the phone? Nokia should come out with a version without the phone, and pack some more features to it.
Not quite. Large pixel densities don't cause blurryness, but they create heat, which causes noise, especially at high ISOs.
Although 41MP is too large in any case, I wonder what the sensor size is. If it's DX or larger, that would be interesting.
But how much storage is on this phone? Does it have removable storage? If not, you're going to fill it up pretty fast.
zoetmb:
You didn't address my point correctly.
Do you know what I meant by "point spread function"? This is how much a hypothetical infinitesimal point of light (or ray) gets spread out (defocused) by the optics. Focus is never perfect, and that is an optical physical fact. If the pixels on your sensor array are dense enough that more than a few fit inside the spread function, then you have "blurry" pixels at whatever zoom level it takes to distinguish that many pixels. This happens by 5 MP for most phone camera lenses. If you then squeeze more into that same spread function, then all you are adding is more "blurry" pixels. That is what I meant by the above, and I stand by it. Having said that...
What is interesting about this phone is that it has a larger lens than most, so potentially a narrower point spread function. I didn't realize that when I first replied to this thread. Also, I do appreciate the fact that one can reduce sensor noise by oversampling and then co-adding neighboring pixels, and the white paper shows that that is what Nokia is trying to do.
But anybody that thinks this is going to yield 41 million sharp pixels is duped by the specs.
Comments
What this means is that even Apple should follow suit, allow using to ZOOM in on what we want to shoot.
It's not about saving huge files. I don't want a bunch of 48MP files saved on a phone. But I do want to zoom. Who doesn't?
- Engadget June 26, 2012 review of Nokia 808 with PureView 41MP sensor
But I guess y'all know better...
It would make digital zoom useable though.
Interesting, but nothing to sway me away from my iPhone.
I like my 4S and 5 photos and look forward to the 5S camera improvements, but a 41MP super camera is no proverbial "killer app" to make me dump Apple.
And I do not see the appeal of 50mb pics eating up all my storage space.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol
Incorrect. It's not the only factor by a mile, but what you say is factually incorrect if all other aspects are identical.
Wrong. It's especially wrong if "all other aspects are identical".
The quality of a sensor with regards to color, resolution etc is based on how many photons (light particles) land on a single sensor receptor.
With higher megapixels, each receptor becomes smaller, so less photons land on it. This results in images with more noise and artefacts, and worse color.
That's why "full frame" or even DX sized cameras have better image quality than compact cameras with smaller sensors, and medium format cameras (huge sensors) even better.
There is a sweet spot for every sensor size with regard to megapixels. After that sweet spot, more megapixels mean worse images.
The only way to raise this sweet spot is to improve the sensor electronics (lower the noise barrier, etc). This is the reason a newer camera model has better image quality than the previous generation, other things being equal. This only takes you so far, though. You also have the laws of physics and optics to stop you.
Now, in particular, 44MP on a cellphone sized camera (heck, even on a compact camera), is just marketing for idiots.
It has no relation with reality, optics, etc whatsoever.
To give you some context, $6000 full frame cameras that professionals use, with 10 or more times the sensor area, and much finer optics, are only around 26MP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdkennedy1
"41MP".
Specs. It's how "tech enthusiasts" measure penis length.
My Nikon D800, which only clocks in at a measly 36MP, is clearly an "inch short."
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
It would make digital zoom useable though.
In-camera cropping, for those of us with a photography background.
And your theory of useable crops is true only if the optics can hold up their end of the image capture pipeline. What's this thing packing? A Hasselblad lens?
I bought the Nokia 808 the day it was released here in Switzerland. Until yesterday it was by far the best camera phone on the market, iPhone and all. The phones OS, well that's a different story, though for a Symbian phone it wasn't all that bad, the battery was nothing short of amazing. That amount of control you have when shooting in manual mode rivals that of most point and shoot cameras. Not to mention that it takes pictures extremely quick. There is also a pretty good sized community and following as of yet for the Nokia 808 that has improved not only the camera app but have released some very useful and creative camera apps.
The 808 takes 41-megapixels' worth of information and condenses it down to 5MP. In essence, 7 individual pixels are collated together and combined into one "superpixel". This process means you benefit from the same amount of light that would hit the much larger pixels of a 5MP sensor, if it fitted into the same physical footprint. You benefit from solid low-light performance and at the same time you can remove noise and digital artifacts from individual pixels through the oversampling process. It's all done at the raw sensor information level too, but its lightning quick utilizing a dedicated processor to get the job done. The result is a super crisp 5MP image that's much sharper, with greater detail than an ordinary 5MP sensor can achieve.
Though tons of megapixels is all great and all, it's really the size of the image sensor and quality of lens that makes the best photos, here is the lens assembly for the Nokia 808;
Samsung, Sony (ie iPhone) and then Nokia is at the bottom. The Nokia 808 and 1020 also allows for shooting in RAW and has optical stabilization, again for a camera phone, that's just cool. As the cliché goes, the best camera in the world is the one at your fingertips and I've taken terrific pictures that I wouldn’t have snapped otherwise because I simply wouldn’t have had a dedicated camera with me, merely an ordinary smartphone. And the 808 is no ordinary smartphone.
Coming back to Nokia 1020, I am extremely excited about getting my hands on one, I have already promised the 808 to my daughter. Yes it runs Windows 8 but for a personal phone I have no problems with it as it's a big step up from Symbian and to be honest I actually like the interface. Hopefully there will be as many custom camera apps for it then there are for the 808.
I'm sure your iPhone 5 takes great pictures and most of you think this is just gimmicky. Nokia used to be my favorite mobile company but lately they haven't produced anything that I would call worthy of note. This thing however is pretty mind blowing, speaking from experience with the 808, it takes amazing pictures and the 1020 just improves on that formula with an even better camera and UI, so I am going to award Nokia by purchasing one. I don't want to see Nokia go the way of the Dodo bird. I shudder to think of a world with just iOS and Android in it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
Specs. It's how "tech enthusiasts" measure penis length.
My Nikon D800, which only clocks in at a measly 36MP, is clearly an "inch short."
Oh baby, it's how you use it that counts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL
From what I've seen, it takes amazing photos for a phone. Take a look before whining about mega-pixels.
Rich, if you read the above thread, you'll see that the same quality (amazing) photos could be had for far less pixels. The large number of pixels limit how many the camera/phone can hold and how fast then can be sent out from the device. So, 41 Mp is a bad thing and in the end, just marketing.
Now all that said, if Nokia wants to make themselves a niche, marketing the device as a good camera-phone instead of a good smart phone is an interesting idea. The fact the phone is weighed down with Windows 8, and there are no apps to speak of, means Nokia needs something to make up for the shitty OS and lack of apps. Perhaps if they made an optional decent lens attachment that would weigh as much as the phone and triple the thickness of the assembly, they might attract some attention. Without that, they will only appeal to the ignorant and be shunned by those who know optics.
Wow, I bet if Apple used this technology in their iPhone 5s or 6 it would be hailed as the next revolutionary option and you wouldn't question it one bit. Have you even been to any of the shutter bug blogs, the Nokia 808 almost always get's high praise from the, "who know optics" crowd . Yes the new Nokia 1020 runs WIndows 8 but the OS isn't bad, it's actually pretty intuitive and all of the mainstream apps are available; Evernote, Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, News; CNN, Engadget, Pulse, News 360, games; Modern Combat 4, Asphalt 7, Armed!, ect. What apps are you looking for that aren't in the Windows Store. I don't have a Windows 8 phone yet but my 13 year old son does and he has the exact same apps that my daughter and husband have on their iPhone. He especially enjoys the Xbox Live app so he can keep in touch with friends and arrange weekly battles with his Halo clan and uses Xbox Glass for his games.
I'm not comparing Windows 8 to iPhone here, I'm just saying that there is absolutely nothing wrong with people using this mobile OS. Except for the lack of a file manager it's actually a pretty decent OS and I will enjoy it when my new Nokia 1020 arrives early next month.
The Nokia 808 has proven that Pureview isn't just a gimick, the burst mode for example at 8MP takes between 3 - 5 pictures a seconds, I have never seen that kind of speed with the same picture quality on any cell phone. The new 1020 even has hardware image stabilization and hardware zoom. I have played with almost every native camera app that exists, the Nokia's blows them all away by a huge margin. There is even a developers kit just for the camera app so you can add your own functionality. National Geographic has issued them to their field photographers and has even developed an app for the phone because of how they felt about this phone.
I'm sure your very happy with your phone and it takes great photos but this is on another level, itis a unique camera phone that honestly does what Nokia is marketing.
Just for fun take the phone out of your pocket and take a picture as fast as you can, by the time you get to your phone app I would have already taken 3 pictures that have begone syncing with my Skydrive and Instagram.
These are neat,
Now you have the means to spam your own Mac/Win/Linux-PC to uselessness in no time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic
Wow, I bet if Apple used this technology in their iPhone 5s or 6 it would be hailed as the next revolutionary option and you wouldn't question it one bit.
I bet if you read the thread you would see that no one is complaining about the image quality, but the marketing use of 41MP. If Apple did this, they would get flamed as well, but Apple would not. They would advertise 5MP using 'SuperPixels' and then explain what a super pixel was, which is 41MP of data pushed into a 5MP output while allowing filtering of artifacts and distortion.
The fact that this is NOT a 41MP output, but is advertised as a 41MP camera while knowing that people will assume that megapixels means the same megapixels in every other camera sold. Maybe Intel should start offering 12GHz processors instead of 4-3GHz processing cores?
Have you used a Nokia 808?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDW
So far, I've not read any intelligent comments about the pixel density of this camera. Folks, pixels do matter. They do make a better photograph, and here's why. How the heck are you going to put a zoom lens inside a thin phone? You aren't. So to compensate, you let your users Digitally Zoom. You can then save a 5MP photo, zoomed in like you had a real telephoto, and your photo will look great (not stupid like the software interpolated low-MP cameras do it).
What this means is that even Apple should follow suit, allow using to ZOOM in on what we want to shoot.
It's not about saving huge files. I don't want a bunch of 48MP files saved on a phone. But I do want to zoom. Who doesn't?
And your comment is not intelligent either. Zooming (actually cropping) is only one aspect. As I previously wrote, high pixel densities cause heat and heat causes noise, especially at high ISOs. So while you gain resolution, you then lose it due to the noise. Each new generation of sensors are better in this regard, but 41MP in a 1/2.5" or even a 1/1.65" sensor is overkill. 1/1.65", which is what the Leica D-Lux 4 and 5 used (but with a 10.1MP sensor) is only 11.9% the size of an APS-C sensor and 5.2% the size of a full frame sensor. Besides, if you can't get a "raw" format out of the phone (and I suspect you can't), then it's a bit moot anyway. I suspect the camera is using very high compression ratios to output the JPG, which will also decrease quality, although increase storage space.
In any case, the true test is in the results and until people get their hands on the phone, we don't know whether it's good or bad.
Note that Nikon's top of the line D4 body ($6000), is only 16MP and in DX (APS-C) mode, it's only 6.81MP. Canon's top of the line EOS-1Dx ($6800) is 18.1MP. It's their lower priced cameras that have higher megapixel counts. The MP counts are relatively low because these bodies are used by pros who need the highest quality. Which means being able to shoot at high ISOs with low noise. A highly packed sensor can't do that.
While developing a tiny 41MP sensor is quite an accomplishment (and I wonder whether Nokia developed it or whether it's third party and if so, who accomplished it), this is not about quality. It's about being able to market the idea that it has this 41MP sensor because "if the number is bigger, it must be better", especially with macho men who have no real understanding of the physics -- you know, "my amp goes to 11" and all that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic
I bought the Nokia 808 the day it was released here in Switzerland. Until yesterday it was by far the best camera phone on the market, iPhone and all. The phones OS, well that's a different story, though for a Symbian phone it wasn't all that bad, the battery was nothing short of amazing. That amount of control you have when shooting in manual mode rivals that of most point and shoot cameras. Not to mention that it takes pictures extremely quick. There is also a pretty good sized community and following as of yet for the Nokia 808 that has improved not only the camera app but have released some very useful and creative camera apps.
The 808 takes 41-megapixels' worth of information and condenses it down to 5MP. In essence, 7 individual pixels are collated together and combined into one "superpixel". This process means you benefit from the same amount of light that would hit the much larger pixels of a 5MP sensor, if it fitted into the same physical footprint. You benefit from solid low-light performance and at the same time you can remove noise and digital artifacts from individual pixels through the oversampling process. It's all done at the raw sensor information level too, but its lightning quick utilizing a dedicated processor to get the job done. The result is a super crisp 5MP image that's much sharper, with greater detail than an ordinary 5MP sensor can achieve.
Though tons of megapixels is all great and all, it's really the size of the image sensor and quality of lens that makes the best photos, here is the lens assembly for the Nokia 808;
Samsung, Sony (ie iPhone) and then Nokia is at the bottom. The Nokia 808 and 1020 also allows for shooting in RAW and has optical stabilization, again for a camera phone, that's just cool. As the cliché goes, the best camera in the world is the one at your fingertips and I've taken terrific pictures that I wouldn’t have snapped otherwise because I simply wouldn’t have had a dedicated camera with me, merely an ordinary smartphone. And the 808 is no ordinary smartphone.
Coming back to Nokia 1020, I am extremely excited about getting my hands on one, I have already promised the 808 to my daughter. Yes it runs Windows 8 but for a personal phone I have no problems with it as it's a big step up from Symbian and to be honest I actually like the interface. Hopefully there will be as many custom camera apps for it then there are for the 808.
I'm sure your iPhone 5 takes great pictures and most of you think this is just gimmicky. Nokia used to be my favorite mobile company but lately they haven't produced anything that I would call worthy of note. This thing however is pretty mind blowing, speaking from experience with the 808, it takes amazing pictures and the 1020 just improves on that formula with an even better camera and UI, so I am going to award Nokia by purchasing one. I don't want to see Nokia go the way of the Dodo bird. I shudder to think of a world with just iOS and Android in it.
Excellent review. Can I buy the camera without the phone? Nokia should come out with a version without the phone, and pack some more features to it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoetmb
Not quite. Large pixel densities don't cause blurryness, but they create heat, which causes noise, especially at high ISOs.
Although 41MP is too large in any case, I wonder what the sensor size is. If it's DX or larger, that would be interesting.
But how much storage is on this phone? Does it have removable storage? If not, you're going to fill it up pretty fast.
zoetmb:
You didn't address my point correctly.
Do you know what I meant by "point spread function"? This is how much a hypothetical infinitesimal point of light (or ray) gets spread out (defocused) by the optics. Focus is never perfect, and that is an optical physical fact. If the pixels on your sensor array are dense enough that more than a few fit inside the spread function, then you have "blurry" pixels at whatever zoom level it takes to distinguish that many pixels. This happens by 5 MP for most phone camera lenses. If you then squeeze more into that same spread function, then all you are adding is more "blurry" pixels. That is what I meant by the above, and I stand by it. Having said that...
What is interesting about this phone is that it has a larger lens than most, so potentially a narrower point spread function. I didn't realize that when I first replied to this thread. Also, I do appreciate the fact that one can reduce sensor noise by oversampling and then co-adding neighboring pixels, and the white paper shows that that is what Nokia is trying to do.
But anybody that thinks this is going to yield 41 million sharp pixels is duped by the specs.