I've handled a broad strokes comparison of the two 41 megapixel camera flagships of the smartphone world before, notably here (when I declared them roughly equal in merit though with very different processing pros/cons) and here (as part of a four way test, but with very similar conclusions), but what I wanted to do here was to push them both to the limits in real world low light situations. Would the benefits of Optical Image Stabilisation outweigh that of a larger sensor? Would a BSI sensor compensate for a smaller Xenon flash? Is the hardware oversampling engine from the Nokia 808 missed on the Lumia 1020?
You know, the more the world centres in on large touch-only smartphones, the more I continue to appreciate the genuinely different hardware we've had in the modern age in the Symbian world. Yes, the OS is effectively now frozen in stone (though, despite yesterday's buy-out news, Accenture will still hopefully be under contract to provide support/patches etc. for another two years at least), but there's really very little in the smartphone world that can compete with the 2011 Nokia E6, with its 'QWERTY candybar' form factor. Here then, for your consideration (and celebration) are five under-appreciated design features, over and above the highlights we've covered before. And perhaps extra reasons why you might like to buy up an E6, even if as a backup smartphone or for your 'collection'(!)
Burst photos are 'in' at the moment, and rightly so. While no use at all for traditional photography stars like coastlines and sunsets, when it comes to action shots of kids, pets and wildlife, it can be very helpful to take short sequences of photos so that you can pick the best one later - and hopefully be pleasantly surprised. Now, 'burst' mode is part of third party utilities, commonly, e.g. here, but I thought it worth highlighting that Belle FP2's Camera application includes a burst-like mode out of the box.
I've often proclaimed that the most natural way to use the Nokia 808 is in one of its 'PureView' modes, i.e. using the oversampling to produce the legendarily 'pure', noiseless pixels, rather than shooting in the somewhat artificial 'full' resolution modes, which expose the usual raw sensor pixels and their noise. However, when using the intuitive PureView zoom, you effectively end up down at the same 1:1 pixel use. Is this a problem? Exactly how far can you zoom in anyway? When should you use PureView zoom and when should you try to resist? Hopefully I answer these and other questions below.
As a regular compiler of smartphone 'top 5's in The Phones Show, I find myself regularly finding myself happiest at least one generation from the current bleeding edge of technology, somewhat oddly. Causing me to stop and muse - what you might not have considered is that there are far more benefits than disadvantages in doing this, not least of all in helping your wallet out a little.
While working on my review of the video capture side of the new Nokia Lumia 1020, I took the chance to do some back to back comparisons, on my phone jig, with its PureView predecessor, over on Symbian, the Nokia 808. The side by side footage is below, for your interest, covering quality, colours and zoom capability. Summary: the Lumia 1020 footage can be classed as 'better' overall, but there are pros and cons on each side and in the end it's the OIS system that pulls the 1020 ahead. Interesting stuff!
A couple of days ago, I pitted the Nokia 808 against the new Lumia 1020 directly, concluding that the latter's images were more processed but did have the advantage of being more immediately attractive to non-purists. In addition, there was the flexibility of the 'live' photos (of which more in our dedicated AAWP review part). My gut feeling is that these devices from Nokia are some way ahead of the chasing pack, so why not put this to the test?
In advance of the rest of our Nokia Lumia 1020 review coverage, I wanted to deliver an answer to the question that just about all of our readers are asking. Specifically, can the Lumia 1020, with its slightly smaller (though BSI) sensor and image processing differences, deliver images that are as good as those from the existing Symbian-based Nokia 808?
Hopefully somewhat topical, given the All About sites' imminent Lumia 1020 review coverage, I show here how the Symbian-running Nokia 808 PureView can also do the 1020's trick of shooting first and zooming/reframing later. Of course, this function has been in the 808 since its launch, and yes (Windows Phone fans) the facility isn't as slick or as fast as on the 1020, but it's still a capability that's worth exploring and highlighting.
Yes, an All About review series on the Nokia Lumia 1020 is coming in due course, but let me first squeeze in a quick four way imaging comparison, courtesy of sample shots from four relevant camera-centric smartphones from Matt Miller and his extensive Flickr gallery. As ever, I'll save you the trouble of downloading dozens of JPGs and working out which is which - see below for my crops from the Nokia 808 PureView, the Lumia 1020, the Lumia 925 and the HTC One.
.jpg){kind=icon}
