Photo by Jan Ras
Why not at local zoo? What's the point?
The rise of the (mini) apes has started! Who knew it would be in Thailand.
I see more monkeys than Thailand. I believe the tittle need to be change. It is called false advertising. It create a bad taste once you know that you have been mislead.
Like others said, another DPR disappointment. Trivial and not Thailand specific.
They are *kind* of cool pics. What really irritates me and obviously others is the title has almost nothing to do with the exclusively monkey content. There is a time an place for B&W and I think the Thai-In with an old Wat sort of makes it appropriate. They didn't all need to be B&W though. The heavy vignette use makes my head hurt. Should of just been a thread in Windows Phone talk or Black and White photography instead of a headline.
Just a lot of monkey business that could have been shot with any smartphone
Needs more vignetting..
I can't wait to see a successor to this camera centric phone. in particular, use a new snapdragon chip to push those pixels faster.
so basically lumia shoots with B&W and have heavy vignetting....oh come on...
Darn it! I hope they give me a full refund for my already prepaid Thai vacation.
This is it? I shoot DNG-RAW with my Lumia 1020 and for certain areas of photography it is a great tool. With the right processing the pictures can look like being shot with a real camera, even large prints look great.
But this set just doesn't proof the point of neither the DNG, nor the low noise or high resolution. It looks like another instagramed iPhone shots.
iphone have colors
I quite like these B&W pictures, there are a couple of young monkey portraits that work quite well, like all B&W for me they need printing and mounting. I would go 1,2,4 and 6 as a set and don't print to big, if the quality here is representative.
It's a shame one of those monkeys didn't grab his "camera" and run off with it!
Hahaha.... too funny!
...has inspired me to get out my box brownie.
Very trivial pictures... 8 out of 10 are monkeys. Why BW? Because the pictures are so trivial that the photog desperately needed something to make them interesting?P.S.: to Dpreview... next time I'll send you my holiday pictures, 8 out of 10 will be cats, but I'll take them with a Nokia and maybe you'll publish them too...
Don't be too harsh on DPR people. This must be part of their on-going Lumia marketing campaign - They probably didn't have much choice but to run with the cliche monkey photos.
Born and raised in Thailand. These images (except the last one with Thai sign) don't remind me of Thailand. Monkeys can be anywhere. The architecture could be somewhere anywhere in our neighboring countries.
If the headline was "Photographing monkeys in Thailand with..." then it would have been better.
Lived in Bangkok for a short 3 years and I think they're good photos but certainly not representative of Thailand. Perhaps a title change is in order.
I found only very few image represent Thailand, most of them are Monkey shoot to me, and can be happen everywhere, just wonder why editor choose these images to be preview here... Should we have some kind of screening before?, if small web feature these image maybe most people will understand, but when Dpreview choose to preview, I think should re-consider..., such a big site but very loose in screening
Unfortunately, that's what DPR has become nowadays. Quite disappointing actually. Very poor editorial choice.
The photos presented could have been taken anywhere using probably any cheap camera or phone. I am sure any photographer would have featured Thailand in a more interesting perspective than showing some monkeys. Using B&W on wildlife is also not the most interesting. B&W effect is better used on graphic images.
Great 1.3 mp BW, Lightroom edited photos.Those photos could have been taken from any low-end $ 90 phone-camera, and frankly i believe they are.
A series of monkey photos taken at a Thai ruin is hardly "Thailand". I was expecting a much broader coverage. Oh well...
The only drawback to the 1020 is it's DR and overall operational speed. The ignorance of some of the responses here is astounding. I am guessing that most of you don't realize that the sensor in the 1020 is larger than almost all point and shoot cameras including some of the higher end ones...never mind being larger than every other camera phone (except the original Nokia 808). The fact that I have a large sensor and RAW capabilities with me at all times and I don't have to carry an extra device is invaluable.
I bet all photographs are BW because color representation and noise are unacceptable.
I bet you never shot with a Lumia 1020.
@ipecacaEven cameraphones have an acceptable noise profile and color rendition when shooting in good light/daylight, which was apparently the case here.
Hi, I find many of these pics to be fascinating because of the strength of the subject. At the same time, I can't help being annoyed by this nonsense about smartphone photography. In ideal conditions of subject and light one can take interesting pictures with the lousiest of cameras but for consistently good photography smart phones are simply pitiful. There is plenty of people who are not interested in investing time and money in photography, and for them smart phones are just right. Like many others who truly love photography, I take pictures of Nature, landscapes, cityscapes, travel and people. I try to balance technology with technique (not to go crazy about gear) but should be out of my mind to visit a remarkable place like Thailand and rely exclusively on my smartphone camera. I don't buy the portability issue either because there is a choice of little cameras on the market that can do amazing work and fit in your pocket.
Couldn't agree more. A smart-phone camera would be an absolute last resort for me - quite apart from the image quality, things like the usability, ergonomics and image storage are additional "issues" with smart-phones.
Congratulations to smart-phone manufacturers for their clever marketing and convincing people to use smart-phones for photography!
The one huge benefit of smart-phones prevalence for "average Joe's" photography is that there will continue to be a commercial market for professional photographers using proper cameras
Yes good point, but we all know that. one thing you've forgotten is that you usually carry the phone cam everywhere. There are loads of places where brandishing even a compact would get you ejected from the premises. Check out my new Pentax Forum. http://www.thepentaxforum.co.uk
Hi, I do carry my Nikon P7800 with me everywhere and photograph in the New York City area anywhere without any problem whatsoever (in places where they do not allow photography you should not use your smart phone either). You just have to get into the habit of having a (smaller) camera with you all the time. There is nothing wrong if you do not, it just means that you don't have that level of dedication. As I already said, for a lot of people smart phone cameras are just right but they do not cut it as a consistently capable photographic tool. This is supposed to be a site for people who truly love photography and articles like these, while fashionable, should not be taken into consideration
Especially on vacancy a lot of people, even professional photographers are tired of taking,tons of equipment with them. Maybe even a better smartphone, respectively a better smartphone cam, is a little bit very puristic. On the other hand, most of my vacancies I have left the big FF-DSLR at home, and have taken an inferior coolpix or later on my amazing Sony RX100II with me. And once I have videoed with my Nokia Lumia 920, and nobody has believed that it was taken with a smartphone. DSLRs are really superior for sports, extreme wide angle or Tele, AL, etc. For standard situation compacts and,good smartphones can be in deed sufficient.As conclusion I would say, if I paid up an,expensive,trip to Thailand at least I would take my Sony, nothing inferior. For photosafari at Africa of course professional equipment.
What you intend as "photographed"? Shooting is a legittimate action, every body could shoot what ever he want, but this is a photography site, here we speak, read, think, study, show and look photos, not shoot.I'm tired to see the term photography abused. Here we have some poor shoot of some monkeys in Thailand, here there isn't any photography of thayland. I know hardware industries spent a lot of money, but photography is not made by the hardware, is made by the photographer.Actually also the less efficient piece of equipmente is usefull to take photos (cellular phone, small video cameras, notebook cameras), it's correct to show "real world samples of a Nokia Lumia, but don't call this shoots: "photos", are simple turistic shoot with a poor composition that is unacepptable to day. At the presents days also a child has to shoot a well composed image).I hope to never see again a similar think, here. Best regards and thank You
here is a color monkey pic I captured using the older Nokia 808
I think it is utterly stupid and pointless to intentionally choose inferior equipment without any reason.
And those B&W pictures lack tonal range, contrast and sharpness which makes good B&W pictures look awesome..
Yeah but if he took a conventional camera its likely he wouldn't be mentioned here on DPReview or any where else.
"I think it is utterly stupid and pointless to intentionally choose inferior equipment without any reason."
Fair point, but a great reason is that you're far more likely to have a phone cam with you. Check out my new Pentax Forum. http://www.thepentaxforum.co.uk
A bit off the topic, but these monkeys seems lack of nutrition, and do not looks well at all. No?
the nastiness here is over the top. there are several nat geo photogs who used the 1020 (dont know if they still are). i think they enjoyed the challenge. i doubt anyone has claimed the 1020 or any other phone cam is the be all and end all. annie leibovitz nonetheless praised the iphone camera. well, it's true, if it's good enough for annie leibovitz, it may not be good enough for those without her talent. maybe that's what's sticking in everyone's craw.
"Negative" comments here are usually black and white! Ironical, isn't it? :)
Black and white or color. Images are fine for subject. I would image an eight year old would be able to shoot a nice photo with an easy as pie camera,or I mean phone or was that toaster. The pictures quality is very low. Some photographer in 1930 would get better looking images. Sensors the size of ant's eye are not going to make for great images. Have your fun with your toasters, I mean phones taking "pictures". It is just overload to point of million monkeys at million typewriters, I mean Laptops will sooner or later write War and Peace. Were so sorry uncle Ansal.
there's always room for optional retro b&w "style" images, albeit now digital and near-focus free (high dof of tiny apertures) to match consumer pocket disposable cameras of the bygone film era
ditto: color with creative digital filter effects
nothing wrong really, nor less creativebut predictably high dof=smartphone photography
Once and for all- camera phones will get better and better. For some they will be the greatest thing since sliced bread. For others they will never take the place pf digicams. I personally consider them a waste of good editorial space on this site. That, as they is what makes horse races. VRR
More likely, our photographic taste will decline faster, adjusting to the mediocracy that accompanies any "professional" photography work. The shots above are mediocre at best, just as any other phone snap.
Why all of them is Black and White?
These things are beginning to get a bit tiresome. We are all by now well aware that phones now have decent compact cameras incorporated, and we know reasonable IQ can be obtained with compact camera.
So here is a service of monkeys in Thailand, why do we care what was used to take the pictures?
These photos confirm my worst fears; that there's some real monkey business behind this whole smartphone photography trend.
I have nokia 1020 and have to say this post is really lacking the quality I've use to expect from your site. The pictures are OK, but not worth a blog post IMO.
Honestly, going to Thailand and ending up taking pictures in black and white is the stupidest idea possible!!It is like some stupid idiot who would decide to still watch a black and white TV today when there are now only color TVs available, not to mention 1080p color TVs!!
More, these pictures would be SO MUCH BETTER IN COLOR!!!
There is this false idea (most of the time even snobbish, falsely "hip" idea) that quality pictures ought to be in black and white! Wrong!! It is much worse when a good picture is in black and white than if it would have been in color.Why? We live in a world full of colors, WE DO NOT LIVE IN A WORLD THAT IS BLACK AND WHITE!!!!!!
When I see black and white pictures from a photographer, I think to myself "another idiot who thinks he wants to pretend being an "artistic photographer" by using black and white pictures instead of color pictures!!!"
Thanks for sharing anyway these pictures but I stopped watching them as soon as I saw that they were in B&W!!
Your arrogance astounds me. Do you realize that many very significant and compelling b/w photos very produced 1940's onward, when color stock was being used? And of course our reality has always been color. To pigeon-hole all contemporary b/w as "hipster" is misinformed, ignorant of b/w conceptual potentials in the here and now.
Strange that you should reply with a black and white argument!
The Lumia 1020 shoots in RAW so I wouldn't cry too much about the photographer being "dumb" enough to only take black and white photos.
He's right though. 90% of b&w use out there is just contrived worthiness, riding on the other 10%'s quality.
Here is my 'Photographing TOKYO with the Nokia 808 PureView' https://www.flickr.com/photos/partyzane/sets/72157635085002579/
I was about to say! isn't that what flikr and 500px are for? LOL
nice pics btw :)
That's a good set. Cut it down from 130 to about 12, and you'd have a really great set!
Oh well, at least we got some good cockfights out of this.
When you feel the need to apply vignetting to all or most of your photos, STOP!
Awesome pictures and shows how good smartphones are. I love taking pictures with my iPhone. The iPhone just makes me feel creative in an Emo sort of way.
I have an iPhone too, and I use it for useless crap. Just like this photoblog.
You know, not every photo had to be B&W. Some photos work better B&W, but others work better with color.
First of all, thanks for sharing these interesting and nice photos. I like them!
Secondly, the eyes and mind behind a camera are what makes 90% of a picture; the camera gear itself accounts for certain limitations, such as operational speed (e.g. slow AF may let you miss some shots, and the DoF is naturally very large with small sensor cameras). That being said, it is absolutely possible to make stunning pictures with modern cameraphones, within the boundaries of those above mentioned limitations. Some of my best pictures I have taken with a Nokia N8 cameraphone; not because its better gear than e.g. a dedicated DSLR/MILC but because its a camera you literally ALWAYS carry with you.
Thirdly, I really don't know what to make of all the negative comments posted below. Some people seem to have lost all their politeness. For example, people complaining about the title and pics not representing entire Thailand but a small part of it - come on guys, really?? Really???
continued:That all being said, I wish the photos posted here were of higher resolution, considering the Nokia 1020 provides 5MP worth of pics (with pixel binning) alongside the full 38-something MP pics (max resolution).
The B&W conversion is a matter of taste. The way it was performed in these pictures may not be liked by everyone, but it was the photographer's preferred way to convey the characteristic impression of scenery he saw with his eyes.
Some people have complained about the composition / fraiming. You have to consider that these pics have been done with fixed wide angle lens camera! So yeah, try to get close enough to fast moving or nervous monkeys with a wide-angle lens and then try to stage everything in order to get a great composition. It's almost impossible. That's why wildlife photography is dominated by lenses with long focal lengths. Considering these HUGE limitations, I find the composition of the pictures actually very good!
Nokia have been caught too many times faking footage using DSLR and pretending it's a mobile. Why should we trust this at all?
The fact it's a Windows Phone is enough for me not to go anywhere near it full stop. Anyone foolish enough to believe this footage without checking out results for themselves really deserves to be lumbered with Microsofts failed mobile.
@mgillespieYes, that's true. I remember Nokia having been caught with their pants down, when they advertised their new optical image stabilization system in one of their Lumia phones (I think it was the 920) and it turned out they indeed used a DSLR rig.Nonetheless, even if posting those pics of monkeys from Thailand has been an advertisement stint for Nokia, it does not take away the message that modern cameraphones are capable of some serious photography. While I think that Nokia has set some benchmarks for cameraphones, any other modern smartphone can take pretty good pictures, if used in the right way (e.g. iPhone, the Sony smartphones, Samsung Galaxy etc). I still think that fixed wide angle lens systems (such as virtually ALL smartphones) are NOT exactely the best choice for wildlife photography, but nonetheless, the pics posted here were not bad at all in my opinion.
The bitter pettiness of the most "popular" comments on this article perfectly illustrates the pathetic state of amateur photography (or, preferably as a category: camera ownership) these days. Small wonder the majority of talented members of DPR left the site long ago .
This article and the photos presented must be a joke. If one has not been to Thailand and is reading this only, you may think that Thailand is just a miserable country inhabited with only monkeys.What is DPR trying to do to publish such a post?
I think desire a poor choice of title, most are savy enough not to confuse this as fully representive of Thailand.
Really, who would take it for representative. If i see a documentary about grizzly bears in the Rockies, i will also not take them for the typical sole inhabitants of that country.
And I think America is full of flashing neon signs!
Much of the commentary here stands as simply petty territorialism, representing weak defenses of expensive equipment. And the comments relating to the titling of the article have little to do with the merits of the photography, nor does the resolution provided; both things are not the decisions of the photographer. Criticism of the photos themselves are valid opinions expressed in a frank manner. Fair enough. But despite my potential minor criticisms relating to processing (perhaps a bit heavy handed use of vignetting and the like), these stand head and shoulders above most members' wildlife imagery. They represent, what is in the contempory environment, a bit more of a fresh take on subject matter in a formal regard. I've looked at the work of many whom criticize so vehemently. Quite honestly their work undermines credibility.
Defending expensive equipment? The article is about a smartphone that itself isn't cheap. Identical pictures could have been made with a camera a quarter of the price of the Nokia 1020, or with a smart phone half of its price.
Many people have views on art, that does not mean we are or should all be artists to have a view and we don't dismiss the effort either - he's a professional thus we have, not unreasonably, expectations.
David, I regret framing it in that manner. I very much believe, aided by a respectful articulation, all opinions should be considered valid - art is certainly subjective. However, my observations on this site tend to re-enforce my opinion that those not active as photographers often make derogatory declarations, the likes of stating something to be "crap", "pointless", "worthless". That type of declaration is quite different than expressing their preference. And that behavior has been common in comments on other artist features.
Only this article is not an artist feature. It's a gear feature.
It would be naive to think that much of does not cross over to commentary on the skill of the photographer. And, in all fairness, other than standard testing of gear, the gear will envitably be seen to some degree in the context of the photographer using it.
And the territorialism in defense of expensive equipment is more intended as a reference to those defaulting to the likes of FF, despite their work not really warranting it. The perception that professional's use, exclusively, this level of camera (and that is a common misconception) should be corrected. I have been in several exhibitions along side artists preferring gear, modest in price but fully capable of meeting their needs.
On the DPReview home page for this feature it reads, "It would seem that a trip somewhere as exotic as Thailand would require a pro camera and a heavy bag of lenses." In my opinion this is an inaccurate statement. The phone was used to photograph one very photogenic location inhabited by monkeys. It was not used to photograph Thailand -- the whole country. And what is the end product -- files of a size and quality the phone was capable of producing. So, again in my opinion, the writer of the feature could have provided a more precise description such as: Here are some photographs of monkeys in Thailand taken with a phone. Of course framing it in a DSLR vs phone context it will garner more comments and views from the "There's something wrong on the Internet" crowd to which I guess I am a member as proven by this post.
One can travel light with a point and shoot, or even a small DSLR with a few small sized primes.
full resolution of Lumia 1020 photos is 7136x5360, full resolution of my Olympus E-M5 is 4608x3456 so size of Lumia 1020 photos is more than enough for printing that you wouldn't differentiate which photo of the same subject is taken with Lumia 1020 and which with proper camera.
Resolution alone doesn't make the entire picture.you can have a large pixel count and very little actual detail.
@ electrophoto -i responded regarding Dan Wagner's jibe on size and quality of Lumia 1020 files, not the content of the photos
Umm.. so what exactly these photos are doing on the DPR top page?
Well, it is of course not nokia advertisement - is it?(again).
Now, that is a good question :-)