Menneisyys: I've very thoroughly tested it on my (factory; no rooting) Nexus 7 2013 and found out the following:
- the new panorama support is GREAT, particularly if you enable maximum resolution (the default is high-res). Up until now, Google's implementation was a joke - far-far inferior to either Apple's one on the iPhone 4S+ or Samsung's implementation in their Android handsets. Even Nokia's WP (but not Symbian) implementation has been significantly better.
- blurring worked just GREAT in my tests. While some people did complain about it being slow(ish), I haven't noticed speed problems on my N7, which, while "only" having a 5 Mpixel sensor, has a, compared to the SD800, significantly slower CPU.
What's wrong? Most importantly, all manual modes have been removed, which is a BIG-BIG minus. There's no
- scene selection- manual WB and ISO setting- timer
The first two is particularly painful as, with the new Camera app, you in no way can force the system to shoot at high shutter speeds.
(EDIT: ignore; will re-upload the images soon)
BTW, a quick correction: "It then uses the captured information to create a 3-model" - you meant 3D, not 3.
Only manual exposure compensation has remained. (Which means that, in this regard, Android is still superior to iOS, where there's not even proper exposure compensation. See my writeup on the implications of this at http://www.iphonelife.com/blog/87/exposure-compensation-and-bracketing-bible if interested.)
Fortunately, some people at Android Police discovered Google may have not ditched these manual settings entirely and they may add them back some time in the future. (More info: http://www.androidpolice.com/2014/04/16/apk-teardown-advanced-camera-mode-photo-sphere-live-wallpaper-and-more-hiding-in-google-camera/ )
I've very thoroughly tested it on my (factory; no rooting) Nexus 7 2013 and found out the following:
Elaka Farmor: How can RX100 (with its much smaller sensor and more megapixels) have better dynamic range and color depth, and a two years old olympus with a smaller sensor (E-PM2) have much better low light ISO??http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-PowerShot-G1-X-Mark-II-versus-Sony-Cyber-shot-DSC-RX100-II-versus-Olympus-PEN-E-PM2___941_896_840
Ouch... that limited DR is very bad news... no Mk II for me, it seems. Hope the successor to the RX100 introduces a new lens starting at 24mm. Up until then, I stick with my Nokia 808 as my daylight P&S.
DPReview folks, want to post on Google's new stock Google Camera client? I've very thoroughly tested it on my N7 2013 and found the new pano and blur mode to be GREAT. Pano was practically useless in the previous version; in the new one, it's orders of magnitude better.
Too bad most manual settings are removed, incl. scene selection (only exp. comp. is left) but Google may add them back as is also pointed out by http://www.androidpolice.com/2014/04/16/apk-teardown-advanced-camera-mode-photo-sphere-live-wallpaper-and-more-hiding-in-google-camera/
Menneisyys: Still image quality key areas:
Photo Artifacts:Z2: 68 pts808: 89 pts
Noise:Z2: 84 pts808: 88 pts
Texture:Z2: 83808: 84
Color:Z2: 74808: 80
I don't really see a lead for Z2 here. Do any of you?
What did make the Z2 "better" overall? In addition to video (Z2: 73; 808: 68), autofocus (Z2: 84; 808: 73). Something that, assuming you have time for pre-focusing, has no effect on the overall IQ.
And something that is plain unacceptable and really questions the entire testing methology: Flash:Z2: 85 pts808: 81 pts
Only this is what I can agree with, knowing the relatively low DR of the 808:
Exposure and Contrast:Z2: 88808: 78
Nevertheless, in _all_ other still areas the 808 either beats the Z2 or has a dubious loss (see Flash above), autofocus aside. This is, however, only one area and, when shooting low-DR stuff and with plenty of time for repeating your shots, this won't really be an issue. In all other, key areas (color / texture / PA /Noise) the 808 wins.
... areas that DxO states the 808 is worse than the Z2. In all other areas, the 808 is better according to DxO.
Yup, I know the final score also includes video - the one I don't at all use on my 808 because even my "old" iPhone 5 is, particularly under low light, significantly better.
However, in this very comment section, many (e.g., Petrogel) seem to have forgotten this very fact and they state the 808 has been completely beaten and the Z2 has better overall IQ than the 808. Which is certainly not the case if you take a closer look at the still IQ score pairs I've cited below. It's only at the
- VERY dubious flash (I really don't know how in Earth can DxO consider the Z2's flash better than that of the 808!) and
- the exposure
- the autofocus (not an issue if you pre-focus - I've shot tens of thousands of stills with my 808 and the percentage of keepers weren't significantly worse than with my iPhone 5 with shots using manual pre-focusing. It's only with blind autofocus (e.g., with selfies) that the likes of the iPhone 5 have delivered _significantly_ better results.)
Juandante: It is very funny to see the amount of Fanboys here. Anyone agrees that the Samsung Galaxy S4 with its small 1/3 sensor have same if not better IQ than the old N8.
Same goes for this ancient 808 with tiny squeezy pixels, this is technology.
"i've never liked Dxo's sensor ranking as i've never liked the 808 fanboys pointing out at me the first place 808 had at the Dxo "top 10""
Try shooting a bit with the 808 and the Z2 and you'll see how immensely better the 808 is, IQ-wise.
Menneisyys: Speaking of the 808's flash, yesterday, I made tons of open-air "social" shots in the evening, with the 808. The subjects were typically at least 5-6 meters away. Everything was on auto, incl. the flash. I used CameraPro Qt in its 41 full-sensor Mpixel mode.
The 808 chose ISO 640...1000 for the shots. Of course, I did manual focusing before each shot. All the shots were good (again, if you carefully pre-focus, there won't be focus problems) and the subjects (people) pretty well lit by the Xenon flash. The, in addition to the (possibly) high brightness, other advantage of Xenon flash, namely, movement freezing, also worked just fine.
Now, do the same with the Z2's cr@ppy LED flash...
On the weekend, I've made over 700 full-sensor (41 Mpixel) 72% JPG snaps with the 808 (around 380 each day - with a fully topped battery, that's around the maximum available with CameraPro Qt with GPS on, with very-very moderate Flash use.)
99.9% of the shots didn't exhibit any focussing problems (of course, I pre-focussed every time). Only the camera shake turned out to be a problem with shots under the shutter speed of 1/30s. Tack-sharp images, albeit a bit of lacking in DR at times.
This all means this phone is a hell of a (stills - I don't use it for video, for which, apart from the lack of stereo / high-dynamics audio and significantly wider FoV, my iPhone 5 is much better) camera. The Z2 just can't produce not even similar, let alone better, IQ. As has also been proved by the DxO review, as I've proved in the test breakdown below.
Still image quality key areas:
Speaking of the 808's flash, yesterday, I made tons of open-air "social" shots in the evening, with the 808. The subjects were typically at least 5-6 meters away. Everything was on auto, incl. the flash. I used CameraPro Qt in its 41 full-sensor Mpixel mode.
Dominick101: DXO lost all their credibility which is for sure. Look into the fine details of their scores between 808 and Z2 and you will see how mismatch their comparison is. If you look further into the scores of iphone5s and 1020, you will, too, be shocked. DXO being a reputable site puts out bias rubbish scores which are most of the time subjective to the tester/user.
Dominick101: 808 is still king when it comes to IQ, period.
Marcus Antonius: Does the Z2 offer full manual control like the Nokia 1020 or 1520? Does the Z2 offer shooting RAW? Does the Z2 offer OIS?No further questions your honor..
"Does the Z2 beat every phone in the DxOMark tests? Yes."
Wrong. See my detailed analysis.
The Z2 still can't beat the 808 in IQ, resolution and noise.
WRT speed and low-light video (particularly after switching to non-HD modes), the iPhone 5/5c/5s are significantly better than the 808. No contest there.
WRT still (and only still!) IQ, resolution and noise, the 808 is significantly better than ANY iPhones. No contest there.
In addition, the lens of the 808 is significantly wider than that of any iPhones, particularly when the latter shoot HD / full HD videos.
All this boils down to what you really need. Want a speedy cam or want to shoot in low light? Get an iPhone. Want as good still IQ, resolution and noise as possible? Get a 808.
I know the advantages of iPhone's camera well enough. (After all, I've written several camera apps and published tons of detailed articles on the iPhone cameras - see http://www.iphonelife.com/werner.ruotsalainen ) So I know there are areas (action shooting; autofocus speed; low-light video shooting etc.) where it's better than the 808.
When low-noise, high-detail shots are needed and you have time for careful manual pre-shooting setup, however, the 808 trounces the iPhone5.
No they didn't. See my detailed comparison of the color / texture / PA / Noise scores. Yes, FOUR *key* areas where the 808 has beaten the Z2.
"Menneisyys your repeatedly posts are one more prove of how hard is for you to accept the obvious"
YOu obviously haven't understood my detailed posts.