vincent__l: Does the D810 fix the interpolated crappy live view, when zoomed in, from the D800 ? This makes manual focusing with live view very difficult with the D800.
Alec: I currently have a D800, and for tethered shooting using HDMI out to an external 24" monitor for manual focusing, I currently have to use an EyeFi card, because D800 won't simultaneously enable USB tether and HDMI output.
Is D810 able to do the latter?
Also on the video front, is it scaled from all pixels on the sensor or produced using line-skipping?
about the video, it looks like it's the same line skipping method as the D800... Watch the moiré at 0:22 and 0:34 :
"Google turns its attention to imaging on new Nexus 5"
and then further down, I read: "1/3.2-inch sensor"
After having played a bit in lightroom with these files, I can't believe they are from a smartphone ! Incredible. My 808 is a little bit jealous.
Jim Evidon: I've seen better images from an old Box Brownie. Cell phones are best kept to making phone calls and playing with apps.If you want to take photos and send them wireless, buy a cheapo camera with WiFi and knock yourself out.
ManuelVilardeMacedo: They both lack sharpness. I'm sorry for the people who think they'll make great shots with these expensive gadgets, but both of them are short on image quality. Yes, the 808 is better - at least if you can take your mind off the considerable levels of chromatic aberration -, but what's the point? For the price you'll be better off with an enthusiast compact camera like the Sony RX100.
iphone 5s vs lumia 1020 at the same output size (print): http://imgur.com/VjlQNaK
"they both lack sharpness"
Try to compare the 1020 and the 808 to all the other smartphones on this comparison tool, at "print" resolution (= all at the same size). The 1020 and the 808 are easily MUCH sharper than the competition, by a mile. And that's all that matters to me. 3mm more in thickness to get the best camera on a smartphone is absolutely worth it, to me. Your priorities might be different, though.
"most of them are meaningless and deeply uninteresting" ? Are you suggesting that the camera is responsible for that ? Please, tell us which camera takes "meaningful and interesting" photos on its own, thanks !
Guys, yes, the 808 is slightly better (in some situations), but it's also much thicker and it doesn't have OIS. I own the 808 and my father just got a 1020, and believe me, the thickness of the 1020 is much more "market friendly". And in low light and for videos, the OIS makes a big difference. High ISO on the 1020 is also better (sharpness is just a small part of image quality). Above 800 ISO, the 808 gets green shadows, whereas the 1020 keeps more "natural" colors throughout the brightness scale. And that's something visible already at small sizes.
Both cameras are lightyears ahead of the competion, relax. If you want something thinner, get an iphone or a samsung. If you want a great smartphone that replaces your P&S camera, get the 1020.
Good news ! Shows the confidence they have in their cameras. Let people do their processing if they want.
The video stabilization score is somehow surprising. A low 49 with hardware stabilizaion? And the iphone 5s has 54 ?
Having used and seen what the stability of the lumia 920 in video, I am a little perlpexed.
Keith Sinrod: Did Nokia fix preview vs. photo differences?
I have been using a Nokia Pureview 808 since last October.When it cooperates, the photos it takes are excellent.
Unfortunately, what you see on the LCD preview isn'tnecessarily what you'll get when you take the photo.Under certain dramatic lighting conditions which happenoften outdoors, the actual photo can be very under or overexposed, even though the preview was spot on. Aftermessing with exposure compensation, the photoopportunity is often missed.
Also on USA versions of the 808, Nokia doesn't allowthe "camera sounds" to be disabled. Nothing worsethan hearing the beep of focus confirmation andthe "click" of taking the photo!
The 808 could have been a great little street shooter, butthese 2 problems really kill it for me. I sure hope the Nokia1020 doesn't suffer from the same problems as the 808.
Please show the ISO selected and actual exposure compon the 1020.
Please get it right this time Nokia!
Strange, I don't have the problem that you mention from preview to photo on my 808 (I am not saying that you don't have a problem). The only thing that is (slightly) different on my preview ("liveview" image) compared to the final image is slightly more contrast (I read that they did it for visibility outdoors), but exposure is the same.
AstroStan: "The Lumia 1020 allows you to simultaneously shoot both a full-resolution capture and an oversampled, immediately shareable 5MP version "
That should say "undersampled" (re Nyquist sampling theory).
No.Capturing 41MP to get a 5MP result *is* oversampling. You sample more than what you need -> oversampling. The process of going from 41 to 5MP is called downsampling (which still is not the same thing as "undersampling").
duqov: 41MP is currently a feature that allows moderate zooming with a smartphone at good light. Not more and not less than that. Take it or leave it.
With the OIS of the 1020 it should be possible to get better zoomed videos and many low light shots should also become better.
Exactly, and that is already better than what you find on other smartphones (except the 808).
dual12: Absolutely horrible.
Compared to what? The even worse competition ? You did compare the samples at 5MP, right?
Daxs: Looks like real phone for wedding photographers! JOKE!Like some people said NOKIA is better Then 5D markII! Really BIG and GOOD pictures! NOKIA is some real JOKE! Phone with 41mp! Kids will like that!
Nobody said the Nokia is better than the 5DmkIII. They just showed that in that particular test, in good light, the Nokia 808 resolves more than the 5DmkIII. Sharpness and resolution are only a fraction of what makes image quality. You'd have to be silly to think that a smartphone can compete with a Full Frame camera (5DmkIII, D800, etc). Those comparisons are just a way of showing the amazing details one can capture with those 41MP Nokia, and that is undeniable. The end point is that those Nokia cameraphones are much better than any other cameraphone on the market, and that's already amazing. I own a D800 and a nokia 808. I know which one to use for what. PS: the D800 doesn't fit in my pocket.
rami: looks like an ugly surveillance camera results. very little to do with photography.
If the output from this camera is like an "ugly sruveillance camera", I can't image how you would qualify the cameras in the rest of the smartphone industry (except the Nokia 808). By the way, I hope you're not judging the full resolution images, but the 5MP downsampled ones.
philinnz: horrible noisy images even in good light. It seems it must be difficult to hold the camera level so you would lose 10mp straightening and cropping. I think I got better results 12 years ago with my old kodak dc-280
The point is to use it as a great 5MP camera which surpasses everything else in smartphone territory (except the Nokia 808). I agree that the full sized images don't look that good, but downsampled to 5MP, they are excellent.
At that price, it looks good. The iphone 5 at 3times the price has 8MP. Do you think 8MP vs 5MP on a smartphone makes a difference ?
jcmarfilph: Tsk... tsk... when will they learn that attaching a lens on a mediocre brick is useless. And will it fit in your pocket?
I'd rather carry my smartphone and use it as a phone and my bridgecam for taking pictures and be happy than making myself look like a dork.
Why should it be attached to a "mediocre brick" the rumor is about a module formed by lens + sensor. I don't see why that sensor should be worse than a bridge camera. The smartphone is only for commanding (processor + screen + UI), if I understood the concept correctly.