Dré de Man: 28mm equivalent is mostly boring for landscapes and cityscapes and way too short for almost all pictures of people. It's the one focal length I hardly ever use. It is very good though for egg head and other ugly pictures you can only excuse for by saying your phone manufacturer is smarter than you are.
So don't buy it.
For street photography, I think it's a good compromise.
As an occasional amateur photographer, I'm much more interested on the Panasonic CM1 cameraphone. I don't want another expensive camera whose sensor will become obsolete in a couple of years. I'm still happy with my old LX3 in this sense. I just want a LX3 packed inside a smartphone.
Sonyshine: Quite possibly the worst mobile handset to be launched in the last couple of years.
To me it looks better than the over-sharpened pictures from the S5, which shows a lot of halos. It also resolves more detail than the S5 as we can see by looking the moiré test rulers.
Just put a 808 Pureview sensor on a modern smartphone and take my money.
white shadow: Interesting. Looks like Panasonic is trying to come back to the mobile phone market after years of absence by introducing this devise. However, the price is a big hindrance to its return.
How many users will want such a camera on a smartphone? How good is this phone by itself? The Panasonic brand for smartphone is not well accepted at this moment. Too much risk for the new buyer. Is Panasonic coming back to this market to stay? Is this a one off product?
Panasonic was in the handphone business in the 90s but left after a few years.
I wouldn't by the first iteration of this device because it's priced pretty high. But I can imagine Sony, Samsung or Nokia/Microsoft bringing more affordable models in the future.
rfsIII: Yeee haaaa!!!! Finally, the phone of my dreams. As a person who shoots events from time to time and needs to upload photos to client websites while the event is happening, this camera will solve a lot of problems for me.
This is a compact premium camera WITH a smartphone. Think on journalists and serious amateurs.
Awesome. Panasonic always promoting new tendencies on photography. Remember LX3, GX1, GH1...
Hopefully other brands like Samsung and Sony will bring something in this line.
808 still wins. I have a Galaxy Note I (2011) and I'll only upgrade to a decent camera phone. Moving from the N8 to the Galaxy Note I lost a lot of fun taking pictures through the phone and I want to recover it.
TheScrambler: It's nice. It's small. It feels good and it's quality is nearly at full frame level. But should i really leave APSC-DSLR technology ? I really dont know...;-)
I want using my legacy lenses, so another brand new APS-C camera is more of the same c*** to me.
sblecher6sj7: Three of us performed a side by side test with a NikonD800, a Canon 60d and a Mamiya 645 Pro. The Mamiya was loaded with Kodak Portra color negative film. The pictures were taken with the cameras on a tripod and the focal lengths were chosen to give the same field coverage. The focal lenth of the Nikon Test shots was !.6 times the Canon and the Mamiya focal length was 1.6 times the Nikon. Then the Mamiya negatives were scanned with a Nikon Coolscan 8000 scanner. The Nikon D800 was best performer, and handily outperformed the Mamiya , and Canon 60D also was better than the Mamiya by a smaller margin. Both digital cameras were both much less noisy than the scanned negative. Since the image from the Mamiya doesn't require as much enlargement,it's still capable of making a big print, but not as good as the Nikon D800. The Mamiya can produce a bigger print than my old Canon 30D. Too bad the test written up in DP Review didn't include any DSLR's between the 40D and The D800.
I think film will never compete with DSLRs in the "gross noise count". Film will always look noisy for the new generation of photographers. On the other hand, film noise is something you can live with while digital noise is monotonous and therefore more disturbing as that pattern take your attention.
On the other hand, the Velvia textures on the metal cable at bottom of the test picture or that gray building at mid right shows that film still is a good option for texture maniacs like me.
Maybe a raw picture from D800 can be better processed, but considering only this review, I still prefer the film one at daylight.
To me the best performer in daylight was the Velvia one. I prefer preserving textures as nearly-random film noise isn't really annoying. This test shows two things: smartphone cameras are not that bad and film is still alive (for practicity you'd better using a D800 though).
I'm still waiting a better camera phone than Nokia 808. Lumia 1020 looks overprocessed and oversharpened.
Boring review... Lumia 1020 wins with a slight margin against S4Z although Nokia 808 has a way better camera for still pictures, albeit it's outdated. In videos, however, the competition is tougher.
Maybe we'll have a better cameraphone landscape when we'll have truly Nokia competitors. But at that time we'll have an even better Nokia phone - a Lumia 1120, maybe.
Currently, when you have a near-premium compact camera performance, you have to buy a Nokia. There aren't any other reasonable options.
Wouldn't the new iPhone 5S have a bigger 8MP sensor than the previous version? This article points to the same sensor size.
Nice! Hopefully it will perform as good as Galaxy S4.
"he feels that his iPhone gives him access to places that his DSLR never could"
In Brazil, even an iPhone is a bit risky. I prefer using a Nokia camera-phone or a premium compact camera which look more like "cheap consumer stuff" so I don't get annoyed by casual robbers.
I wonder if Detroit is really that bad or he is only taking pictures from the most degraded neighborhoods.
Oops409: Your best camera is the one you have with you.My A55 rarely leaves the house - 5% usageMy Nex-6 I take on trips - 70% usageMy RX100 when I think I might come across something interesting - 23% usage.My iPhone 4s is always with me - 2% usageI will order the 5s... Perhaps it will make 5% usage?
I used my N8 on nearly 90% cases. Now with a Galaxy Note I practically stopped taking pictures. However, it keeps making around 80% of my pictures.
The 20% remainder pictures I take with a Pana LX3 (18%) and a Canon F1 (analog, 1%). I have a DSLR (Pentax K100D) and other film gear which I only click the shutter button to assure they're still alive.
In short, a decent phone camera made me more productive and now I almost click nothing. A physical shutter button can be a good explanation to my current behaviour, but not only.
siberstorm27: That headline is a contradiction. iPhone AND photographers? Photographers have DSLRs, and turn their noses at the thought of using an iPhone. I don't know why you are comparing the iPhone to the 41MP of the Lumia 1020 or the 20MP of the Xperia Z1, when it is basic knowledge especially for a photography site that MP doesn't mean jack. Everybody here wants bigger pixels and bigger sensors. You know you are not writing for the dumb naive consumers who look at only MP count. That is not your audience. The iPhone 5S camera isn't any worse than anything else out there. Probably much better than those 1.1 micron 13MP shooters. The Lumia 1020 is a niche product and the Z1's 20MP photos don't look much better than lesser 13MP ones. Neither iPhone 5S or Z1 have OIS. It is still very competitive. Apple hasn't been known to be extraordinary innovative in cameras. I don't see them bucking the trend and pulling out some Lumia 1020 rival.
@TrojMacReady - Yes, I partially agree with you. I agree in the sense that HTC One's 4MP "ultrapixels" perform worse than most current high-end smartphones in all aspects (DR, noise, color accuracy and resolution).
On the other hand, Nokia N8 reportedly had better or - at least on par - DR and low-light performance than Nokia 808 and Lumia 1020, despite it had a smaller - but less dense - sensor than its newer brothers (although N8's sensor was pretty big even in the state of the art of mobile phones).
I don't like Lumia 1020 approach. Nokia 808 pixel density was already concerning having a big 1/1.2" sensor. There wasn't any room for increasing sensor density. But Nokia decreased pixel size in L1020 arguing that BSI sensor would compensate losses in pixel size. However, this approach visibly didn't work: L1020 performs virtually the same as a "modest" 13MP Galaxy SIV. In Nokia 808 I can see better picture quality comparing to Samsung's flagship phone though.
miketala: Was thinking yesterday that Apple is perhaps the most innovate camera maker in the world. For example, the 5s is the only camera in the world to have:1. dual flashes to help get proper white balance regardless of ambient light (1000+ variations of how the flashes fire).2. ability to take 10 pics/second, camera then chooses the best and potentially eliminates remaining motion blur using the remaining pics.3. ability to take slow-motion video (120fps at 720p) and, at any point in the video, speed that part of the vid to real time on the fly.
Not only are these new, but they're totally accessible and useful, even to the lay person.
Thom Hogan speaks directly on all of this at bythom.com.
If it only chooses the best-of-ten pictures as a software IS this would be the most dumb approach I would expect.
I presume that with a 64bit processor, Apple will use advanced algorithms for guessing how the picture will look with no motion blur, merging the ten pictures in only one, pairing or almost pairing with OIS performance.
Mikael Risedal: The ccd is from Sony, more pixels are always better, do not confuse sensor size and pixel pitch.= in plain english, the sensor size always matter and more pixels are a benefit
Suppose a sensor technology called X.If you have two sensors, one with 8MP and the other with 3MP, both with the same size and using the X technology, I would prefer the 3MP one because:
- 4K monitors are not so popular yet.- I prefer bigger dynamic range than highlight-clipped, sharper images;- Lower resolution in this context means better low-light performance;- I never print pictures taken from a mobile phone;- 3MP fits perfectly in a retina iPad.