Previous news story    Next news story

41MP Nokia 808 smartphone hints at pixel-combining future for small sensor cameras

By dpreview staff on Feb 27, 2012 at 20:56 GMT

Nokia has made the startling announcement that it has created a 41MP smartphone, the Nokia 808 PureView. Interestingly, in most shooting modes the camera will output 3, 5MP or 8MP stills, rather than offering its full resolution - promising greater quality and offering some clever features. And this isn't a trade-show concept model, this is a product that will be offered to the public, though details of when and in which countries haven't been announced. What's interesting isn't so much the pixel count as how it's used, so we took a closer look.

The first thing to realize is that this isn't a standard 1/3.2" mobile phone sensor, it's an unusual and remarkably large 1/1.2" type (five times larger). In fact, it's almost three times the size of the sensors in most compact cameras. As a result, its photosites are the same size as those in most 8.2MP cameraphone but the 808 doesn't try to create an image of the same quality, 5 times bigger. Instead it oversamples the image and then combines pixels (using proprietary algorithms Nokia says optimize detail retention) down to a smaller size (though there is a special 'creative' shooting mode if you want the full resolution - 38MP at 4:3 aspect ratio, 36MP at 16:9).

Diagram showing the size of the Nokia 808 PureView's 1/1.2" sensor in comparison to those used in various compact cameras and mobile phones. A Four Thirds sensor is included for scale.

This pixel-combination means that noise (which occurs randomly) is averaged-out across multiple pixels (around 7-to-1 in the 5MP mode). The high native pixel count also means that it's possible to effectively 'zoom' by cropping into the center of the image and reducing the number of pixels you average together. Consequently the 808 can offer a roughly 2.8x 'zoom,' while maintaining 5MP output, despite having a fixed lens. The image quality will drop (since the noise is no longer being averaged out), but it does mean you get a roughly 28-78mm equivalent zoom, without the need to have moving lens elements, making the process fast and silent. It also means the lens' 15cm minimum focusing distance is maintained.

And, although the benefits of pixel-binning are lost as you magnify-in, because its photosites are the same size as contemporary 8MP phones, the resulting 5MP should offer the same pixel-level quality even at full magnification.

The same process allows 1080p video to be shot with a 4x cropping zoom.

Much like the Panasonic LX and GH cameras, the Nokia 808 uses an over-sized sensor to maximize the area used to offer different aspect-ratio images.

Despite the large sensor and comparatively large f/2.4 aperture, you won't get much control over depth of field (it'll be equivalent to setting an APS-C DSLR's kit lens to 18mm f/5.6). The depth-of-field control is reduced still further when magnified-in, because it doesn't gain the shallower depth of field that longer physical focal lengths usually bring. So, while it's an improvement over most phones, we wouldn't put much faith in the Nokia white paper's talk of bokeh.

The interesting thing for us, though, is not the Panasonic-esque multi-aspect-ratio use of the sensor, nor the astonishing pixel count, it's the idea of using that high pixel count to offer lower noise or non-interpolated digital zooming, while maintaining a constant image size. As Nokia's blog points out:

'5Mpix-6Mpix is more than enough for viewing images on PC, TV, online or smartphones. After all, how often do we print images bigger than even A4? [It] isn’t about shooting pictures the size of billboards! Instead, it’s about creating amazing pictures at normal, manageable sizes.'

And that's something that might be interesting to see in future compact cameras - models that will concentrate on output of a sensible size so that the user can easily get the benefit of them oversampling the scene.

Click here to read Nokia's blog post about the 808 PureView, which includes more detail about the phone's other features.

And click here to read the company's white-paper on the technology underpinning it.

Nokia 808 PureView lens and sensor specifications

  • Carl Zeiss Optics
  • Focal length: 8.02mm
  • 35mm equivalent focal length: 26mm, 16:9 | 28mm, 4:3
  • F-number: f/2.4
  • Focus range: 15cm – Infinity (throughout the zoom range)
  • Construction:
    • 5 elements, 1 group. All lens surfaces are aspherical
    • One high-index, low-dispersion glass mould lens
    • Mechanical shutter with neutral density filter
  • Optical format: 1/1.2”
  • Total number of pixels: 7728 x 5368
  • Pixel Size: 1.4um

Nokia's sample images:

ISO 800 - 5.0MP, 4:3
ISO 114 - 5.3MP, 16:9
ISO 58 - 38.4MP, 4:3 note the extremely close focus distance required to offer such shallow depth-of-field
18
I own it
4
I want it
1
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 667
12345
cesaregal
By cesaregal (Feb 28, 2012)

I like Nokia free maps, Nokia phone section, 1/1.2" sensor and Zeiss lens.

8 upvotes
liquid stereo
By liquid stereo (Feb 28, 2012)

I hope to see this in/on an iPhone.

1 upvote
rusticus
By rusticus (Feb 28, 2012)

What is an iPhone?

10 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Feb 28, 2012)

"I hope to see this in/on an iPhone."

You'll never see anything like this, not in the next 3-4 years at least. The iPhone's cameras (or, for that matter, cameras of most? all? other phones) have always horribly lagged behind Nokia's flagship ones.

2 upvotes
Camp Freddy
By Camp Freddy (Feb 28, 2012)

last ditch attempt to sell Symbian handsets ????? Very suprised at the images it takes: great for a mobile.

0 upvotes
Reonhato
By Reonhato (Feb 28, 2012)

they have been developing this for 5 years. A time when Symbian was still on the top. It is not like they made this up when Symbian sales were declining.

4 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Feb 28, 2012)

Well, high-end Symbian phones have always been THE best camera phones, camera-wise. Just compare the N95/N82, the N8 or the 808 to anything else on the market - even the N8 to the iPhone 4S...

4 upvotes
stylinred
By stylinred (Feb 29, 2012)

last ditch? symbian sold over 20million phones in Q4 '11 (without any high end device for the entire year of 2011); sure they're not in their hey day anymore but its not like they're RIM or WebOS

0 upvotes
wutsurstyle
By wutsurstyle (Feb 28, 2012)

impressive. I admire their ingenuity to make the process of "cropping the sensor" to act as a zoom. great idea combining that with a large sensor in a cellphone, a feat in itself.

plus i totally dig with their remark, "it’s about creating amazing pictures at normal, manageable sizes"

my interest is peaked.

2 upvotes
emiller
By emiller (Feb 28, 2012)

I bet Nokia would prefer that your interested were piqued!

1 upvote
Bashar Yassin
By Bashar Yassin (Feb 28, 2012)

I suggest that Nokia starts making cameras ... with Carl Zeiss optics ..
i'm sure they can produce great cameras .

5 upvotes
aperture 56
By aperture 56 (Feb 28, 2012)

To me, phone cameras like Nokia N8, iPhone 4s... now N808.. are already real cameras... those dedicated compact cameras to me is just a thing of the past... no I don't want to carry my phone, and in addition to that camera... it's such a relieve with these new smart-phones.. Nokia, please make smart phones with better and better cameras:)

1 upvote
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Feb 28, 2012)

Great news, at long last. Meanwhile, the down-on-their-luck digital camera makers (Sony, et al) are churning out $450 "superzooms" with 1/2.3-inch sensors. Let's vote with our wallets, folks, and stop buying their crapola 1/2.3-inch sensor throw-away cameras.

0 upvotes
Alphachimp
By Alphachimp (Feb 28, 2012)

Outstanding IQ for a smartphone - better than most compacts I would say!

2 upvotes
JEROME NOLAS
By JEROME NOLAS (Feb 28, 2012)

YES, AMAZING. I NEED NEW PHONE AND CAMERA.....SO WHO NEEDS NIKON ANYMORE?

2 upvotes
Onlyrgu
By Onlyrgu (Feb 28, 2012)

There is a camera inside a hole of the Image: Street view in Rio
You can find it at the corner of the news paper 'TAGARELA' on the painting.

I was looking at the details of the image and its pretty good and i guess they kept the camera for reason

Im using Nokia N82 for 3 years.
Because i love the camera

The first Nokia phone with xenon flash, the N82 has a 5 megapixel camera with Carl Zeiss Tessar optics. With f 2.8 Aperture.

I loved nokia only beacause of this phone.

The N8 and N808 are some karizma for Nokia phones.

I can find some distortion at the corners like my N82 and Sony CS T99.
I think the image quality of N808 is comparable with a normal point and shoot

0 upvotes
rvalle
By rvalle (Feb 28, 2012)

Are you kidding? "image quality of N808 is comparable with a normal point and shoot" ???
It completely blows away every compact out there!
The only thing missing is an optical zoom lens.

9 upvotes
SamTruax
By SamTruax (Feb 28, 2012)

Wow...you really need to start using a real camera before making such a ridiculous statement. According to you all the camera manufacturers should just go home and hide their tails because Nokia has managed to outdo everything ever achieved in photography.
The new camera phones are 'great' but they are not as good as any of the better compacts out there. There is a lot of 'crap' out there too but most manufacturers have premium compacts that seriously outperform this Nokia.
The iPhone 4s takes great 1080 video and decent stills but it's still no where near the output of something like a Panasonic LX3/5, Olympus XZ1, Fuji X10 (orbs and all)... the output of this Nokia looks really good...but still not as good as a REAL camera.

0 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Feb 28, 2012)

"There is a lot of 'crap' out there too but most manufacturers have premium compacts that seriously outperform this Nokia."

Prolly noise-wise (at least when running the 808 in full resolution; that is, w/o pixel binning) but definitely not resolution-wise. I've spent quite a lot of time on measuring the resolution of the 808 and it's simply astonishing - even in the corners. (There, it can be "only" in the 15-20-25 Mpixel ballpark.)

0 upvotes
stylinred
By stylinred (Feb 29, 2012)

@SamTrux iphone4s? rofl..... if you think the iphone takes good photos your opinion is a rather expendable one and to compare it with the N8 or 808, lol, is just ridiculous

heck the N8 beat out any P&S released up until 2010 it beat out the best from Ixus and Finepix (beat out my dlux4 aka lx3 too)

the 808 will hopefully be able to beat anything released up until 2012 but we'll have to wait and see

1 upvote
Muhammad Jassim
By Muhammad Jassim (Feb 28, 2012)

MAN, I LOVE THIS! I wish I didn't buy blackberry! My future phone is definitely this! NOKIA IS AMAZING!

0 upvotes
slncezgsi
By slncezgsi (Feb 28, 2012)

The sensor is larger than in my GRDIII. This could be the first smartphone that could replace the need for compact digital camera for me.

But what really matters is the OS. I would have probably preferred Android, but maybe Nokia is getting back into the game.

Ah the screen. Well, let's see how bad is it ...

0 upvotes
Wye Photography
By Wye Photography (Feb 28, 2012)

Soon, all your fast expensive long lenses are going to become pretty redundant.

Imagine having in your pocket a camera/iPhone with a 50-100mp sensor and able to crop the middle bit giving you the equivalent of a 300mm f2.4 lens at 8 megapixels (suitable for A3 prints).

What, 5 years!

4 upvotes
Petka
By Petka (Feb 28, 2012)

Before continuing to dream about it, spend some time studying optics and diffraction.

2 upvotes
Rage Joe
By Rage Joe (Feb 28, 2012)

I've been wondering where is the limit, how small can you make quality optics and what will be the crucial thing that sets the limits? Anyone? There seems to be so much bull and myths about this going around.

2 upvotes
Joseph S Wisniewski
By Joseph S Wisniewski (Feb 28, 2012)

Wye, you don't get the equivalent of a 300mm f2.4 without a 125mm aperture. That's simple physics and information theory.

Rage, the existing lens, with a 3.5x crop relative to FF, is equivalent to a 28mm f8 in light gathering power, DOF, and resolution. A crop to a 300mm equivalent is about another 10x on top of the 3.5x, so a nice solid f90. that won't really look sharp, even at web size.

6 upvotes
Wye Photography
By Wye Photography (Feb 28, 2012)

COME ON MAN! I was just pulling figures out of the air. Do you guys have to take everything sooo seriously. Get a life.

Besides, using a small centre part of the sensor you are in effect narrowing the field-of-view getting the EQUIVALENT of telephoto lens. You are cheating. Actual lens mechanics have nothing to do with it. Some people of just plain thick.

2 upvotes
4strings
By 4strings (Feb 28, 2012)

Agreed Joseph! This Nokia is with 40Mpix & f2.4 on this sensor is very close to the diffraction limit, if I'm not mistaken. Simply there's no point in putting 100Mpix in such tiny sensor since your resolution would be limited both by diffracion and lens aberration. In my opinion this 40Mpix is already too much.. But its really fun to show off... You've got an iPhone, 8Mpix..woooww.. Now check THIS out; Nokia 40Mpix...:-D

1 upvote
LensBeginner
By LensBeginner (Feb 28, 2012)

That reminds me a lot of what a certain Ken Rxxx is preach... ehr... saying about the D800 in his blog... :D

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 32 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Rage Joe
By Rage Joe (Feb 28, 2012)

Joseph, I think you are mistaking now. You wrote: "equivalent to a 28mm f8 in light gathering power, DOF, and resolution."

So far so good.

But then you continued: "A crop to a 300mm equivalent is about another 10x on top of the 3.5x, so a nice solid f90"

That's true a far as DOF and light gathering power is concerned. But while cropping into the picture the f-stop still remains the same f2.4. This is the same fenomenon as putting a 200mm/2.0 full frame Nikkor in front of a DX sized D7000, you get the same field of view as 300mm lens on a full frame body, but you get to keep the f2.0!

2 upvotes
john Clinch
By john Clinch (Feb 28, 2012)

Firstly I think the point about high pixel count and then pixel binning is that this is the new route to low noise. Gone are the days of large pixels. Break that pixel into 4 pixels and recombine them and you reduce the noise. It matters not at all whether the lens resolution is not up to the pixel spacing.

the bit I don' get is why we are agreeing the lens is f8 in terms of light gathering?

0 upvotes
Rage Joe
By Rage Joe (Feb 28, 2012)

John, you are right, the f-stop remains the same f2.4.

What we are talking about here is that if the sensitivity of the sensor per area is the same, that leads to it that a bigger sensor gathers more light. That is, you get the same amount of light gathered on a bigger sensor, using a smaller f-stop ( with the same sensitivity of the sensor/ area).

Now what does this matter? Nothing, if you want to have the same DOF. But it matters if you want to have a shallow DOF, since we don't have f0.5 or so lenses for cameras that have small sensors.

But back to my question, I would be interested in what is the limit of the glass material itself, not the optics, but just the glass that can be produced for the best lenses. Where is the limit how small can you make a suberb lens before the results are limited by the glass itself?

2 upvotes
Rage Joe
By Rage Joe (Feb 28, 2012)

I wrote: "This is the same fenomenon as putting a 200mm/2.0 full frame Nikkor in front of a DX sized D7000, you get the same field of view as 300mm lens on a full frame body, but you get to keep the f2.0!"

Yeah, but to make things even easier to understand, I must remind you that you get a different DOF with a 300mm equivalent lens (200mm) and f 2.0 on a DX sized sensor than what you get with a FX sized body with a 300mm and f2.0 :)))) Easy.

0 upvotes
Petka
By Petka (Feb 29, 2012)

41 MPix at f:2.4 is just about the diffraction limit with a 8x11mm sensor size, as extrapolated form the table at the end of this article. And that requires a "perfect" lens.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/resolution.shtml

0 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Mar 3, 2012)

"In my opinion this 40Mpix is already too much.. But its really fun to show off... You've got an iPhone, 8Mpix..woooww.. Now check THIS out; Nokia 40Mpix...:-D"

Not too much. According to my controlled resolution tests, the lens + sensor combo does deliver highly detailed results. In the center, the lens might be even capable of more resolution with a higher-Mpixel sensor.

0 upvotes
Durandalfr
By Durandalfr (Feb 28, 2012)

I will only buy it if it brings a slowmo video mode (120 or 240fps).

1 upvote
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Feb 28, 2012)

So.... just do yourself a huge favor and DON'T buy it.

0 upvotes
Durandalfr
By Durandalfr (Feb 29, 2012)

well I would like to have it in replacement of my little viewty which can do 120fps, at least.

0 upvotes
Just Hobbyist
By Just Hobbyist (Mar 1, 2012)

Wouldn't surprice me if the hardware could do it, in zoom mode. That pixel binning in video recording is going to take a lot of bandwith, and if individual photocell bw limitation is higher than the bus bw offchip, in theory the camera could provide 210fps in 1080 mode.

But I wouldn't hold my breath over a firmware release with sloow mo. This is the first incarnation of this technology, and at first they are going to consenrate on picture quality, reliability etc. Slow mo isn't that high on features.

0 upvotes
LensBeginner
By LensBeginner (Feb 28, 2012)

The Nokia N95 camera is miles ahead of the one mounted on the Samsung Galaxy S, and it is a product which is more than three years older than the other... I have limited experience because I can't afford to buy every smartphone that is created, but this I can tell (I also borrowed and tried a N97 mini): Nokia might have produced crappy OSes, but camera quality has always been very nice in flagship models.
I was perplexed to say the least when I discovered that the N8 was going to have a 12Mpx camera, but this approach here makes sense to me.

2 upvotes
Jez EMIN
By Jez EMIN (Feb 28, 2012)

I can believe you.

I 'upgraded' from an N95 to a smartphone (a HTC Desire HD) and yes, I can watch movies, YouTube, surf the internet etc etc on my new phone (plus of course download hundreds of Android apps) BUT BUT BUT, my 8mp camera is a pile of JUNK.

I used to take my N95 for example out for long treks and the pictures it would take would be stunning. I (stupidly) assumed that a current 8mp camera would be better than a 3 year old one.......

Now, I hardly take any pictures with my HTC, it's simply not worth it.

Also, with these fantastic smartphones with the touch screens, they use a soft shutter release, and that does not work ergonomically. Glad to see that this Nokia uses a proper physical shutter button.

I'm almost tempted to get rid of my HTC whilst I can still get some decent money for it (though as I type this, I am reminded that I have some pretty darn good serious Android apps (not games)).

1 upvote
LensBeginner
By LensBeginner (Feb 28, 2012)

You should really stick with Android, a damn good OS IMHO...
A workaround I use is to take photos with one of the countless HDR apps and then use Photomatix for real processing (mostly in the Exposure Fusion mode). You can still shot handheld, however this is most certainly not good for sports and action in general. Nice for landscapes though. It certainly makes the thing less immediate and user-friendly, which is what smartphones should be all about, again imho.
You can't ask a friend at a pub to "stand still for about 6" until I've finished takink my three exposures" and the say "you'll see the result tomorrow, because now I only have three terrible photos"... :-)

0 upvotes
Jez EMIN
By Jez EMIN (Feb 28, 2012)

Hi LensBeginner,

I think the best solution for me really is to get rid of the HTC and buy a tablet with Android on it and then get a/the Nokia.

Nokia make great phones and maybe the Windows OS is a good one (good enough not to get me addicted to a phone for Christ sakes !!).

I love the idea of taking pictures with a phone and don't agree at all with whoever it was on here that said if you want to take pictures take a camera wth you (and use your phone for making calls......). When I'm out trekking, I don't want to take a (heavy/bulky) camera, I prefer my phone with builtin GPS, built in sunrise/sunset calculator etc etc etc.

No, I cannot and will not accept the crap images that come out of my HTC !!! They truly are bloody awful !

0 upvotes
stylinred
By stylinred (Feb 29, 2012)

what apps do you have on your Droid? you should see if its available on Symbian unless they're regionalized apps (like your banks app or local movie theatres) symbian in more cases than not has the same application in their store and at the very least an equivalent one after all up until the end of 2011 Symbian was still the #1 OS in the world

a lot of people are misinformed about symbian or they think its the same symbian that they used back in the 90s... how they could think that thats even remotely possible is beyond me

heck the new Symbian Belle is better than Gingerbread in many opinions even GSMArena calls Belle "almost revolutionary" and that acclaim was based on a slower device and lacking the "Feature Pack" that the 808 carries

0 upvotes
rocklobster
By rocklobster (Feb 28, 2012)

There are some pretty dreadful compacts out there that I wouldn't mind seeing disappear from the market that are not helped at all by their zooms (often x10 or more) with distortion/CA, soft edges etc. Looks like the simple (small, I mean) lens on this thing has most of those issues covered.

OOF noise in ISO800 shot is grainy - probably not a characteristic of the sensor but more likely NR processing.

Good effort Nokia.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Experte
By Experte (Feb 28, 2012)

From the article:

" The depth-of-field control is reduced still further when magnified-in, because it doesn't gain the shallower depth of field that longer physical focal lengths usually bring."

This is however wrong. Depth of field is not affected by focal length.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/dof2.shtml

0 upvotes
JWest
By JWest (Feb 28, 2012)

This isn't focal length, it's cropping.

0 upvotes
Felix E Klee
By Felix E Klee (Feb 28, 2012)

Cropping by a factor of two is equal to doubling the focal length, thus halving the aperture. And, naturally, it is also equal to using a sensor only one quarter the full size.

1 upvote
Petka
By Petka (Feb 28, 2012)

Cropping means bigger magnification which in turn means smaller circle of confusion for the same sharpness. Thus you do get smaller DOF with crop. DOF is not exact, it is something that is agreed upon.

3 upvotes
pepe abascal
By pepe abascal (Feb 28, 2012)

now, this is something, really something. photography is in full revolution!

0 upvotes
Dheorl
By Dheorl (Feb 28, 2012)

Now please hurry up and put this into a windows phone so I can get really excited and buy it (maybe with a higher res screen admitadly).

1 upvote
MonkRX
By MonkRX (Feb 28, 2012)

The last 5 years of Casio Cameras have already been doing this.

How to do it:
Step 1:Set to lower than max resolution.
Step 2: Zoom.

It will show you three different types of zoom on the graduated zoom marker, in this order:

1. Optical Zoom. All images here are "over sampled", then resized to the chosen output resolution.
2. Digital Crop. All images here are crops of the full size image. Less "over sampling" as the zoom level increases.
3. Digital Zoom - Classic "enlarge to output resolution" mode.

GJ Nokia for making it sound like a brand new concept.

To be honest, I think Nokia should be offering even lower resolutions. If their "over sampling" isn't some basic software algorithim, and actually has some excellent hardware/software pixel binning and noise reduction... Nokia could be creating the perfect Facebook camera. Low resolution with excellent low light sensitivity. (40MP down to less than 1MP). Imagine all the drunk clubbing showing up on FB, super sharp.

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Dheorl
By Dheorl (Feb 28, 2012)

3MP really isn't much over a HD screen. Not sure what max upload size for flickr and FB is though.

0 upvotes
SamTruax
By SamTruax (Feb 28, 2012)

Shhhh...don't tell everyone here. They think this all brand new technology.
No one has ever done pixel binning before and no one has ever cropped the sensor to achieve a different zoom level.

2 upvotes
LensBeginner
By LensBeginner (Feb 28, 2012)

One could reasonably assert that no one has ever done that to this level of flexibility (zoom + low light situations + full res qhen you need it) this level of bruteforce performance (hell, we barely see 36mpx in professional cameras, for what that's worth, obviously) and in a piece of consumer hardware on top of that!
Nikon D1 was a profesional product and you could use all the res only via raw (if I do recall correctly), and while I'm not familiar with Casio cameras, I don't think we are even bordering this level of specifications. We'll see about quality, I can't wait to see a night shot...

0 upvotes
MonkRX
By MonkRX (Mar 1, 2012)

@LensBeginner, Heh, I guess you don't know Casio. Casio was the first to market with a 10MP CCD Sensor in a compact consumer camera. Bleeding edge, just like this Nokia. It offers all the advantages that the Nokia is currently offering, while also remaining easy to use. It has more flexibility than Nokia's offering purely because it has an optical zoom, so zooming did not compromise quality (in this case, lowing the amount of pixels to bin).

Casio used to be a pioneer and a leader in consumer cameras, offering some of the best in class image quality (See Casio Z-750, P700, FH100 reviews here on dpreview), best in class UI, and arguably still some of the best AE, AWB, and Auto ISO. They're severely underrated.

Comment edited 44 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
MonkRX
By MonkRX (Mar 1, 2012)

Dheorl Wrote: "3MP really isn't much over a HD screen. Not sure what max upload size for flickr and FB is though."

Yeah. 1920x1200 is about 2MP. My dated 4:3 CRT is 2048x1536, about 3MP. According to dpreview, FB's new photo viewer is max 960 x 960. I think Google+ is a bit higher than that. I'm just under the assumption that most people take pictures for FB. So offering a very high quality 1MP image would be perfect for those kinds of users.

For us, I want a 120MP sensor so I can get some really good 12MP pictures ;)

0 upvotes
tiberiousgracchus
By tiberiousgracchus (Feb 28, 2012)

Mobile phone= Photos Music and Calling. This does it for me forget the apps.

2 upvotes
Juraj Lacko
By Juraj Lacko (Feb 28, 2012)

Well done to NOKIA. I never was their fan really. But this is really good approach and every phonemaker and compact camera maker should follow it. I would defenetely buy this phone if it had Android OS instead of nokia system.
Some had to be said Nokia had alway very good cameras in their phones. Sadly rest wasnt that tempting. Thats why they loosing customers worldwide.

3 upvotes
Felix E Klee
By Felix E Klee (Feb 28, 2012)

Should be an interesting sensor for Lytro. They need lots of MP in small space, below their micro lens array.

1 upvote
zoranT
By zoranT (Feb 28, 2012)

How come a mobile phone company introduces real imaging innovation while the rest of compact camera makers are sleeping (the last innovation I remember was Sony's BIS - though rather evolution than revolution).

3 upvotes
carnaby
By carnaby (Feb 28, 2012)

Read Thom Hogan for a while, and you'll understand why.

0 upvotes
Deepak73
By Deepak73 (Feb 28, 2012)

Simple. 'Cause Canon, Nikon and Sony know they sell large number of P&S cameras by just increasing pixel count on tiny sensors. They know common man just falls in that megapixel marketing. Till now!
That's why this cameraphone is revolutionary. Now even non photography aficionados will start to realize that those tiny sensors with gazillion megapixels were just an illusion created by these large corporations.
I think the low end P&S is dead.

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Photato
By Photato (Feb 28, 2012)

38MP pixel sharp handheld?, yeah right LOL
Would rather have 5 Big Fat MP like the pro cameras.

0 upvotes
carnaby
By carnaby (Feb 28, 2012)

Either you didn't read the article, or you didn't understand it, because they really use all those pixels to create exactly "5 Big Fat MP"!

5 upvotes
GuptaD42
By GuptaD42 (Feb 28, 2012)

This Nokia sensor's normal output is a "5 Big Fat MP" picture, just as you asked for. Low noise, high quality output. How does 5MP on a sensor almost as large as Nikon 1 sound?
Seems to beat most P&S cameras hands down.

Picture quality will certainly drop in the full-res 38MP mode. Probably best used with some sort of support/mobile tripod in good light. Nokia could do some sort of a combo holder that works as a car mount (the phone has GPS + locally stored maps + voice navigation) as well as a mini-tripod.

Unless, with all the fancy pixel-binning processing in-phone and the sheer number of 'spare' pixels, Nokia has implemented digital IS. I don't know, but it's a real possibility for this approach to imaging.

Of course, I haven't held this phone camera in my hand yet. But, at that big sensor size, I'm willing to believe. And, given Nokia's track record with the N8, they do have credibility in producing the best pictures out of a mobile phone.

4 upvotes
Rage Joe
By Rage Joe (Feb 28, 2012)

@Photato,"38MP pixel sharp handheld?"

Easy.

Have you ever thought about maybe supporting your camera with something when taking the picture? Or what about sunny scenes where you need neutral density filters just to block away the excess light?

I just love the opportunity to take the picture with 38 megapixels and do some postprosessing, hope that the Zeiss optics will deliver constant image quality with different focusing distances.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Photato
By Photato (Feb 29, 2012)

@Carnaby, 38MP will never have the same light collection efficiency than a true 5MP sensor because the pixel gaps are greater than zero. This high density sensor is a compromise to compensate for the lack of an optical zoom lens, but in the end is sort of useless given the handheld shooting conditions of cellphone cameras.

0 upvotes
Photato
By Photato (Feb 29, 2012)

@ GuptaD42. I'm not saying this camera is crap, but it could have been better with larger pixels. If the high density/ down-sampling approach was superior to true large pixels, you can bet your azz that Pro cameras would had much higher densities.
Just looking at the sample images, the skin tones are awful.

0 upvotes
Photato
By Photato (Feb 29, 2012)

@ Rage Joe. Wha!?!?t a 38mp Sunset!? LOL
For that you need a good dynamic range that only true large pixels can give you, you don't need detail. Have you ever taken a sunset picture?!

0 upvotes
stylinred
By stylinred (Feb 29, 2012)

so what you're saying is they should throw an even larger sensor into the phone? its already the largest ever seen in a phone @ 1/1.2".... the last phone even close to that size was the 808s predecessor the Nokia N8 with a 1/1.83"

0 upvotes
Photato
By Photato (Feb 29, 2012)

@ Stylinred. No, all I'm saying is the choice to go for small pixel binning was wrong. Using this same size sensor you can get better image quality, especially in low light handheld with 5 Big Real Megapixels instead.
Pixel Binning can't match the quality of Real Big Pixels.

0 upvotes
Rage Joe
By Rage Joe (Feb 29, 2012)

@ Photato. Dynamic range is not determined by pixel size. But resolution is mainly determined by pixel count.

0 upvotes
R Thornton
By R Thornton (Feb 28, 2012)

Well, I need a new phone anyway, might as well try this one. If its battery life is any good, it could be a sweet deal...

0 upvotes
Kissel
By Kissel (Feb 28, 2012)

Seems like Nokia's death agony.

0 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Feb 28, 2012)

Are you joking? With an excellent cameraphone like this, which completely beats all of the competition (as with the N95 / N8 back in the day - or, for that matter, the N8 even today)?

6 upvotes
Kissel
By Kissel (Feb 28, 2012)

No kidding. Statistics prove that Nokia is loosing its market share dramatically. There hasn't been a competitive product in a year or so, and what was being produced suffered quite low quality. Nokia fans might object, but reality is quite tough. I doubt this cameraphone would change the situation.

0 upvotes
Jon Rty
By Jon Rty (Feb 28, 2012)

Please take a look at the Lumia 800, a universally praised phone by Nokia.

4 upvotes
G10Rebel
By G10Rebel (Feb 28, 2012)

Jon Rty, universally praised but floppin in the market

0 upvotes
KEG
By KEG (Feb 28, 2012)

And a universally non selling phone also

0 upvotes
pascoa341
By pascoa341 (Feb 28, 2012)

USA-not selling maybe, but universally? Apparently selling over 1 million. It's not iPhone territory, granted, but still not bad for a first product (not a big nokia/winphone fan btw, just trying to bring some nuance to this discussion).

http://mynokiablog.com/2012/02/04/lumia-sales-far-above-forecasts/

1 upvote
Jon Rty
By Jon Rty (Feb 28, 2012)

Flopping?

http://mynokiablog.com/?s=lumia+800+sale&x=0&y=0
For a limited launch, I'd say the Lumias have done well.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
costinul_ala
By costinul_ala (Feb 28, 2012)

i do own the Lumia 800, i don't know what you are talking about.
It is expected that things change from time to time, it is in out advantage. And Nokia had a ridiculously large market share 3-4 years a go. Things got complicated to consumers advantage. It is easy to sell bankruptcy predictions around, it sells well. In this case they don't have any real life support

0 upvotes
stylinred
By stylinred (Feb 29, 2012)

the Lumias have only been on the market since the middle of December... and not even widely available and they sold 900,000 units in 2.5 weeks?

Nokias losing market share sure.... but they're still the #1 cell phone maker/seller in the world.... and their smartphone department is still highly competitive.... #1 in Asia and #1 in most of Europe (just look @ the ComScore report)

just because the USA started buying smartphones finally (offsetting Nokias world marketshare) doesn't mean much...

0 upvotes
ViTAR
By ViTAR (Feb 28, 2012)

Too low screen resolution @ 360x640

0 upvotes
Jon Rty
By Jon Rty (Feb 28, 2012)

For what?

1 upvote
G10Rebel
By G10Rebel (Feb 28, 2012)

Yeah. This doesn't cut it anymore.

0 upvotes
gogo2
By gogo2 (Feb 28, 2012)

True. Too low resolution to displaying high resolution photo.

0 upvotes
Rage Joe
By Rage Joe (Feb 28, 2012)

@Vitar. "Too low screen resolution"

Hehe, it's much better this way than the other way around, too low resolution in the image, as you have in, say iCrap.

2 upvotes
LensBeginner
By LensBeginner (Feb 28, 2012)

It depends... if all you need to do is to show photos to your friends, then I'd rather have a WVGA AMOLED like Samsung Galaxy S & SII that makes even s6!77/ pictures look good rather than a bad screen that make good photos appear rahter dull.
Me, I'm for viewing photos on the pc screen so I actually concur with your view, but we have to remember what's the great market for these devices, hardly photographers methinks...

0 upvotes
JJu
By JJu (Feb 28, 2012)

Nikon D5100 has 3" 640x480 display and users are pretty happy with it. Even though it's not an AMOLED.

3 upvotes
LensBeginner
By LensBeginner (Feb 28, 2012)

This is apples to oranges, really, you don't run spreadsheets, notepads, organizers, dictionaries, e-book readers on your D5100... and I doubt that you use it to take pictures of your buddies at the pub (and show them how much they're drunk afterwards). Besides, AMOLEDS on smartphones are just terrible for color fidelity (cyan/bluish tinge), but that's a plus for casual snapshots because it makes them appear cooler and cleaner than they actually are.

0 upvotes
zigi_S
By zigi_S (Feb 28, 2012)

I doubt you see with the naked eye a single pixel.

This kind of resolutions were standard for 14 inch monitors. And nobody complained that they couldnt read letters back then. The resolution mem is just another piece of apple propaganda thrown out into the fruit community. Nobody complained about iphone 1 and 2 low screen resolution. Only after the "retina" display, a fancy name for a high resolution screen that apologizes apples ridiculous profit on a unit, the screen res. became the thing that separated the snobs who could and would pay for an iphone and those who couldn't and wouldn't for actualy no real difference. It's about status not real performance.

2 upvotes
LensBeginner
By LensBeginner (Feb 28, 2012)

Believe me, I don't easily fall from advertising, nor I consider myself a so-called pixel peeper, and besides my main camera is a K100D Super (6.0Mpx).
I just had the opportunity to check - side by side - several photos of the same subjects on an N97 (640x360) and a Galaxy S (800x480 Super Amoled). Photos of the Samsung looked way better (plus one could pinch-zoom with ease, I know that's part of the UI, but helps immersion and fruition nonetheless). Then I got home and looked at the photos on a serious pc monitor: there was no match, because the ones taken with the Nokia were a lot better than the others for detail, noise etc.. The screen matters. Maybe you can't consciously put your finger on a difference, but you feel it.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
stylinred
By stylinred (Feb 29, 2012)

you should look @ the device/screen first before making a comment based on numbers.... each screen technology utilizes pixels differently the 808s AMOLED ClearBlack Screen looks brilliant irl

@ LensBeginner N97... really? thats like a 4 year old device with some ancient LCD tech... and the OS is COMPLETELY different

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Andr Giongo
By Andr Giongo (Feb 29, 2012)

Ok. Now I´ll have to wait for the Pentax 645 D Upgrade.
Hopefully the new camera will be able to make phone calls!
:oD

0 upvotes
kadarpik
By kadarpik (Feb 28, 2012)

Very nice phone for photographer, bokeh is not bad either, I have Nikon V1 for this purpose just now, phone is not so responsive and fast but in most cases it is ok I hope, at least dedicated button to activate camera !! Hopefully this announces also new compact cameras generation, there is not too much left for entry level DSLR-s in the market between mirrorless and super compacts (super phones).

Color resolution is quite high, over 10 Mpixel red photosites, red and blue details must, wanna see red stripes on blue

0 upvotes
ZAnton
By ZAnton (Feb 28, 2012)

I must say I was very sceptic about 40 MP in a phone,
but if these photos are not fake, they are really, really good!

And the fact that Nokia will shoot most of the time with 3-5 MP means, that the phone was made by engineer, not marketologist or salesman.

8 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Feb 28, 2012)

As the article says the sensor is much bigger than a usual camera phone sensor (it's almost as big as the Nikon 1), so the actual pixels are the same size as in a regular 8mp camera phone sensor.

It's an interesting tech but I can't help but wonder if (apart from not being able to zoom) the overall image quality would have been better if they had made the sensor 8mp, after all that would have been similar pixel size to the Nikon 1.

1 upvote
Bilgy_no1
By Bilgy_no1 (Feb 28, 2012)

@ Andy
Yes, that could have given similar results in terms of noise, but lose the 'lossless' digital zoom function. Digital zoom is important for a fixed lens phone camera.

3 upvotes
LensBeginner
By LensBeginner (Feb 28, 2012)

Plus you'd have lost a lot of quality in every situation where there's so much light that any kind of phone/P&S/... takes great snapshots (noon, summer, tropics, cold transparent winter days, etc.)

0 upvotes
Fri13
By Fri13 (Feb 28, 2012)

Engineers do not understand photography, that is a problem.

When was dpreview changed to club of brand defenders and hi-fi chasers who just repeats what marketing and sales people say?

Photography isn't just about megapixels or sensor size. It is about far more technical features what can not be implemented to smart phone case as laws of physics does not allow it. Photographer needs a tool what is very flexible and allows to give exactly wanted results in different kind situations.

After all, we are talking here about SMART PHONE, not about SMART CAMERA or not even CAMERA.

0 upvotes
LensBeginner
By LensBeginner (Feb 28, 2012)

...but when you don't have a camera with you then your phone is your next best tool, in fact it's the only tool you have, so it' just perfect compared to no tool at all ( 0,00001/0 -> ∞ )

0 upvotes
DaveMarx
By DaveMarx (Feb 28, 2012)

Brand wars, shmand wars.

In the long view, processors, sensors, OS capabilities, battery life, display technologies... don't stand still, so no point predicting the outcome of a never-ending race. Today's model, no matter how advanced, is a proof-of-concept for the next generation, and with smart phones out-selling every other consumer electronic device, it's not surprising that Nokia, Apple, Samsung and the like can afford to lead, rather than follow, in the world of innovation.

If you're into Grand Unification Theories... It's a communicator, pure and simple, covering the widest gamut of human expression yet. Sometimes the execution's a bit crude, necessary compromises may prevent optimal performance for any one function... but compare one of these things to an Instamatic, cassette player, Trinitron, Apple II, VHS camcorder, Atari 2600, pager, Moog synthesizer, and let's not forget the wireless phone...all in a tiny box, for a couple of hundred bucks? We live in exciting times!

2 upvotes
Robo2k
By Robo2k (Feb 28, 2012)

too bad this decent camera is stuffed into what appears to be a less-than-adequate smartphone. the screen resolution is a total joke. Even the cheapest androids have better resolution

0 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Feb 28, 2012)

While you're right about the screen resolution, Symbian is rock-solid, unlike Android (no reboots etc.), and has much less power consumption. In addition, Nokia's build quality is generally much better than those of Android manufacturers.

7 upvotes
Jon Rty
By Jon Rty (Feb 28, 2012)

Yes they do. But unlike Android, Symbian is designed around that resolution, so the only time you'll really see the difference is when surfing.

2 upvotes
carnaby
By carnaby (Feb 28, 2012)

@Menneisyys, my HTC Desire HD Android phone has been far more stable and required far fewer reboots and has a way better build quality than the symbian based Nokia 5800 Xpressmusic I had before it. The 5800 is by far the buggiest phone I've ever had. I still liked it though, but there were bugs under every stone!

0 upvotes
ZAnton
By ZAnton (Feb 28, 2012)

@ Menneisyys
My wife has Nokia 5230 with Symbian. I must say, I have never seen more stupid, slow and unstable system. It had "hang" many times, so that reboot was necessary, and during the update of the Ovi Suit I had died completely, so we had to install several programs from the internet to reinstall the firmware ans system. The build is good, but not better than Philips and Sony-Ericsson.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Reonhato
By Reonhato (Feb 28, 2012)

@ carnaby @ZAnton. I do own the phones you mentioned and that tech or OS version was released late 2008. I have used Nokia belle and comparing these versions of Symbian is like comparing windows 3.1 to Windows 7.

In reply to robo2k, I am an Android user now as my main device and although I don't buy cheap Androids, their cheapest screens have 320x240 screen and some midranges have 480x320 screens.

I do Agree that a higher res screens would have a better impact of the overall package to some.

2 upvotes
LensBeginner
By LensBeginner (Feb 28, 2012)

Symbian's a nightmare to program for... a lot of stupid housekeeping to be done by the programmer that could have been done automagically (resulting in software which is less prone to memory leaks and the like)

0 upvotes
Fri13
By Fri13 (Feb 28, 2012)

How most people watch taken photos?

a) From computer screen (1280x800-1920x1200) in fullscreen
b) From WWW page by WWW browser in size around of 640x480
c) Printed to 10x13-20x15cm
d) From cell phone screen (3.5-4.8" display)
e) From TV (1368x720-1920x1080)

That camera is 5Mpix and it does not change for anything else, even that it gives change to save 36 or 38Mpix image, the camera is not flexible to be taken seriously for most photographers. And when most people just takes snapshots with it, they are just wasting even the quality what is left for that phone.
Yes, there will come some great photos but not many, and those same photos could be taken with a camera resulting better photo in most cases.

So let blind-hatred fans to have their fan, as this 808 phone does not threat photographers more than those cheap 5Mpix cameras with plastic lenses made in china.

It is just better that more bad photos are taken with these 808 or N8 kind phones, as it rise the cameras reason to exist.

0 upvotes
stylinred
By stylinred (Feb 29, 2012)

@Robo2k screen technologies are different across the board.. it isnt simply based on numbers... Nokias AMOLED ClearBlack displays are beautiful you'll have to give 1 a look

@ZAnton @Caranby the 5230 and 5800 were low end Symbian phones (fitted with cheap hardware) that were released 3/4 years ago respectively and they were based on an OLD version of Symbian... as noted above that's like comparing Windows 3.0 to Windows 7 just because it carries the same name doesn't mean its the same OS... to even think that is ridiculous (sorry)..

@LensBeginner .... a nightmare to code for... WOW it has been a LONG LONG time since you looked @ symbian.... ever since Symbian^3 its been immensely easy to code for Symbian because of QT; QT has changed the world for coding for Symbian thats why Nokias Store rocketed to 70k Apps in a handful of months until Elop made his dreaded announcement @ MWC 2011 even still some developers stayed on and Symbian has well over 100k apps and growing a short time later

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Andrew Butterfield
By Andrew Butterfield (Feb 28, 2012)

If you're going to use a 1/2" sensor, why not just make it a high quality 10MP one, then you wouldn't have all the pixel binning nonsense? The photos look pretty noisy to me so where's the advantage?

0 upvotes
Bilgy_no1
By Bilgy_no1 (Feb 28, 2012)

It's not 1/2"; it's 1/1.2"!

The sensor in this phone is close to the size of the sensor in the Nikon 1 series. It's much bigger than the sensor in high end compacts (1/1.7""), let alone most standard compacts (1/2.33").

I also don't see the noise you're talking about. The top photo of the guy and girl has a bit of noise, but that's shot at ISO800! Show me a current compact camera that would give a result like that at ISO800, and pay special attention to the detail...

The advantage of the technology is that you have a choice of higher quality (more binning) or zoom (with less binning). This allows more flexibility with a fixed focal lens, which is essential for a phone camera.

10 upvotes
ljmac
By ljmac (Feb 28, 2012)

The Nikon 1 has far better noise performance than this, and an only slightly larger sensor. I'm not seeing the benefits of pixel binning either - in fact, it seems to result in pattern noise.

0 upvotes
LensBeginner
By LensBeginner (Feb 28, 2012)

Yeah, but the Nikon 1 is supposed to be a prosumer camera, this is a cellphone! it's not only sensor size that matters...

0 upvotes
stylinred
By stylinred (Feb 29, 2012)

the Nikon 1 sensor is actually a lot bigger... they're close but just look @ the extra space it has and I HOPE the Nikon 1 cameras look better since they cost double the price of the 808 (which is also a phone)

0 upvotes
GuptaD42
By GuptaD42 (Feb 28, 2012)

The spiritual successor to Nokia N8, and the P&S killer.

Apart from astonishingly high quality still pictures, Nokia is claiming Continuous Focus 1080p full HD video. There's a separate xenon flash for pictures and an LED video light for shooting video. And it has Dolby headphone tech for playing music/ surround sound from movies.

With IQ reaching levels entry-level P&S cams cannot provide, will it be end of the dedicated P&S camera? Lower-end m43 (like EPL1) and large-sensor enthusiast bridge cameras will probably become the entry level for camera companies.

As the DPR sensor size comparison shows, the Nokia sensor is pretty close in size to Nokia 1 and far bigger than compact cameras. Negative /marketing/ impact on the Nikon 1 system?

Nokia has indicated a price of $450 without carrier subsidies. That should fall to $100-150 range with standard 2yr contracts. And once Nokia has the tech in Windows phone, I guess the Symbian/belle models will drop further in price.

5 upvotes
brkl
By brkl (Feb 28, 2012)

Good lord. Pixel binning is bogus, but such a large sensor in a phone is really exciting.

1 upvote
Fri13
By Fri13 (Feb 28, 2012)

What I do find exciting is that single pixel size was very small in microns. And the bigger reason, is that 38 megapixel (you can not seem to get over that) sensor is available with under 500 euros for consumers.

0 upvotes
antonmandara
By antonmandara (Feb 28, 2012)

Sensor Mode Setting in Nokia 808 Camera: PureView Mode: 8MP, 5MP, 2MP (or3?). Full Resolution Mode: 38MP

0 upvotes
misterpepper
By misterpepper (Feb 28, 2012)

Has anybody heard anything about price? A typical compact with these specs would be several hundred dollars alone.

0 upvotes
Jon Rty
By Jon Rty (Feb 28, 2012)

450€ in Europe, before taxes, unlocked and unsubstizied

1 upvote
aperture 56
By aperture 56 (Feb 28, 2012)

I have Nokia N8 and it has completely replaced my dedicated camera.. it has very well thought functions and settings, and once I got used to work with it and found correct settings for my style of photography, it is even quicker to take photographs than Canon S95... and my favorite focal length is 28mm anyway, i neither like nor need zooms... While with this Nokia 808 the boundary between phone camera and high end compact camera doesn't exist anymore, at least for me, and for many photojournalists I am sure...

I thought the other day, what a convenient concept are these smart-phones... it seems like all my life is in the Nokia N8 - photographs, video, messages, emails, important notes, phone numbers, calls, clock, radio... in one little device that stays in my pocket... Thought about maybe getting pana GX1 with 14mm for really serious projects but now I think, it would not really do anything different for me than my Nokia N8... waiting for Nokia 808 to play with:)...

4 upvotes
Aero Windwalker
By Aero Windwalker (Feb 28, 2012)

-_-better than my camera! unreal...

1 upvote
antonmandara
By antonmandara (Feb 28, 2012)

You can set Nokia 808 to take FULL RESOUTION of 38MP. See the video release.

0 upvotes
kff
By kff (Feb 28, 2012)

I am dreaming about a large display like 10'' .... actualy about something similar as Asus Padphone: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YKEG49DeVg

and about system like GXR with alternatives of senzors and lenses ...
(maybe Nokia Pentax Ricoh GXR :)

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
sauchiyong
By sauchiyong (Feb 28, 2012)

I bet video from high res camera like 5D Mark II already use pixel binning, and take advantage of the extra pixels already.

The thing about smart phone, it has open access to developer to develop thrid part application and have direct access to internet. These open up a lot of possibily which camera do not have. Something in between will come up soon...

0 upvotes
theranman
By theranman (Feb 28, 2012)

What do you think the chances are that this phone will have image stabilization????

0 upvotes
LukeDuciel
By LukeDuciel (Feb 28, 2012)

with over-sampling on a multi-ratio oversize sensor, it's easy, as long as processing power is in place.

iPhone 4s can do electronic IS with video. It's not really new. Lots of mini-DV from last century can do that.

0 upvotes
stylinred
By stylinred (Feb 28, 2012)

well the N8 has video stabilization and i imagine this will too but i havent read anything about IS for stills so i imagine it doesnt have it

Comment edited 31 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Rooru S
By Rooru S (Feb 28, 2012)

This prove again that slim P&S might dissapear in the near future because of good sensored phones.

0 upvotes
Donglei
By Donglei (Feb 28, 2012)

D800 was "the big picture", but just for 3 weeks. It is so shameful for less MP than a phone now...

4 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Feb 28, 2012)

The D800 was never the resolution king :)

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2009/9/28/hasselblad

1 upvote
AnHund
By AnHund (Feb 28, 2012)

Why?

0 upvotes
qwertyasdf
By qwertyasdf (Feb 28, 2012)

The 5.0 MP pic is tac sharp! I can even see the guys hair sticking out his nostril!

2 upvotes
ChristianHass
By ChristianHass (Feb 28, 2012)

I guess we have very different definitions of "tac sharp".
It's not bad for a camera phone though, especially at ISO800.

0 upvotes
SilverFilm
By SilverFilm (Feb 28, 2012)

How are the rock climbing photos taken in the future? See exif. That's pretty impressive indeed. Makes me want one almost as much as the good images themselves. Does it also come with the portable studio lights? Seriously, pretty impressive for a phone (or P&S).

0 upvotes
VadymA
By VadymA (Feb 28, 2012)

Hope iPhone5 will have similar sensor ;)

1 upvote
vlad0
By vlad0 (Feb 28, 2012)

Very unlikely.

7 upvotes
stylinred
By stylinred (Feb 28, 2012)

the iphone5 might catch up to the Nokia N8 finally (i doubt it) but you'll still be getting the over saturated, sharpened, dnr'd images ;)

2 upvotes
snake_b
By snake_b (Feb 28, 2012)

The iPhone might use this tech when they figure out how to make an app for it that makes the lens look like it has cataracts.

2 upvotes
Reg Natarajan
By Reg Natarajan (Feb 28, 2012)

This is exactly where cameras need to go. If I can carry a slightly larger phone and get this kind of quality, I'll do it in a minute. The best camera in the world is the one you have with you, and the worst in the world is the one you left on the shelf at home. I need Android for business, though, so I'm looking for Samsung and Sony to step up.

6 upvotes
amicus70
By amicus70 (Feb 28, 2012)

Yes, but I've read, that you could wait a long time for an android-mobile with such a cam...

1 upvote
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Feb 28, 2012)

With the amount of swiss knife capabilities lumped on a cell phone these days...

It is no longer a cell phone, as it was known before...

It is a different gadget altogether.

It has turned into this bat belt whip out full featured pocket device that keeps on evolving into a yet more complex electronic product.

.

4 upvotes
N8Phreak
By N8Phreak (Feb 28, 2012)

No one really (that I hang with) uses the term 'Cell Phone' anymore, it's commonly termed as a smart phone now. A cell phone is the Motorola Razr from a decade ago.

0 upvotes
snake_b
By snake_b (Feb 28, 2012)

Or in Germany, where it's still called a "handy", which is an abbreviation for "handjob", but they insist english speakers say it.

0 upvotes
Greg Henry
By Greg Henry (Feb 28, 2012)

Well, I think here in the U.S. people are now spoiled on Android, Apple, and maybe Windows Phone OS if it catches on - they've never been introduced to the Symbian OS so it never took off here like it has in several other countries, where it remains strong.

Nokia has all but admitted they're going to go head-on into Windows Phone OS for the states, though. So my guess would be a future version of this phone/camera combo with WinOS will wind up in at least one of the major carriers here within 2 years or less.

Funny thing is, though: There is a measurable number of people here who still reallly aren't all that hyped up about the whole "smart phone" stuff. They really don't want an Android or iPhone, but, the standard feature "dumb" phones are a bit too basic, too. I think there actually is a class of buyer here who would embrace a Nokia Symbian phone like this very well, IF and I do mean IF Nokia were extremely good at marketing it in the right way and places. I'd try it.

0 upvotes
snake_b
By snake_b (Feb 28, 2012)

Hah, Nokia Belle "dumb"? Try it, sir. There's a reason they even pulled the "Symbian" name. You might be very surprised at how it stacks against iOS and 'Droid (both of which I have). Not to mention battery life and working with as few restrictions as possible.

Comment edited 57 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Lilianna
By Lilianna (Feb 28, 2012)

Belle is a very different animal, it feels VERY much like Android.
But with far better battery life and MUCH better signal reception.
And fewer crashes too ;)

3 upvotes
Jon Rty
By Jon Rty (Feb 28, 2012)

Symbian was never dumb. It was the first smart-phone OS, and did things in 2001 that iOS could only dream of in 2008. The problem was never that it wasn't capably, the problem was that the touch-screen UI was clunky, the OS a bit laggy, and the ecosystem smaller than that of iOS and Android.

But Belle has fixed most of the UI problems, the OS is quite smooth now, and even tough smaller, there are almost 1 00 000 apps now, which makes the differences seem insignificant.

1 upvote
Bilgy_no1
By Bilgy_no1 (Feb 28, 2012)

Let's not forget that even in the last quarter, Symbian (now just Nokia) still held something like 20% worldwide market share in smartphones. Of course, that's way down from the 60+ percentages it enjoyed only a few years ago. But it's not irrelevant. I bet any of the other phone makers would love to have a share like that.

The problem of the Symbian ecosystem is that it is no longer supported so widely as it used to be. Samsung, SonyEricsson, and several others ditched it for Android, in part as a move to overtake Nokia. Nokia also got caught by the increased pace of innovation in the sector (slow processors, difficulty adapting to touch based UI, etc). And last year, Nokia announced its switch to Windows which cast a huge doubt over Symbian.

I feel Nokia managed the whole switch poorly. But I still trust their ability to make really good products. I'll certainly look at this product (would be great if we could hack it to run Android and use apps that are not available for Symbian).

0 upvotes
Rage Joe
By Rage Joe (Feb 28, 2012)

I wouldn't be too surprised if Nokia's Belle OS, with astonishing devices like this, would make a nice "symbian-comeback", as the truth is that it could take a long time for any other OS to run this kind of stuff.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 667
12345