Just Posted: Nokia 808 PureView Review

Asking it is answering it !

Aug 5, 2012permalink

I can't conceive the need some of us have to give this cam-phone such a free promotion, again and again... and again.

Are they in fact crypto-sales representatives of Nokia flooding every web sites ? Are they just would-be buyers who are not so sure of their own choice and are looking for others reaction to comfort themselves in their futur purchase decision ?

Aug 5, 2012permalink

are we still comparing it against DSLRs and high end compacts that were all made with a single purpose in mind, and that is to take pictures ? Well .. that speaks volumes for the product...

The 808 created its own category, and it should be looked as a ratio between size/functionality vs. picture quality. Show me anything else on the market, that can produce that kind of quality/flexibility, in such a small package. The sensor module in the 808 is wayyy smaller than anything that comes even close in terms of quality.. I am not even going to mention the optics, because that is another masterpiece from Zeiss, which deserves a lot of credit.

Aug 2, 2012*permalink

DarkShift

"The sensor module in the 808 is wayyy smaller than anything that comes even close in terms of quality.."

Not quite sure about that. Judging the studio shots clearly the best quality comes ONLY if the phone used with low ISO settings and no digital zooming. When shot at high ISO it is easily killed by latest m4/3 cameras. The detail level goes down as lighting gets dimmer. DR and colours are not very good to begin with.

As for flexibility and UI, it's camera is still designed for consumers and not for somebody who takes photography more seriously ;) Yes it is the best camera phone to date, but somebody has smoked something if they claim that it offers better "flexibility" than real cameras.

Aug 2, 2012*permalink

i was talking about "device" flexibility, not the camera alone. Its a fully featured smartphone+decent camera.. you can't expect it to be better than high end dedicated cameras.

All in all, its goon enough for a lot of people.

Aug 2, 2012permalink

zodiacfml

The reason this thing happened because the manufacturers were too comfortable and chose a slow innovation race. Sony, a new comer, created something a little exciting, the RX100. Nokia is similar and taking risk, why make something when people buy the iPhones and Androids where the camera is good enough to them.

Aug 2, 2012permalink

rx100 is pretty cool, but again, its 250 grams, and designed with one purpose only.. to take photographs. The 808 is 160 grams, and you have a fully featured smartphone + camera, which does quite well in most situations. And the rx100 is worth almost $700 .. can't even send a text with it.

My point is, why carry two devices ? If you are goint to to do that, carry a Nikon D800 along the 808... otherwise id doesn't make much sense.

Aug 2, 2012*permalink

HowaboutRAW

vlad0:

The Nokia 808 is horrible at high ISOs, and the RX100 isn't really useable above ISO 1600.

There's no need to introduce the large and expensive D800 as the only alternative to the Sony or the Nokia. (Also the D700 still way out performs the D800 in lowlight.)

Aug 3, 2012permalink

It is incredible to compare this camera phone to a real camera. Makes no sense at all. The image quality of the RX100 is in a completely different league than mediocre output from this phone. It is a good camera for a phone, but that's about it.

Aug 3, 2012permalink

Once again, Anhund has perfectly summed up my thought. This cam-phone is what it is and nothing more.

Wanting to compare it non-stop to a "real" camera is pointless as this item is good - maybe very good ? - just in some well-defined conditions of distance, luminosity and speed of reaction. It's as is one wanted to compare a swiss-army-knife to a damascus knife used to be used quickly and extensively in a restaurant. For sure the swiss-army-knife cut well enough, but it reaches its limit in no time.

Aug 5, 2012permalink

zodiacfml

Though the reviewer touched on bad highlight clipping, he also added that such problem is prevalent in compacts or any other camera phone.
I agree with him that you can judge a small photo whether it is taken with a compact or DSLR by just looking at the DR or lack of it.

Bad handling of highlights is obvious in today's cameras. Manufacturers can get away with more MP because people are just looking at the resolution and noise performance. Noise is muffled with noise reduction and reduced through better electronics but handling highlights require big, fat, old fashioned photosites.

I still consider this Nokia very good compared to plenty compacts out there.

Aug 2, 2012permalink

Kelvin L

I'm disappointed that Nokia Australia isn't bringing this phone into the country. I was hoping to get one of these to replace an ageing iPhone.

Aug 1, 2012permalink

kadardr

The rendering technology of the PureView Nokia (oversampling) should be benchmarked to normal cameras of various classes and sensor sizes to evaluate its real value.

As we learned from the interview embedded in the review: the oversampling technology is protected as Nokia's own. Could this technology be adopted by the camera makers? ?

Would the same Nokia camera without the smartphone be a viable product option for the masses? ?

Aug 1, 2012permalink

how many loosers around?!... look upstairs, then click - sample image/studio comparison tool - and put what ever you like against 808 (except d800) , and on martini bootle try to read "alessandria year" on ANY FF camera! no way Hose.. and on Nokia 808 you can.
Of course, nobody here will try to put 808 in dark, to put brighter , sharper lens, zoom's , have ergonomics and other aspects Dslr's can do. But Nokia 808 HAVE REAL RESOLUTION! (probably real 30MP) Period :)

Aug 1, 2012permalink

DarkShift

By ISO 800 it starts to look like watercolour painting and most of details is lost.

Aug 1, 2012permalink

vision63

What's a looser?

Aug 1, 2012permalink

vision 63 , looser is loser,( when somebody don't speak english as native language)

Aug 1, 2012permalink

A looser is a guy who likes to dress loose-fit clothes.

Aug 2, 2012permalink

Wei Steen

One thing to remember: Nokia 808 does waaay better than all Canon/Nikon/xxx DSLRs and compact cameras in making phone calls and sending SMS. In fact, I have never trusted my Canon 550D with a SIM card, it fits in SD card slot badly...

Aug 1, 2012permalink

rafalvonbur

There is simply no way that I will change my DSLR for one of those. Proper camera is what i use the most and phone well texts and conversations. i'll keep it that way.

Aug 1, 2012permalink

sure that... but why negate resolution quality of 808? hurts?

Aug 1, 2012permalink

Its a DSLR companion, not a replacement. Or in my case, my DSLR is a companion to the 808, since I find myself taking pics with the phone more often than with the DSLR.. 808 is pretty much always with me.

The camera start up time is impressive as well, from locked to ready.. can't be more than 1-2 secs.

Aug 1, 2012permalink

Zvonimir Tosic

I wonder who will revolutionarise smartphones with an electric toothbrush, or with a milk frother? Those two are in fact useful ideas.

Aug 1, 2012permalink

rafalvonbur

all the tools in swiss knife would be nice to.

Aug 1, 2012permalink

And a toaster and espresso machine.

Aug 2, 2012permalink

An integrated electric shaver would be a most for many of us.

Aug 5, 2012permalink

After having looked through the samples gallery I'm impressed with the quality from this camera phone, but then again it doesn't even stand up very well to my 10 year old nikon Coolpix 4500 and it certainly lacks far behind the image quality that we all have become used to from dedicated cameras like S100, J1/V1, RX100, 4/3, NEX etc. just to mention a few examples.

The fact is that this is a camera phone with a small lens and even though quality has improved immensely (here mostly by down sampling) then it is just a camera phone that do not stand up very well to a real camera in terms of image quality.

I'm sure that will change over the next few years and the gap between this type of camera and dedicated cameras will become much closer.

Aug 1, 2012permalink

one more looser... look upstairs, then click - sample image/studio comparison tool - and put what ever you like against 808 (except d800) , and on martini bootle try to read "alessandria year" on ANY FF camera! no way Hose.. and on Nokia 808 you can.
Of course, nobody here will try to put 808 in dark, to put lens, zoom's and other aspects Dslr's can do. But Nokia 808 HAVE RESOLUTION! Period

Aug 1, 2012permalink

I'm sorry for you resuyaber if you can't see it I'm afraid no one can help you. I'm talking about image quality not resolution. Nobody cares about resolution if the image quality is mediocre which is the case with the 808 compared to any of the cameras I mentioned.

Aug 1, 2012permalink

Der Steppenwolf

And ALL cameras you mentioned, save for one (S100) are actually small SYSTEM cameras. This phone should be benched against P&S cameras and with those, it stands it's ground.
Oh btw, it can also make calls and text, surf and so on. It also happends to be always in a pocket, try put one of those cameras you mentioned before in your pocket and then come back for further discussion.

Aug 1, 2012*permalink

Oh, my... It's crystal clear that some among us (oder "unter uns" ?) are Nokia satellites sent here and there to promote this item that is to a Dslr what's a broken watch to a good Perrelet: for sure it gives absolute hour two times a day, and suffers no monthly variation. Is it worth buying such a watch though ? For my part, I prefer the Perrelet even if it's not atomically exact these "two times a day". Instead, it's exact well enough every hour a day, isn't it better ?

And insisting all over again on the RESOLUTION (in capital, in case we are too stupid to understand) is a sufficient proof the ones who talk of photography using this criterion extensively are not photo-connoisseurs. Their aggressive as well as childish behaviour stands against the product they intend to make us buy.

For my part, it's no use further insisting, I hate to be fooled by a hard-seller.

Aug 5, 2012*permalink

Karroly

@rpm40,
"It may be more challenging to shoot a nice photo with a cameraphone than with a top end dslr..."

But it is more challenging to most people to open even an entry-level DSLR user's manual and learn all its features and subtleties. That is why P&S cameras sell more than DSLRs (apart from price/weight/size) and people use their cameraphone...

Aug 1, 2012permalink

elave

the aquiles heel of nokia and their stronger side is hardware. Design is beautiful!, software is adequate but processing units and ram are impossible to cope with .. and yet theyi give you something like this!

Nokia put the equinox cuad core or the tegra 2 ! and make a flag ship again!

This is a great compact camera but a horrible phone!.

I rather have something like a micro 4/3 or maybe the canon s95 and a great phone!.

Because a phone is a tool and it needs to work good always!.

But I recon ... great camera!!!!

Aug 1, 2012permalink

Mike Griffin

The 808 incorporates several leading edge technologies. Mainstream camera manufacturers must be asking themselves why they didn't come up with such ideas first.

Aug 1, 2012permalink

alfpang

It's still not clear how the 808 stacks up against compact cameras (although the comparison test looks decent vs the Canon S95)

At any rate, I think I've just found my answer to what spare phone to buy when I travel (and need a 2nd phone to roam with)

Aug 1, 2012*permalink

Yup, for example relative DR tests (see my posts below regarding the RX100) are still missing...

Aug 1, 2012permalink

h2k

Even with last years Nokia 701, i made nice photos and 1 was printed by a magazine (i removed all Exif first). Yes, hi-iso images look like watercolor paintings - but only at pixel level, at a lower level they look nice and are good memories of relaxed evenings without logging a real camera around.

Some apps for Symbian are missing i guess, including useful GPS tracker and Nokias can't be connected with new cameras to be controlled via Android (i'd love live view on an external device).

Some nice things about my Nokia 701:
- solid Old World build quality
- dedicated button for camera on, then snap
- dedicated toggle button for screen off + screen locked, then screen on + unlocked
- LED flash/video light useful as torchlight
- general ease of use
- alarm clock usable when phone OFF
- navigation with maps WITHOUT connecting to internet or mobile service provider in many countries

I made good use of all these features mentioned above. I just wish there was a Nokia for Android.

Aug 1, 2012permalink

RF and voice quality are very good, probably the best of all the phones I've owned thus far.

Aug 1, 2012permalink

AmaturFotografer

Finally people realized that the more mp, the better. Let the megapixel war begin(again)!

Aug 1, 2012*permalink

In dpr studio comparison tool i find ONLY one DSLR ( Nikon D800) have better resolution than Nokia 808 ??? Is there something wrong with my eyes?

Aug 1, 2012permalink

Resolution and image quality has nothing to do with each other.

Aug 1, 2012permalink

"Resolution and image quality has nothing to do with each other."

Static megapixel count maybe, particularly with small sensors and/or shitty optics (some examples: Sony's / Nikon's latest 16-18 Mpixel 1/2.3" or even 1/2.5" P&S and superzoom cameras). Effective (true) resolution is, however, excellent in the case of the 808. It just can't be compared to the above-mentioned, new, Mpixel count-wise, vastly overspecced Sony / Nikon models heavily smearing away all details even at base ISO.

Aug 1, 2012permalink

By AnHund
"Resolution and image quality has nothing to do with each other."

Yes, i know it hurt :) that 808 have better resolution (resolve more details) even that 5D3

Aug 1, 2012permalink

@resuyaber. It hurts to see that people believe that this camera can compare to a 5D3 or even a good P&S :-) It is however an interesting technology and results are very good for a camera phone.

Aug 1, 2012permalink

lensberg

But it will never ever come close to bettering the 5D III at high ISO, dynamic range, depth of feild, per-pixel definition and just sheer all round versatility...

Taking your theory into consideration, at base ISO its equal if not better than the D800 too at detail resolution & capture...

Aug 1, 2012permalink

CFynn

Of course - it has far more depth of field than a DSLR. :-)

Aug 1, 2012permalink

to Lensberg ...
this is not theory - you have samples to see with your eyes (if you like). and i excluded D800 as you can read. (and meaby some very few other exotic far over 10k$ cameras.. ) but DPReview stuff put over 130 very nice cameras in compare tool list, and nokia 808 beat them ALL (except one)

Aug 1, 2012permalink

Nothing but ludicrous. Just try to take photos of a tennis match, of a politician interview, of a quick event happening 50 meters away or what you think could be a UFO speeding in the sky in the twillight... and you will find your cam-phone is good to nothing, except taking funny photographs of your best friend picking his nose on the sly, or your girlfriend eating sloppily her melting Ben & Jerry's ice cream.

Aug 5, 2012permalink

jon404

Phone aside, are there any apps for this thing?

Will be interesting to see how it evolves -- if Nokia could run Android or Windows, they would have a winner.

Are the blown-out highlights the result of too many photosites for such a small sensor?

Jul 31, 2012permalink

vetsmelter

Although am here to learn about the photographic capabilities of the N8's successor, I feel the lack of knowledge about Symbian is as widespread as the idea that it is a "dead" OS.
Installable applications I currently use:
-Camera Pro, Shutter Pro, Camera Lover Pack (all creative image capture softwares)
-FlickrUP (upload pictures to Flickr - Nokia for same dark reason has removed built in Flickr support in the N8)
-Joikuspot (share your 3G by creating a Wifi hotspot)
-Nokia Internet Radio
-Remote Multidrive, SymFTP setup FTP/webservers on internet / wifi network, share your phone's drives on the net(work)
-Youtubedownloader
-Smartoffice
-Apps Switcher (soft button for multitaksing overview), App Stop (kill all or selectively to free memory - if you want to use Shutter Pro)
-Opera Mobile (webbrowser) , Minibrowser (webbrowser with easy front button to turn on/off Java)
-Skype
-MyExplorer (files)
-Recordoid (record voice)
-Nokia sleeping screen (beautiful clock and image, always on)
..

Aug 1, 2012permalink

tomtom50

At ISO 1600 it is not far from the Canon S100. In bright light it captures more detail than some dslrs. It fits in a phone.

Perhaps Nokia should produce a tiny camera based on the same sensor. Make the lens a bit bigger and a stop faster. It would still be the tiniest P&S out there, and the faster lens would take the high ISO performance to high-end P&S levels in a far smaller package.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

"In bright light it captures more detail than some dslrs" you are not correct, as 808 outperforma ALL DSLR (except high end ones, D800). Even with 5D3 is tie in terms on resolution , and as you say in bright light)... you can check studio compariison tool on this site. You can make that claim on other site where you can't check that easy .

Aug 1, 2012*permalink

It is completely ridiculous to compare this camera phone to even a Canon s100 which outperforms this phone by far regarding image quality. It is an impressive camera phone but comparing to dslrs etc. makes no sense at all.

Aug 1, 2012*permalink

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/studiocomparefullscreen.asp#baseDir=%2Freviews_data&cameraDataSubdir=boxshot&indexFileName=boxshotindex.xml&presetsFileName=boxshotpresets.xml&showDescriptions=false&headerTitle=Studio%20scene&headerSubTitle=Standard%20studio%20scene%20comparison&masterCamera=nokia_pureview808&masterSample=2012-07-20-0457&slotsCount=4&slot0Camera=nokia_pureview808&slot0Sample=2012-07-20-0457&slot0DisableCameraSelection=true&slot0DisableSampleSelection=true&slot0LinkWithMaster=true&slot1Camera=nokia_pureview808&slot1Sample=2012-07-26-0596&slot2Camera=nikon_d800&slot2Sample=dsc_8318&slot3Camera=nikon_v1&slot3Sample=dsc_0304&x=0.001756440281030445&y=0.004189944134078212

"Canon s100 which outperforms this phone by far regarding image quality. "

The S100 has definitely worse optical resolution (compared to the 8 Mpixel mode of the 808) and, in JPG, smears away details more at ISO 1600. Just two examples (cont'd):

Aug 1, 2012permalink

(continued): check out how the S100 / 808 renders "Paul Smith" on the face of the clock and whether it's readable. Certainly better (albeit more noisy) is the 808 in this case (detail retention).

Also, at (cont'd!)

Aug 1, 2012permalink

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/13100693/html/042012RetinaHDVideoPlayers/s100vs808.png

(continued): check out how the two cameras render the vertical lines of the last-but-one big Japanese Kanjis, just before the lined area. I've annotated this Kanji in the following screenshot:

Can you count the number of vertical lines in the S100 shot? And what about the 808?

Aug 1, 2012permalink

Finally, as far as DR is concerned,

Resolution is only one - but VERY important - part of the IQ. DR-wise, while we still don't have a numeric value, comparative shots with the RX100, both at base ISO, have shown better DR for the 808 than for the RX100.

Here's the discussion: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1046&thread=42098190

That is, I still wouldn't state "the S100 has surely much better DR than the 808". Again, the latter has beaten the RX100.

Aug 1, 2012permalink

dynax7d

When I used the studio shot comparison tool, to me the Nokia 808 resolved more detail than the best Canon and Nikon dslr cameras! Compact cameras were not even close.
How is that possible?

Jul 31, 2012permalink

tomtom50

At ISO 50, the Nikon 800e way outresolves the Nokia in the studio comparison tool.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

"At ISO 50, the Nikon 800e way outresolves the Nokia in the studio comparison tool."

Yup, the Nikon is indeed much better.

However, the 808 is way better than any P&S camera out there at low ISO's. Much better detail retention.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

finnaly someone who actualy see what is clear. ( many there will deny they eyes )

Aug 1, 2012permalink

He..he. Incredible that some people think resolution has anything to do with image quality. The s100 for example is far better than this camera phone that so easily blows highlights. Comparing it to dslrs is insane. It is an impressive camera phone though.

Aug 1, 2012permalink

"He..he. Incredible that some people think resolution has anything to do with image quality. The s100 for example is far better than this camera phone that so easily blows highlights. Comparing it to dslrs is insane. It is an impressive camera phone though."

Here's the discussion: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1046&thread=42098190

That is, I still wouldn't state "the S100 has surely much better DR than the 808". Again, the latter has beaten the RX100.

Aug 1, 2012*permalink

Sorry Menneisyys but the RX100 obliterates this camera phone by a large margin as far as image quality goes.

Aug 1, 2012permalink

"Sorry Menneisyys but the RX100 obliterates this camera phone by a large margin as far as image quality goes."

At high ISO surely. At low ISO, DR-wise? Well, dunno - the comparative images don't look very promising for the RX100...

Of course it's too early to make a conclusion. Nevertheless, I still wouldn't write off the 808 so easily, not even in the DR department...

Aug 1, 2012permalink

marike6

The big deal breaker for me, of the 808 as a camera is the abysmal highlight clipping and the highlight roll-off that, well, doesn't roll.

This, the less than wonderful high ISO performance, and the unfriendly form-factor make it extremely unlikely that enthusiasts will stop buying high end P&S anytime soon. But I do applaud Nokia for pushing the envelope in the camera-phone space.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

LensBeginner

You forgot purple fringes... those roll pretty well... (e.g. the boat in the picture) ;)

Aug 1, 2012permalink

RusVolley

Ｓｉｍｐｌｙ　【First phone with "camera"】　Ｂｒａｖｏ!

Jul 31, 2012permalink

Stephen_C

I feel like duct taping a Galaxy III to a Sony RX 100. Sony could probably do a more elegant job than I, of course.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

Artichoke

I looked long & hard at the Nokia 808 & Symbian was the deal breaker for me
also it is not available except in an unlocked version, which meant more of a hassle for me using it as a phone
I went with the Samsung Gallaxy III which has an excellent, though more conventional, camera
what I like is how well it integrates various commonly used cellphone camera functions
here is a sample of what it can do --------> http://ic2.pbase.com/g4/90/46890/2/144925387.hI3Aalhi.jpg
which is an available light pussycat picture
AF is surprisingly good & it has a swell macro mode that I use all the time
I much prefer WebOs to Ice Cream Sandwich, but having that in the Gallaxy is a dream
too bad Nokia is likely going with Win 8 for this phone when released in a locked version
WebOs is such a fine OS for cellphones
HP's decision to sink their WebOs devices will be studied in years to come as one of the great business blunders

Jul 31, 2012permalink

vetsmelter

Artichoke, I feel with you about WebOS. Too bad the camera in the WebOS Pre 3 is lousy. I just couldn't live with that. The multitaksing on the Pre 3 is great and I love the screen.

Did you study the Nokia N9? The camera is somewhat better and the Linux Debian based OS is more powerful than that on WebOS device.
Maemo (Harmattan / MeeGo) is such a fine OS for cellphones.
Nokia's decision to sink their long standing Maemo line of pocketable internet devices will be studied in years to come as one of the great business blunders.

Luckily the Maemo Team has now united in the Jolla project.
A phone is due to be released this year but I don't expect a great camera at first.

for the waiters: http://www.forbes.com/sites/ewanspence/2012/07/21/finlands-jolla-will-be-the-ferrari-of-the-smartphone-world/

Jul 31, 2012permalink

obeythebeagle

I am amazed at the quality of the images from my 8 meg droid cam, and it has a tiny sensor. This camera is a revelation, with a relatively large sensor, Zeiss lens and many megapixels. For a cell phone, the posted pictures are fantastic. Who wouldn't want one if you were without a dslr? I will however wait for a droid model.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

My hope is on Sony. They can do both (cameras and smartphones) very well.
But they still sleeping :-(

Jul 31, 2012permalink

they don't want to hurt their own p and s market.. Nokia,HTC, and Apple don't care. If Apple had this technology, they would ruin the compact camera market, just like they did to the music player market with the ipod. Compact makers are lucky that its Nokia...

Jul 31, 2012permalink

stoic little

@vlad: I doubt Apple would make a phone like this. It's too bulky for their taste. :)

Jul 31, 2012permalink

As far as I'm concerned, I do not care going out without my phone as I don't use it so much, but I absolutely can't bear being without any camera. Thus, I wonder if one day, we won't have such a news not about a phone that can be used as a "quite good" camera but about a camera than can be used as a phone. I think, by the way, that the time is near when the "phone function" won't be an independent one and it will be added on demand as an application to any item of your choice: a watch, a pair of sunglasses, a key holder, a shoe... It will get smart ! In that case only, I will maybe be interested in a "camera that can take good pictures". Otherwise, out of the question !

Jul 31, 2012permalink

Josh152

If Nikon or Canon would make such a device it would be THE phone for photographers.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

And I would sold by tens of millions world wide. Hey Canon ! Hey Nikon ! Don't forget us for the royalties !

Jul 31, 2012permalink

Typo: it would sell by...

Jul 31, 2012permalink

yortuk

Polaroid tried to go that way: http://androidandme.com/2012/01/devices/polaroid-sc1630-phonecamera-is-a-great-on-the-camera-not-so-much-on-the-phone/

Jul 31, 2012permalink

"Polaroid tried to go that way: http://androidandme.com/2012/01/devices/polaroid-sc1630-phonecamera-is-a-great-on-the-camera-not-so-much-on-the-phone/"

720p in 2012? Sensor size unknown? Must be pretty small (around 1/3"), given that the thing has 3x optical zoom - they would have mentioned a billion of times it it was larger than 1/1.7". Well, I don't think it would have had better IQ than, say, the already IQ-challenged iPhone 4S or the S3...

Jul 31, 2012permalink

It had a great product name, though. 'Polaroid Android'. Someone had been listening to Radiohead there at Polaroid headquarters!

Jul 31, 2012permalink

Joe Ogiba

Screw smartphones, I don't want a 2 year contract and monthly data plan. Put the sensor in a compact superzoom with 1080p60 and I might buy it. My Verizon feature phone was free on our family plan that my wife pays for and it has an 8mp camera with 720p HD video . I use my 64GB iPad with Verizon 4G LTE if I need to go on the internet and view web pages as well as my 13.3" i7 MacBook Air or MacMini with 26" monitor.

Jul 31, 2012*permalink

Josh152

Personally I think everyone should just refuse to sign these ridiculous cell phone contracts and start negotiating sections of them with the carriers. The way it is now the contracts are very lopsided toward the carrier. This will only change if people stop signing them and stand up for themselves. Cell phone contracts are unfair because people let them be.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

vetsmelter

"2 year contract and monthly data plan" Why does this remind me of the time when I was depending on a photographer shop to develop my pictures? I did not love camera's for that reason :)
Lucky digital is here and phones are sold separately from data plans. (over here)

Jul 31, 2012permalink

Josh152

Well in the U.S. many carriers require you to purchase a data plan if you want a smartphone. Even if you don't need it. They literally won't sell you a plan without it.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

Marty4650

These convergence appliances leave me cold. I don't even use the video function on my cameras. I prefer something that does one thing exceptionally well, over things that can do a lot of things somewhat well.

I realize there are lots of people who love the camera phone concept, but I really think Dpreview is casting their net much too widely now.

If they decided to start reviewing security cameras or endoscopes then someone would probably be thrilled. Because after all... they are also cameras of a sort.

IMHO, there are still plenty of real cameras that need reviewing... and that should be the priority of this website.

However, it's not my website. I am just a non-paying guest. And even with all this newly added clutter, Dpreview is still a great website.

So my opinion is just that. My opinion.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

"I don't even use the video function on my cameras" so don't I ! But I bet we are already both "old schools" ?

Jul 31, 2012permalink

happypoppeye

I have to disagree on a few points, all the while understanding where your coming from...
- security cameras and endoscopes are not something a consumer would usually use as a walk around type camera, a smartphone is, so maybe taking it a bit far there
- these are real cameras, and probably should be a priority for DPR right now, seeing how Samsung sold 73 million units last quarter, Apple something like 15 million ...whether you like it or not, this is the biggest sub-sector of cameras sold and ever seen. Let's face it, DPR is out to make money, and reviews like this will bring many more viewers

...over my character limit, now thats annoying

Jul 31, 2012permalink

happypoppeye

...con't

That said, I hate cell phones, and never carry one around just to take photos and hardly ever carry the one around I have, but I do carry around a slim compact camera ...but I'm old and out of touch ...I really do think these camera phones are where the youth are going ...I think the whole SLR vs m4/3 is really offbase and I think in the near future it's going to be the ultra small compacts and cellphone cams that and ILC camera is goingto be fighting against... we'll see, all opinion, most on this site don't get that.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

Just a word about the "best seller" argument: snake oil was sold by hectoliters in the past, it did not ever prove it was a good medecine. In fact, while being popular toward naives, it didn't cure anything (cf: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake_oil ) in history, and if it was still avaible, for sure there would be new-born suckers to implore to be fooled in spite of what we know in our century about that snake oil (toad oil in Japan).

For the rest, I'm glad we largely agree.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

Nico Burns

You might have a point, except for the fact that this camera (the camera part of the phone) represents some real innovation in camera technology, and surpasses the image quality of most pocket cameras.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

Bill Bentley

I'm 49. I still have my Minolta XD-11 with mint leatherette trim. I also have a Canon DSLR, a Panny bridge and a Panny P&S. I for one would be very happy to have image quality rivaling my bridge or DSLR in a smartphone.

I'm trying to simplify my life and my collection of "possessions". The smartphone helps with this a lot. Heck, two weeks ago I just stopped wearing a watch for the first time in my adult life. I always have my phone with me so I'm not missing the watch at all. I'm looking forward to the convergence becoming better and more affordable in the coming days.

For me, the emphasis is on AFFORDABLE, because I'm on a no-contract, pre-paid phone plan. Have been for years now. As others have mentioned I'm in no hurry to pay $50/month just to have the privilege of carrying a cool phone/camera in my pants pocket.

Jul 31, 2012*permalink

Richard Butler

If you took the SIM out of an 808, it could be seen as a touchscreen rival to something like a Ricoh GRD series (albeit a very different approach).

Ignore the smartphone aspect (though that also involves ignoring the features that are helping smartphones kill-off conventional compacts), and you still have a prime-lens camera with a huge sensor and a really interesting approach to the way it uses its many pixels.

It doesn't matter that it's a 'convergence appliance' - it's a fascinating piece of kit that raises all sorts of interesting possibilities about the future of small cameras (regardless of whether they can make calls).

This is exactly the sort of thing dpreview has always been interested in.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

To Bill Bentley: I understand you perfectly and I find very sound in mind to make ones possible to limit the burthen of our countless acquisitions. Look at how many remote-controlers we have for instance to understand immediatly what we are talking about.

Yet, I fear the price to pay to practicality will be too high very soon. I know some Japanese who lost (were stolen from) their valuable phone: the thing in itself is very expensive, that's a point, but beyond that, it contained their transportation card paid for one or several months, their watch, their diary, part of their schedule, emails, photographs taken, downloaded songs, and in some cases their electronic-purse with "some" money in it.

We have to never forget, never, that concentration may mean speed and efficiency, but overall it happens a day or another when it proves to be a desastrous weakness. That day, we loose all and it's too late to regret.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

Timbukto

Yes I like buying devices that do one thing extremely well. Which means for me being able to shoot a DSLR with portrait primes is doing one thing extremely well, but having a smart phone with a fast wide-angle lens of good quality + innovative sensor is still a big plus. It allows my DSLR to do one thing extremely well compared to having to use a larger and more IQ compromised zoom for social 'snapshots'.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

larrytusaz

{Marty4650) I agree 100%, and I have a smartphone. But I'm like you, I'm tired of all of this "convergence." Yes it is handy to have 3011 features in 1 item that's always with you, but such an item does not perform the functions as well as the "one thing only" devices it replaces, even if it does it "good enough."

Even things like the calculator app on a smartphone--compared to an all-touch device you have actual physical buttons with tactile feedback. Compared to something like a Blackberry, it's still better because you're not having to use the numbers in the reverse "telephone" format (with 7-8-9 on the bottom row as phones do it vs the top row as calculators do it). I use my phone's GPS but I still own a Garmin Nuvi so that I can do other things on the phone while the GPS handles driving directions (my wife typically drives while I'm riding "shotgun"). A phone that does nothing but phone calls (I'm thinking landline) will have multiple line capabilities & such. The list goes on.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

Bill Bentley

@WilliamJ. Your point is taken, but pretty much the same, or worse, could happen by a pickpocket at the train station. I am not suggesting putting your whole life inside the phone and replacing your wallet, although it is coming to that no doubt. Plus, everything is moving towards "cloud" back up so even if you lose your phone all your pictures and data are one new phone and a download away. Plus the new phone security wipes the lost/stolen phone data remotely and completely.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

littlebitstrouds

The best camera, is the camera you have with you. Fact is, I never know when I'm going to see something I want to document, and I just won't carry more then my cellphone wallet and keys with me throughout the day. I bought my Evo LTE phone because of it's amazing camera. I may trade it in, at a loss, and get this if the camera feature is that much better. There are consumers that love these reviews, and am glad they are covered.

Here's what I can do with my phone camera:
http://youtu.be/IRV2XtkntjI

Aug 1, 2012permalink

Marty4650

No.

The camera you have with you is just "the camera you have with you." There is nothing "best" about being the only option you have.

This entire website was designed to help people make gear choices, and not for simply spewing old cliches that really mean absolutely nothing.

Aug 2, 2012permalink

rpm40

Add a waterproof case to the 808, and you have the highest IQ ruggedized point and shoot you can buy! Sure, the new waterproof Oly TG-1 zooms optically, but the pureview "zoom" makes up for it, and at full resolution the Nokia definitely pulls away in IQ.

I think using similar tech to the 808 to design a proper weatherized pocket cam would be a great idea.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

What if someone rings while you're taking a snapshot?

Jul 31, 2012permalink

Yiotis

You will know who to blame for losing a shot or even sue him or her for losing millions from a potential photo, from a mobile phone...

Jul 31, 2012permalink

In that case, it's time to realize the big mistake you commited relying on your phone to take pictures. Hard life lesson !

Jul 31, 2012permalink

Push the red button and take a picture.
But OK maybe this was the important moment.
But what if you want to take a snapshot and don't have your dedicated camera in your pocket.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

In that case just use the one that is included in your watch, or in your pen, or in your glasses, or in your anything else (cf: http://www.spyville.com/pepospycabow.html ).

Jul 31, 2012permalink

AlanG

Simply turn the phone off or don't answer it while shooting. I wouldn't answer my phone when shooting fleeting photos with a DSLR either.

Jul 31, 2012*permalink

if its that important, put the phone in airplane/offline mode..

Jul 31, 2012permalink

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/8083837371/review-nokia-808-pureview/6

Only two readers spotted the irony. Cell phone fanboys are just too serious. Relax.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

marike6

Nice review but why are all the comment from last evening gone?

Jul 31, 2012permalink

Zdenek Janda

It seems that there are two parallel discussions related to Nokia 808 review, this one and the following one (on bottom of page):

Jul 31, 2012*permalink

AndrewG NY

Dunno. I had a comment yesterday evening that's gone missing.

Check that -- it WAS in the other thread!

Aug 1, 2012*permalink

RadioGnome

Clear example of my statement, that cameraphones make excellent representations of the thing you point the lens at, but make totally uninteresting photographs.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

Jon Rty

If you need your camera to make your shots interesting, then you're not doing it right. Cameras may open possibilities, but they never make shots interesting, and a interesting photograph is possible with any camera.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

rpm40

Cameras don't make interesting photographs.

Sure, if you have a nice camera like a D800, great high iso, faster autofocus, more control over DOF, and so on, it's easier to get the picture you want- and yet, amazingly many photographers took great photos back when they were limited to asa 25, no autofocus, many with nearly infinite DOF.

It may be more challenging to shoot a nice photo with a cameraphone than with a top end dslr, just like its more challenging to shoot the same with an old film camera. There were plenty of good and bad photos taken then. There are plenty of good iphone photos and bad Canon 5d III photos taken now.

Maybe what you meant is that you're too lazy to work within the limits of a cameraphone to take interesting photographs? :P

Jul 31, 2012*permalink

CBuff

"Many with nearly infinite DOF" ?? What are you talking about ? Have you ever glazed in the glass of a 4x5 or 8x10 chamber? Do you know why the tilting mechanism was so useful back then ?

And then the other uninformed comment about camera and "Interesting" photographs.. to record reality, yes, you need an interesting subject. Have you ever spent 5 seconds examining a print by Edward Weston ? How you "feel" the texture of the object? Come on, stop showing your ignorance with posts like this one.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

RadioGnome

I find a lot more interesting photography using home-brew analog processes, shoe-boxes with pinholes, toy-camera's and such, as I find interesting photography using smartphones.

How dull can you get. Press a button and some programmers deliver the thing they have thought up for you. Sometimes with some pseudo-random-lomo-effect which is just another program.

Any subject gets better when photographed with something else than a smartphone. Be it an M9 or a Hello Kitty cam. Only sometimes, a smartphone is your best cam. That is when the smartphone is the only camera with you, and the choise is smartphone or no picture.

Jul 31, 2012*permalink

dkord

Images are flat with no pop but if you're planning on dirtying it up on instagram and posting it on facebook or twitter who cares.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

Mescalamba

Hate to burst your bubble, but most digital photos are flat without processing.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

(unknown member)

There's even a few flat images taken with a DSLR in the OP's gallery. :P

Jul 31, 2012permalink

K_Photo_Teach

Can someone explain to me what this means for how lenses limit resolution?
I was under the impression from reading around here that even DSLR lenses were limiting the Nikon D800?

Jul 31, 2012permalink

BJL

For one thing, it is a good (though small) prime lens of fairly low f-stop, so diffraction and such are not killing the images the way some people fear. And it is a very big sensor as phones (and compacts) go, with pixels no smaller than on many other phones, and the un-cropped images are displayed at high PPI.

For another, the talk of lenses limiting the D800 is a bit exaggerated: usually, both the lens and the sensor contribute some limits on IQ, and that was true even with consumer grade 35mm film as the sensor, but despite that, improving the film or sensor while using the same lens usually gives some clear improvement in IQ.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

MarkInSF

I'm impressed by the images, but every time I read 'PureImage' I remember that an antiquated meaning of 'pure' is dog poop. Really. I like the creativity here. I suspect these sorts of sensors will, eventually become common in phones and compact cameras of all types. Want to 'zoom' your laptop's webcam or your ruggedized underwater can? This solution is more compact and has no moving parts. The sensors will continue to get more sensitive so can be made even smaller. I suspect with more processing power a better job of oversampling can be accomplished, too. These are a bit softer than I would have expected, given how good the sensor is at full resolution.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

Sergey Borachev

The main problem is a conundrum for those who also need a smartphone and also like to shoot photos. Do you get this camera and sacrifice on the features of a smartphone, like application, ussability, etc? or do you get a good smartphone like iPhone or Android phone and sacrifice on the camera features?

Or, I suppose, also this. Get both a good smartphone and something like a RX100, XZ-1/2 at a lot more cost in terms of weight and money but get all the best?

I think I will wait for an Android version of this camera, from someone else, since Nokia will only be using Microsoft os, if not Symbian. Story of its failure.

Jul 31, 2012*permalink

MarkInSF

The upcoming MS OS looks quite nice and clean. I just think it's going to have a hard time catching up in apps unless MS comes up with some killer feature to overcome that disadvantage. I don't think this is it, but it will make a few sales.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

The 808 is a full featured smartphone.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

uluN808

@Sergey Borachev

Have you effer tested the 808?
I came from an Samsung Galaxy SII and sold it for the 808.
The 808 is a full smartphone!!!

Jul 31, 2012permalink

@ uluN808
I'm a owner of a N8 and since my wife have a GS2 I'm thinking about changing to Android (if there would be just one with the photo quality of at least the N8).

Jul 31, 2012permalink

CBuff

the 808 is NOT upgradeable to Windows 8. End of story.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

every time I take a phone in 5Mpix auto mode, I am amazed at how small the file size is, but the quality remains very good at the same time.. I am getting 500kb. to 1mb files that look great.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

thejohnnerparty

Buy stock in Nokia & Microsoft. Nokia is presently selling for about $2.10/share. Microsoft is about $30.00/share. Both may reward you, but make no mistake - it is a risk!

Jul 31, 2012permalink

CBuff

Right... give the share price, but not the market cap. Make a decision to invest based solely on share price, yeah baby, glad there are investors like you out there to keep the market fluid. Attaboy!

Jul 31, 2012permalink

highwave

I thought this phone would run the RX100 very close

sadly from what I've seen in the photo comparison with it and the Nikon V1, it seems there is a very sizable gap between it and the 1 inch sensor cameras out there.

It seems even the Canon S100 is better (can't be too sure with the Canon strong noise reduction)

phone cameras have a long long way to go before they kill off P&S like the RX100

Jul 31, 2012permalink

familyogre

"phone cameras have a long long way to go before they kill off P&S like the RX100"

Absolutely, and i doubt they ever will purely because of the limited form factor for a phone. However it does give the P+S industry a major kick up rear to raise their game.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

MarkInSF

I'd say Sony already raised their game with the RX100. Now I wish they'd combine all that camera goodness with the features others offer. No reason not to have a great camera without a touchscreen, Wi-Fi, and GPS. They take nothing away from the camera, add nevligible size or weight, and are useful. Camera purists will be unhappy, but they will still have their primitive playthings, too. Eventually the camera just becomes a phone. I'd much rather have that kind of camera phone, one that is a great camera first and a phone second. The 808 takes nice pictures -- for a phone.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

marike6

@MarkInSF

Actually glad my RX100 doesn't have a touchscreen. Changing settings is super fast with the control ring on the lens, and the lovely LCD is not constantly filled with fingerprints. It has all the modern goodness you could want, i.e. sweep panorama, hdr, auto dr, filters, etc, and like most Sony products it's not the slightest bit "primitive".

Jul 31, 2012permalink

rpm40

Are fingerprints and smudges more of a problem with some touchscreens over others? None of my cameras have touchscreens, but my iPhone does, and I rarely notice the fingerprints despite tapping away on that thing all day.

I am a bit anal myself about wiping down the screens on my cameras, but even then I only notice when the camera is off, so may do it at the end of the day before I put it away.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

Anfy

It would be interesting to compare it - on the studio comparison tool - against the Sony RX100.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

J1000

I'm not a fan of the colors I'm seeing.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

Barney Britton

I suggest a drink of water and a nice lie down :)

Jul 31, 2012permalink

urix

NOKIA PureView fan detected.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

Barbu

Excellent comeback, mr. Britton! It seems that there are again real people at DPreview. Keep it up!

Jul 31, 2012permalink

Barney Britton

We're very real. At least I think we are...

Jul 31, 2012permalink

NotSteve

I might be wrong, but it seems like the camera industry has a more reasonable take on patents than the mobile device sector, be it tablets of phones. I'd hate to see the convergence between mobile devices and cameras introduce the egregious level of patent-trolling and lawsuits that is taking place in the mobile phone/tablet sector into camera development.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

I don't think I would ever buy an P&S again. Its something like the 808+DSLR .. everything in between doesn't make much sense to me.

Nikon D800 + Nokia 808 .. that combo would cover 100% of my needs.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

familyogre

That's exactly why i bought an 808, it does have it's faults as a camera but in most situations it does a great job so no need for a point and shoot. For everything else i have my k5.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

.. works great! I've been on the smartphone+dslr combo since the Nokia N8 came out 2 years ago.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

CameraLabTester

The marriage of camera manufacturers and mobile phones are inevitable.

These two separate items sell on their own right, and combining them only increases the desirability of the product.

The camera features of this gadget is good, but the Nokia phone interface is something a lot of disappointed and badly burned previous users would recall as a painful memory.

Put this camera on an iPhone, HTC or Samsung and it will shine. Nokia has to clean up it's interface first.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

The UX in Symbian 10.1 is quite good, and with the available hardware, the 808 runs just fine.. try one, you will see for yourself :)

Jul 31, 2012permalink

(unknown member)

Thats kinda like comparing the latest Android to an early version of RedHat. The 808 uses Nokia Belle as the OS which is a world away from the Symbian OS that was used on the N97.

Infact the Nokia Belle interface is very Android like.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

@ sir_bazz:
You are right Nokia Belle and Android are very similar but the problem is that the most app developers are leaving Symbian.

Jul 31, 2012permalink

"You are right Nokia Belle and Android are very similar but the problem is that the most app developers are leaving Symbian."

Get an iPad (or an Android tablet) and you have the best of both worlds. (Who would browse the Web when there's - even compared to the best Android phones / the iPhone 4s) a much superior tablet hardware (much higher-resolution, eye-pleasing etc. - think of the Retina-screened iPad 3)?

Jul 31, 2012permalink

(unknown member)

@Schwermetall

Yup I agree with that and it may well be in issue for some potential buyers however, thats a much different issue to someone saying that the Nokia interface needs to be cleaned up.

Jul 31, 2012permalink