DPReview Publishes 808 vs. 1020 Studio Comparison! My Remarks

Started Oct 25, 2013 | Discussions
Menneisyys Senior Member • Posts: 1,458
DPReview Publishes 808 vs. 1020 Studio Comparison! My Remarks

Article HERE.

1, at ISO 800 (versus 400), the sharpness of the 1200 gets a MAJOR hit. This isn't the only shot where this is evident – for example, as I've also explained in the comments section (see the comment starting with “Yup, the Z1 shot at ISO 400 1/10 s, while the Nokia at ISO 800, 1/9 sec.”), the nigh image set on the second page of DPReview's “Shootout: Sony Xperia Z1 vs Nokia Lumia 1020 vs LG G2 vs Samsung Galaxy S4 Zoom ” is also showing exactly this.

This is why the gradually decreasing text size test delivers incomparably worse results with the 1200 than with the 80:

In daylight and base ISO, there's practically no difference between the two cameras:

2, the lower effective resolution is also visible in the double-res ISO 12233 lines.

At around 3700 lph, the 808 still delivers true detail at high ISO, unlike the 1200, which stops delivering detail at around 3200 lph:

In bright light (and base ISO), both have approximately the same resolution (around 4000 lph):

3, finally, the left/righ border area (including the corners) softness is just incomparable. The 808 delivers way better results. A base ISO crop (so that the lower resolving power of the 1020 at ISO 800 doesn't have any effects of the results):

OP Menneisyys Senior Member • Posts: 1,458
Re: DPReview Publishes 808 vs. 1020 Studio Comparison! My Remarks
1

4, chroma noise-wise, at base ISO, the 808 is cleaner in all colors. As you can expect, the blue channel is significantly noisier in the 1020. This is pretty normal – after all, not even APS-C cameras can render blue skies without noise at base ISO – they can't beat the laws of physics. (At least not most of them.) Interestingly, which was pretty much hard-to-anticipate, the red channel, particularly with orange colors, is also significantly(!) more noisy in the 1020. A crop showing this:

Here, I used two arrows to denote the blue area and the orange one, both showing significantly more noise with the 1020.

5, noise reduction at base ISO makes foliage (in this case, green feathers) being rendered better on the 808. When doing the comparison, I made sure I chose an area still not in the left/rightmost 7-8% (with 4:3 shots, the area where there's significant blur) area. Unfortunately, many of the feathers of DPReview's test scene are in this area.

Here's a comparison:

As you can see, the 808 renders the feathers better. Some of them aren't even visible on the 1020's image.

vlad0
vlad0 Regular Member • Posts: 202
Re: DPReview Publishes 808 vs. 1020 Studio Comparison! My Remarks

There seems to be more noise around the faces on the right side at base ISO as well

 vlad0's gear list:vlad0's gear list
Canon EOS 400D 808
falconeyes
falconeyes Senior Member • Posts: 1,603
Re: DPReview Publishes 808 vs. 1020 Studio Comparison! My Remarks

That confirms my experience too (have a 808 and are very happy with, did some gallery shots too!).

Just wished somebody would take the 808's camera module and put it into a true camera housing, with real buttons. And better APP. Sort of flat, pocketable RX100.

-- hide signature --

Falk Lumo

 falconeyes's gear list:falconeyes's gear list
Sony RX100 III Pentax *ist DS Nikon D850 Nikon Z6 YI 4K Action Camera +8 more
wklee Veteran Member • Posts: 8,817
Re: DPReview Publishes 808 vs. 1020 Studio Comparison! My Remarks

How much of an improvement will it be when Nokia delivers on RAW for the Lumia 1020? It will be interesting to find out the 1020's capabilities then. Too bad it doesn't have a built in SD card slot. 32GB is going to be inadequate, fast.

Article HERE.

1, at ISO 800 (versus 400), the sharpness of the 1200 gets a MAJOR hit. This isn't the only shot where this is evident – for example, as I've also explained in the comments section (see the comment starting with “Yup, the Z1 shot at ISO 400 1/10 s, while the Nokia at ISO 800, 1/9 sec.”), the nigh image set on the second page of DPReview's “Shootout: Sony Xperia Z1 vs Nokia Lumia 1020 vs LG G2 vs Samsung Galaxy S4 Zoom ” is also showing exactly this.

This is why the gradually decreasing text size test delivers incomparably worse results with the 1200 than with the 80:

In daylight and base ISO, there's practically no difference between the two cameras:

2, the lower effective resolution is also visible in the double-res ISO 12233 lines.

At around 3700 lph, the 808 still delivers true detail at high ISO, unlike the 1200, which stops delivering detail at around 3200 lph:

In bright light (and base ISO), both have approximately the same resolution (around 4000 lph):

3, finally, the left/righ border area (including the corners) softness is just incomparable. The 808 delivers way better results. A base ISO crop (so that the lower resolving power of the 1020 at ISO 800 doesn't have any effects of the results):

-- hide signature --

Never buy version 1.0 of anything.

OP Menneisyys Senior Member • Posts: 1,458
Re: DPReview Publishes 808 vs. 1020 Studio Comparison! My Remarks

wklee wrote:

How much of an improvement will it be when Nokia delivers on RAW for the Lumia 1020?

It'll have a usable ISO 800 mode, then. Now, the eradication of detail because of heavy NR is quite obvious. (As opposed to ISO 400, where NR is much-much less evident and the shots are far more detailed.) Noisy but still full of details.

Of course it'll still be significantly more noisy than the 808 shots.

OP Menneisyys Senior Member • Posts: 1,458
Re: DPReview Publishes 808 vs. 1020 Studio Comparison! My Remarks

BTW, regarding the 1020's preferring choosing higher ISO's and, at the same time, a bit overexposing images:

- as I've pointed out several times (back in September too - see my Sony Z1 comparison), at ISO 400, there isn't as destructive NR as at ISO 800.

- the 1020 tens to over-expose images, which is certainly visible in this case too.

Therefore, if you manually lock ISO at 400 (max.) and possibly also shutter speed (not to allow the phone to introduce motion blur), you can let the camera under-expose (or, for that matter, properly expose) the image. While the resulting image will be a bit more noisy (particularly if you do under-expose and, consequently, you'll need to do some shadow puulling in pp), it'll be FAR more detailed.

Of course, the introduction of RAW to the 1020 will solve this problem too. Before that, however, you should never let the 1020 go over ISO 400, should you want to preserve detail.

vallhall Senior Member • Posts: 1,058
Re: DPReview Publishes 808 vs. 1020 Studio Comparison! My Remarks

Things will change then the new "Black" update arrives early next year

 vallhall's gear list:vallhall's gear list
Sony RX100 VI Samsung NX500 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 +2 more
Stevan G Contributing Member • Posts: 601
Re: DPReview Publishes 808 vs. 1020 Studio Comparison! My Remarks

vallhall wrote:

Things will change then the new "Black" update arrives early next year

only marginally though

vallhall Senior Member • Posts: 1,058
Re: DPReview Publishes 808 vs. 1020 Studio Comparison! My Remarks
 vallhall's gear list:vallhall's gear list
Sony RX100 VI Samsung NX500 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 +2 more
Stevan G Contributing Member • Posts: 601
Re: DPReview Publishes 808 vs. 1020 Studio Comparison! My Remarks

vallhall wrote:

Stevan G wrote:

vallhall wrote:

Things will change then the new "Black" update arrives early next year

only marginally though

Marginally and marginally

https://www.google.no/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CDQQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.gsmarena.com%2Fnokia-black-update-to-bring-the-old-oversampling-algorithm%2F&ei=T7BsUq_rBKOP0AW13oCACg&usg=AFQjCNGbaz3BGh3RvVQ0B2JoED_Ulp4I2A

I don't give a damn for what they say, they have lost their credibility long ago...and they certainly won't be able to implement "old oversampling algorithm" within 1020 hardware constraints.

Dominick101 Junior Member • Posts: 44
Re: DPReview Publishes 808 vs. 1020 Studio Comparison! My Remarks

vallhall wrote:

Stevan G wrote:

vallhall wrote:

Things will change then the new "Black" update arrives early next year

only marginally though

Marginally and marginally

https://www.google.no/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CDQQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.gsmarena.com%2Fnokia-black-update-to-bring-the-old-oversampling-algorithm%2F&ei=T7BsUq_rBKOP0AW13oCACg&usg=AFQjCNGbaz3BGh3RvVQ0B2JoED_Ulp4I2A

Note that by going back to natural colors and sharpening, Nokia may be exposing the ugly side of their new BSI sensor. From what I can see in many 1020 samples and from my own 1020 as well, the over-saturation was used to hide the lack of detail and muted color from a BSI sensor, and over-sharpening was used to hide edge-bleeding, lack in overall edge sharpness, and lost of detail due to noise. Of course, there will be slightly lesser noise but the noise level was already much higher than the 808 from the start due to smaller pixel/sensor size.

So whatever they do they will have to balance between natural color/sharpness and lost of IQ.

Coming from a Nokia 808 and 1020 user.

Dominick101 Junior Member • Posts: 44
Re: DPReview Publishes 808 vs. 1020 Studio Comparison! My Remarks

Menneisyys wrote:

Article HERE.

1, at ISO 800 (versus 400), the sharpness of the 1200 gets a MAJOR hit. This isn't the only shot where this is evident – for example, as I've also explained in the comments section (see the comment starting with “Yup, the Z1 shot at ISO 400 1/10 s, while the Nokia at ISO 800, 1/9 sec.”), the nigh image set on the second page of DPReview's “Shootout: Sony Xperia Z1 vs Nokia Lumia 1020 vs LG G2 vs Samsung Galaxy S4 Zoom ” is also showing exactly this.

This is why the gradually decreasing text size test delivers incomparably worse results with the 1200 than with the 80:

In daylight and base ISO, there's practically no difference between the two cameras:

2, the lower effective resolution is also visible in the double-res ISO 12233 lines.

At around 3700 lph, the 808 still delivers true detail at high ISO, unlike the 1200, which stops delivering detail at around 3200 lph:

In bright light (and base ISO), both have approximately the same resolution (around 4000 lph):

3, finally, the left/righ border area (including the corners) softness is just incomparable. The 808 delivers way better results. A base ISO crop (so that the lower resolving power of the 1020 at ISO 800 doesn't have any effects of the results):

Thanks for the deep analysis. However, I beg to differ on two points below:

Comparison 1: The text showing both cameras having almost the same detail in good lighting but the level of noise isn't equal. Notice how noisy the 1020 image is, also looking at the middle line where edge-bleeding is evident. The noise on the 1020 at base ISO is a concern because as we know the 1020 applies a higher level of sharpening to their image to bring up the level of detail which also introduces more noise. So if Nokia were to bring down edge sharpening to minimize noise, won't we be seeing less detail on the text? For that reason, there's a direct relationship between noise and detail level, and I don't think their performance is similar in this case.

Comparison 2 (daylight): I think there's a very big difference between the both and they are definitely not on par. The 1020 in daylight only manages around 3600lph whereas the 808 does 4000lph. Look how smudgy it is at 4000lph on the 1020? I don't think the lines are at all defined at 4000lph on the 1020. Again, we're seeing more noise (and edge-bleeding) on the 1020 which could be the reason why the lines are less defined than on the 808. The sharpening on the 1020 is actually a paradox because while it helps bring up the level of detail, it also destroys detail by introducing more noise.

bigley Ling Veteran Member • Posts: 4,448
Re: DPReview Publishes 808 vs. 1020 Studio Comparison! My Remarks

I feel sorry for enthusiast 1020 owners having to wait till next year just to get RAW support in the hope that they can render as good or better than the old 808. It is a long wait, and memories and moments cannot just wait two months. So for now 1020 owners will just have to settle for lesser quality images until next year.

Meanwhile I will be capturing an abundance of memories and moments with my proven king of camera phones, the Nokia 808.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/bigley/10543671124/

full resolution upload for those who want to pixel peep

 bigley Ling's gear list:bigley Ling's gear list
Apple iPhone X
Stig Vidar Hovland Senior Member • Posts: 1,744
Re: DPReview Publishes 808 vs. 1020 Studio Comparison! My Remarks

Stevan G wrote

I don't give a damn for what they say, they have lost their credibility long ago...and they certainly won't be able to implement "old oversampling algorithm" within 1020 hardware constraints.

Nokia has made the two best camera phone out there and they lost credibility?

bigley Ling Veteran Member • Posts: 4,448
Re: DPReview Publishes 808 vs. 1020 Studio Comparison! My Remarks

Stig Vidar Hovland wrote:

Stevan G wrote

I don't give a damn for what they say, they have lost their credibility long ago...and they certainly won't be able to implement "old oversampling algorithm" within 1020 hardware constraints.

Nokia has made the two best camera phone out there and they lost credibility?

I think Stevan G means that with the whole debarkle with the 1020 being released essentially with a totally new image processing engine which sports excessive sharpening, contrast, and bizzaire yellow saturation bias, combined with somewhat, less capable hardware than the predecessor the Nokia 808, has made Nokia look quite amateur with the release of the 1020.

 bigley Ling's gear list:bigley Ling's gear list
Apple iPhone X
vlad0
vlad0 Regular Member • Posts: 202
Re: DPReview Publishes 808 vs. 1020 Studio Comparison! My Remarks

falconeyes wrote:

That confirms my experience too (have a 808 and are very happy with, did some gallery shots too!).

Just wished somebody would take the 808's camera module and put it into a true camera housing, with real buttons. And better APP. Sort of flat, pocketable RX100.

Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of the device ? The point here is to avoid carrying an extra device to take photographs with.. you just use your smartphone for it

It has bee working very well for me..

bigley Ling wrote:

Stig Vidar Hovland wrote:

Stevan G wrote

I don't give a damn for what they say, they have lost their credibility long ago...and they certainly won't be able to implement "old oversampling algorithm" within 1020 hardware constraints.

Nokia has made the two best camera phone out there and they lost credibility?

I think Stevan G means that with the whole debarkle with the 1020 being released essentially with a totally new image processing engine which sports excessive sharpening, contrast, and bizzaire yellow saturation bias, combined with somewhat, less capable hardware than the predecessor the Nokia 808, has made Nokia look quite amateur with the release of the 1020.

I blame the carriers for the 1020 compromise.. they wanted a thinner phone, so we got inferior optics, smaller sensor, and a weaker xenon flash.

The jpeg processing will get better, its only a matter of time before they fully port the Symbian algorithms to WP, and then we will start seeing the old natural color reproduction that most of us like, and not this Walt Disney colors which remind me of the iPhone 4 days.

 vlad0's gear list:vlad0's gear list
Canon EOS 400D 808
OP Menneisyys Senior Member • Posts: 1,458
Re: DPReview Publishes 808 vs. 1020 Studio Comparison! My Remarks

Dominick101 wrote:

Thanks for the deep analysis. However, I beg to differ on two points below:

Comparison 1: The text showing both cameras having almost the same detail in good lighting but the level of noise isn't equal. Notice how noisy the 1020 image is, also looking at the middle line where edge-bleeding is evident. The noise on the 1020 at base ISO is a concern because as we know the 1020 applies a higher level of sharpening to their image to bring up the level of detail which also introduces more noise. So if Nokia were to bring down edge sharpening to minimize noise, won't we be seeing less detail on the text? For that reason, there's a direct relationship between noise and detail level, and I don't think their performance is similar in this case.

Sorry, I should have emphasized the entire section discussed sharpness (and the effects on it by NR) only, not the noise itself. I thought mentioning sharpness in the first sentence was sufficient.

Comparison 2 (daylight): I think there's a very big difference between the both and they are definitely not on par. The 1020 in daylight only manages around 3600lph whereas the 808 does 4000lph. Look how smudgy it is at 4000lph on the 1020? I don't think the lines are at all defined at 4000lph on the 1020. Again, we're seeing more noise (and edge-bleeding) on the 1020 which could be the reason why the lines are less defined than on the 808. The sharpening on the 1020 is actually a paradox because while it helps bring up the level of detail, it also destroys detail by introducing more noise.

Let me disagree. The two shots are of definitely different contrast - the 808 has much deeper blacks.

On the 1020's shot, it's still possible to properly count the lines at around 4000 lph. Not very easily because, again, the shot has far less contrast, but not much harder than at, say, 3600 lph. I've even created a version of the same image with bumped-up contrast:

Should the 1020 have much worse resolution, it'd be entirely impossible to properly count the lines at 4000 lph.

This is also emphasized by the uppermost "decreasing-size text" test, where - apart from the 1020's image being noisier - the two cameras deliver almost exactly the same sharpness.

Stevan G Contributing Member • Posts: 601
Re: DPReview Publishes 808 vs. 1020 Studio Comparison! My Remarks

Stig Vidar Hovland wrote:

Stevan G wrote

I don't give a damn for what they say, they have lost their credibility long ago...and they certainly won't be able to implement "old oversampling algorithm" within 1020 hardware constraints.

Nokia has made the two best camera phone out there and they lost credibility?

it doesn't matter much since all other phone manufacturers have quite crappy cameras so it's not really hard to have 2 best camera phones....

it all started with fake advertising for 920, there was no need for faking with N8&808...also calling 920 PureView for just having OIS, dammit then HTC One and LG G2 are also PureView so basically they have watered down a VERY lucrative concept...then all this mumbo jumbo about 1020 with 6 element lens, BSI sensor, new fancy "oversampling" algorithms and what not, all having mediocre quality at best...promising Symbian support to 2016 then cutting it in now etc. who is to guarantee the same won't happen with WP8 very soon?! New WP phones are becoming obsolete few months after they get on the scene, lumia 900 was rendered obsolete 3 months after presentation, now you already have 1520 instead of 1020 etc.

bigley Ling Veteran Member • Posts: 4,448
Re: DPReview Publishes 808 vs. 1020 Studio Comparison! My Remarks

I am seeing the release of the 1520 will no doubt annoy alot of 1020 owners who thought they had the latest and greatest hardware in their pockets. Not only does the camera not match the 808 as yet but also the rest of the hardware is considered obsolete 3 months after launch!

Was the Snap dragon quad core not available prior to the launch of the 1020? And how about this new IPS screen that boasts more quality over the pentile AMO LED screen in the 1020.

I think I am pretty glad now that I did not purchase a 1020. It seems the Nokia 808 by far is the better made phone. The first 808's may have had issues with lens calibration, but the later batches seems to be really quite good.

 bigley Ling's gear list:bigley Ling's gear list
Apple iPhone X
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads