Joined on Aug 30, 2001


Total: 9, showing: 1 – 9
On article Review: Nokia 808 PureView (349 comments in total)
In reply to:

MonkRX: Bleh. Nokia should have just asked Sony to develop an 8MP BSI sensor of the same size. I bet it would have performed better.

or just use the Nikon 1/RX100 sensor.

All this dubious effort to create gold from 1.4 micron pixels certainly earned them headlines and fanfare, burned through their cash, with little else to show. Image quality is barely better than the N8's 1/1.8" 1.75 micron pixels. A one-off show with zero impact on the sorry state of their other cameraphones with or without Zeiss lens: garbage like any other brand's.

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2012 at 05:33 UTC
On article Review: Nokia 808 PureView (349 comments in total)
In reply to:

iae aa eia: amazing how nokia and zeiss got to this. nokia did a job i never expected them (nokia) to do in the photography area. they (nokia) did not content themselves to compete in the phone market, but in the photo market. i mean, professional photo market.

man, to have a phone being compared to a d800 to give us an idea how good it can perform is... weird?, great!?, absurd?, annoying? right? disorientating?... to which one would they compare if the d800 were not launched then? haaa!

and zeiss, my gosh... german lens engineering at its best. what the heck of a resolutive lens! and give a look at their lens design. i just found this image of it (http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/images/features/808-lenses.jpg).

congrats nokia (and zeiss)! i'm amazed.

When you can't do anything to raise the poor quality of your mainstream phone camera, you divert your resources to a marquee product where direct comparisons do not apply. That's what Nokia is doing here, avoiding the battle, to their peril. I don't expect PureView to do anything for the sorry state of affairs in Lumia or Asha phones.

Once WP8 brings Navteq offline maps to everyone, I expect even more people to see through Nokia's hypocrisy and try other brands.

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2012 at 05:22 UTC
In reply to:

OneGuy: 220 pixels per inch is the new apple "retinal" thing? Well, for at least a year Sony has an 11" diag laptop (the Z series) with 1080x1920 pixels, which translates to 216 pixels per inch.
Yet, Apple has better marketing and wakes dpr up, albeit a year late. Further, dpr is lame to comment that in addition to resolution there is the importance of the color repro gamut, which is a function of technology and at this time IPS (In-Plane Switching) displays are the king -- and Apple isn't there.

Color fidelity is important to photography, I'd say.

The VAIO S15 is the most directly comparable photographer's laptop, IMHO.

It's got a FUllHD IPS, but only 72% sRGB, though, and you have to remember that orange is actually red. Color gamut is not specified for the Macbook Pro. It costs $1000 vs MBP's $2200. That's a lot of money for 2.5X more pixels, but some would find it worthwhile (esp. people with academic grants).

Both weigh the same, 1.96kg vs 2.0+kg, but the MBP is probably more durable. You can fit two 2.5" hard drives + an mSATA SSD inside the VAIO, by ripping out the optical drive. 96WH of batteries inside the MBP probably take a long time and a bulky power adapter to charge.

Sour grapes or pragmatism, some might win clients over with the 5 million pixel display, while I think I can work with 2 million pixels onscreen, and spend that $1200 difference on better lenses.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2012 at 08:56 UTC
In reply to:

Neil2112: Seriously nice update.
Good work chaps, it's a beaut.

I know that a lot of the professional Apple haters will never get this, but as somebody that agonizes over every shot I really do have a deep appreciation for guys like Jony Ive at Apple that go to the trouble of making their gear as near-perfect as possible.

Did anyone watch the keynote? They designed the fans inside the MBP so that the sounds the blades emit cover a broader range of frequencies and so make them quieter..

If you as a photographer don't give a flying fig about stuff like that too, I **guarantee** your photography will reflect it.

well, some companies probably use special fans but they don't make a song out of it. There's no actual measurements in decibels, so you're left to imagine it's the best laptop.

I don't know what kind of photographer you are, but if you need a better laptop than a sub-$1000 VAIO S15 with FullHD IPS to reflect on your work, you probably agonize over your gear, too.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2012 at 08:32 UTC
On article Just Posted: Sony DSC-RX100 preview with sample images (642 comments in total)
In reply to:

BeanyPic: Is it actually a Carl Zeiss lens. I think its a licensed lens. The way you can tell is the Word lens is missing on the lens front. The word Lens can't be used as it's not an original Carl Zeiss lens. A little trade secret on the market that more people are getting to know about. As for the rest of the spec it looks good and I like the design.

I wonder why Sony doesn't leverage the G Lens team... because Zeiss is more marketable? I am under the impression G Lens is more premium in Sony's lineup

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2012 at 10:25 UTC
On article Just Posted: Sony DSC-RX100 preview with sample images (642 comments in total)
In reply to:

Don Kiyoti: What is the point of these interstitial pages? I have long wondered why, when one clicks on the link on the home page, it doesn't go directly to the review/preview.

The Nokia 808 should've used this sensor for superior quality with its prime lens. Its pictures look more "cameraphone" now than the 2 year-old N8's.

Link | Posted on Jun 6, 2012 at 12:14 UTC
On article Just Posted: Sony DSC-RX100 preview with sample images (642 comments in total)
In reply to:

Timbukto: Sample images here and on imaging resource is mind boggling good IMO! Just sold my t3i and I have to say looking at things like this come out...quite happy I did. Still happy with my 5D MK II, but I have to admit Sony are magicians in sensor technology.

magicians, and under-appreciated perfectionists/artists in analog technology... I'm glad they are finally overcoming their inhibitions (of putting too many great technologies into one product) and putting out a great package.

Too bad the name sounds like a Samsung to me. 80% of Sony's efforts are appreciated by 20% of connoisseurs, while 80% of Samsung's efforts spent on superficial checklist features. That's why Samsung has lousy JPEG engines, because 80% of users can't tell it apart from a good one.

Seeing that Sony won't put in a swivel screen, I'd only hope Canon copies the RX100 as much as possible (esp. peaking focus), to create a successor to both the S100 AND G14... a swivel screen S1000, anyone?

Link | Posted on Jun 6, 2012 at 12:01 UTC
In reply to:

rocklobster: I actually had this idea a while ago as a means of dispensing with big lenses in order to get a good zoom range but realised the significant compromises in noise and DR. I am sure that camera manufacturers had thought of this as well (especially Fuji with the EXR) and having weighed up all the pros and cons have gone no further. But now with high Mp counts and density a possibility, perhaps compacts will go down this path or just leave it to the phone manufacturers. Perhaps, as one poster said, the compact camera's days are numbered but if that ISO 800 shot is anything to go by, a reasonable quality compact still does a much better job.

Fuji is the other company with innovative sensors, along with Foveon, but every new sensor was obsolete before processing computationals caught up to its potential. Now it's great to see Nokia pushing the envelope, too. Nokia is using the tried and true 1/2.5" sensor, except combining 4 of them into one unit and working with processing technology, fruits of which will bear for all to see, for better or for worse.

Someone should definitely compare it to a Ricoh GRD IV or V (when it might move to CMOS from CCD)

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2012 at 04:35 UTC
In reply to:

Lan: Nokia isn't a sensor manufacturer, so whose sensor is it?

More samples from the 808 here:
(will it post the link? If not, it's on the official Nokia 808 PureView blog)

About the only instant problem I can see is a few stuck pixels. Not surprising at 100%, but somewhat surprising in the downsampled images. Buy DxO guys!

Those low ISO 38MP images look gorgeous when downsampled to ~10MP.

Design-wise it looks remarkably similar to my last cameraphone - the Kodak/Motorola ZN5. One of the few sensors to date to use an RGBW array. Samples from the ZN5 in my DPR Gallery if anyone's interested.

Congrats to Nokia on a potential winning cameraphone; just make sure it has the features that we want as photographers. Histograms and exposure compensation at least please. Ideally some way to manual focus, or to adjust the focus in some way - zoom review or peaking for the playback as well!

Check out the vastly improved UI in this video:

Auto/Scenes/Creative modes, and the video wisely drills deep into the Creative mode.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2012 at 02:12 UTC
Total: 9, showing: 1 – 9