Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: User Review of Nokia Pureview 808

  1. #1

    Default User Review of Nokia Pureview 808

    UPDATE (24 June): Due to time constraint, I will be inserting the images over time. Apologies

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This is a user review of the image quality of the Nokia Pureview 808 phone's camera. I'm sure most of you have heard of the 808 because of its camera module with 41-megapixel sensor and Carl Zeiss optics. The focus of my review is still images, and time-permit I might show some video samples.

    The front view of the phone (in Nokia case) in camera mode:


    The back view of the phone; notice the camera lens cover that comes with this original Nokia case:



    What I am showing:

    • How the phone capture the same scene versus another phone (LG Optimus 2x), a compact camera (Canon SX230HS) and a m4/3 camera (Olympus OM-D with Panasonic 14mm f/2.5 lens).
    • How the images turn out, in terms of colour, white balancing, image noise, dynamic range etc.
    • Resolution and sharpness of images.
    • Quality of lens.
    • (If I have time...) Aspects of the 808's camera interface.


    What I am not comparing:
    • Interface and specifications of devices.
    • User experience vis-a-vis ergonomics of devices.
    • OS-specific matters, e.g. Android vs. iOS vs. Symbian.
    • Video quality versus other devices.


    A few qualifiers:
    • I paid for my 808, and I don't work for any telco/phone makers. And no, I'm not a Symbian fanboy
    • I have dispensed with comparing ISO 1600 for daylight shots; I don't find it relevant.
    • Shots were taken using the devices' best JPEG setting, and I've used the cameras/phones in pure auto mode.
    • I have used/set lenses on the OM-D and SX230HS (28mm respectively) to roughly match the 808's 26mm.
    • Cropping and resizing were done in Adobe Photoshop, using bilinear method to shrink images and bicubic method to enlarge.


    About the images shown below:
    They are cropped portions of larger images:
    Last edited by pinholeview; 25th June 2012 at 05:05 AM.

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Choa Chu Kang, Singapore, Sing
    Posts
    453

    Default Re: User Review of Nokia Pureview 808

    cant wait for the pictures... i'm planning to get one
    D3100

  3. #3

    Default Re: User Review of Nokia Pureview 808

    First up, 100% crops of center part of image from same scene shot successively around 8.30am. The OM-D, SX230 and 38-megapixel 808 images were resized to 8 megapixels, to match the LG and 808's 8-megapixel output. No PP were done, e.g. no sharpening of images, no exposure adjustment.


    Images taken at ISO 50:

    (Left to Right)
    Pureview 808 (8-megapixel capture)
    Pureview 808 (38-megapixel Full Resolution, resized in PS to 8-megapixel)

    (LG Optimus 2X, Canon SX230HS, Olympus OM-D - not an available ISO option)


    Images taken at ISO 100:

    (Left to Right)
    Pureview 808 (8-megapixel capture)
    LG Optimus 2X (native 8-megapixel output; the 2x has a longer lens, so the hut appears larger)

    Canon SX230HS

    (Olympus OM-D - not an available ISO option)
    Last edited by pinholeview; 26th June 2012 at 07:38 PM.

  4. #4

    Default Re: User Review of Nokia Pureview 808

    Images taken at ISO 200:
    No post-processing was done on images, e.g. no sharpening after resizing.

    (From Left to Right)
    Pureview 808 (8-megapixel capture)
    LG Optimus 2X

    (From Left to Right)
    Canon SX230HS (resized down to 8-megapixel from 12-megapixel)
    Olympus OM-D (resized down to 8-megapixel from 16-megapixel)

    Interesting to note that the OM-D+lens is not actually resolving the pattern of the green fence's mesh: it's more like moiré, since the actual pattern is much finer.
    Last edited by pinholeview; 24th June 2012 at 09:04 PM.

  5. #5

    Default Re: User Review of Nokia Pureview 808

    Images taken at ISO 400:
    No post-processing was done on images.

    (From Left to Right)
    Pureview 808 (8-megapixel capture)
    LG Optimus 2X

    (From Left to Right)
    Canon SX230HS
    Olympus OM-D
    Last edited by pinholeview; 24th June 2012 at 09:05 PM.

  6. #6

    Default Re: User Review of Nokia Pureview 808

    Images taken at ISO 800:
    No post-processing was done on images.

    Pureview 808 (8-megapixel capture): the 808 over-exposed the image, but I have not corrected
    Pureview 808 (Full Resolution, resized)
    LG Optimus 2X
    Canon SX230HS
    Olympus OM-D
    Last edited by pinholeview; 24th June 2012 at 01:12 PM.

  7. #7

    Default Re: User Review of Nokia Pureview 808

    For interest-sake, these are 100% crops of the OM-D and 808 images taken at their lowest ISO setting, as-is and not resized:

    Pureview 808, at Full Resolution (38-megapixel) @ ISO 50, no PP:

    Interesting to note how the 808 tried to resolve the pattern of the green fence's mesh.

    OM-D, at 16-megapixel @ ISO 200, no PP:

    The OM-D+lens is not actually resolving the pattern of the green fence's mesh: it's more like moiré.

    Pureview 808, at Full Resolution (38-megapixel) @ ISO 50, with PP:
    808 image with slight sharpening (in PS, Usharp Mask 50/0.5/0) to see how it can be tweaked. Notice the pattern of the green fences on right of hut and behind it.


    SX230, native 12-megapixel @ ISO 100:
    Last edited by pinholeview; 24th June 2012 at 08:43 PM.

  8. #8

    Default Re: User Review of Nokia Pureview 808

    Again, for interest-sake, these are 100% crops of 16-megapixel OM-D and 808 images, with the 808's 38-megapixel image resized to match:

    (From Left to Right)
    Pureview 808 (38-megapixel image resized to 16-megapixel)
    OM-D (native sensor resolution)
    Last edited by pinholeview; 24th June 2012 at 08:46 PM.

  9. #9

    Default Re: User Review of Nokia Pureview 808

    Next, night shots...

    These are 100% crops of center part of images shot successively.
    The OM-D and 38-megapixel 808 images were resized to 8 megapixels, to match the 808's 8-megapixel output.

    Images taken at ISO 800:
    (From Left to Right)
    Pureview 808 (8-megapixel capture)
    Pureview 808 (38-megapixel image resized to 8-megapixel)

    Olympus OM-D (16-megapixel image resized to 8-megapixel)
    Last edited by pinholeview; 25th June 2012 at 05:06 AM.

  10. #10

    Default Re: User Review of Nokia Pureview 808

    Indoor shot, to show the quality of the 808's lens, sensor and image processing abilities.

    Tech spec: 1/33 sec at f/2.4 on ISO 250, using the 808's 8-megapixel Pureview image setting; straight from camera with no post-processing (apart from resizing in the case of main image).



    (From Left to Right: no. 1-4)
    Last edited by pinholeview; 25th June 2012 at 06:01 AM.

  11. #11

    Default Re: User Review of Nokia Pureview 808

    Continuing from above...

    (From Left to Right: no. 5-9)
    Last edited by pinholeview; 25th June 2012 at 05:57 AM.

  12. #12

    Default Re: User Review of Nokia Pureview 808

    Continuing from above...

    (From Left to Right: no. 10-11)
    Last edited by pinholeview; 25th June 2012 at 05:58 AM.

  13. #13

    Default Re: User Review of Nokia Pureview 808

    Last edited by pinholeview; 26th June 2012 at 08:46 PM.

  14. #14

    Default Re: User Review of Nokia Pureview 808

    Additional comments...

    • File Sizes: The 808 uses only 38-megapixel of its 41-megapixel sensor for the Full Resolution capture, and the file size for the 38-megapixel Full Resolution photos hovers around 12MB. The Pureview capture mode offers 8- and 5-megapixel captured resolutions; for this review I am using the 8-megapixel option, with file size hovering around 2-3MB. Oddly, the LG -although having worst image quality- has very large JPEG files that range between 4-7MB.
    • Lens Protection: Surprisingly, between the Gorilla glass that shields the lens and the Carl Zeiss optics, Nokia has engineered another lens cover that swings away when camera is activated. So, along with the hard cover of the case, there are effectively 3 layers of protection for the optics.
    • As a phone...: the 808 is really just "OK" in this age of iOS and Android. The Symbian Belle FP1 OS on the 808 suffers more app crashes and OS hangs, at least once a day for me. The interface however is pretty fluid and good, comparable to Android in most cases. The app store is pretty...uh, 'sad', although key apps (such as Whatsapp, Facebook app alternatives) exist. The screen is lo-res by today's standard, but it is a pretty good 4" AMOLED screen that is highly readable in the sun: I don't really miss the iPhone4s' screen.
    • Major downside for me? The dearth of photography apps, such as those available on the iOS e.g. 645Pro, Camera+, Snapseed, light-meter apps.
    • Who is this for? Those who need a good camera to be with you all the time while you carry a serviceable phone, and who are not addicted to apps such as Instagram
    Last edited by pinholeview; 27th June 2012 at 04:02 PM.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •