Comparing the PureViews

by Volker Weber

I started making some photos with both the Lumia 920 and the 808 PureView. Nokia uses the PureView brand as a moniker for "good camera". 920 and the 808 have nothing much in common but the Nokia and the PureView brands. While the 808 uses a huge sensor with 41 megapixels to provide for digital lossless zoom and enhanced image processing through pixel binning, the 920 has an optical image stabilization which lets you capture more light by keeping the shutter open for a longer time.

The two cameras cater to different needs. The 808 is a full fledged camera that lets you control lots of setting and also has a Xenon flash, the 920 tries to automate everything. Just point and shoot. So that's what I am going to do. Tweak the 808 a bit (8MP, Superfine, Vivid), and let the 920 do it all by itself. Since the 920 may be smarter than I am, this could be a huge advantage. If you click through to the Skydrive folder, you can also look at the data.

More >

Comments

Vielen Dank für die Fotos!
Bei einem 1:1 Crop scheint das 808 deutlich rauschärmer (was aufgrund des Pixel-Oversamplings auch keine Überraschung ist). Dafür sind die Farben des 920 poppiger (nicht unbedingt richtiger), was heutzutage notwendig zu sein scheint, damit ein Foto als gut empfunden wird. Und bei wenig Licht scheint das 920 durch die Stabilisierung.

Hubert Stettner, 2012-11-02 08:43

The 920 image stabilisator seems to work very well. This is amazing. And this is also important, most cameras manage to take somewhat OK images in bright daylight. At night there is a clear distinction: works or blurred.

Re. the colors: Nice Doppler effect browsing the sdrv ;)

808 colors are impressive. Unobstrusive, realistic. 920 much too warm.
By comparison, in the 808-world Darmstadt appears to be a north german town ;)


Tobias Hauser, 2012-11-04 11:01

Recent comments

Andrew Magerman on OneCore to rule them all: How Windows Everywhere finally happened at 11:25
Nick Daisley on The man who answered the call to save BlackBerry at 09:35
Volker Weber on Connecting the dots at 20:28
Johannes Matzke on Connecting the dots at 18:35
Volker Weber on Connecting the dots at 16:40
Andy Mell on Connecting the dots at 16:32
Detlev Pöttgen on Connecting the dots at 13:10
Ingo Seifert on Connecting the dots at 11:48
Dragon Cotterill on The man who answered the call to save BlackBerry at 10:48
Volker Weber on The man who answered the call to save BlackBerry at 09:24
Patrick Kwinten on The man who answered the call to save BlackBerry at 09:21
Christian Just on Google has won at 08:19
Volker Weber on Google has won at 07:55
Hubert Stettner on Google has won at 07:52
Richard Kaufmann on Pebble is not folding its tent at 00:08
Richard Kaufmann on She just passed a thousand likes at 23:30
Richard Kaufmann on Pebble is not folding its tent at 23:24
Volker Weber on Google has won at 21:49
John Keys on Google has won at 21:46
Volker Weber on Google has won at 21:20
Thomas Langel on Pebble is not folding its tent at 20:25
Hubert Stettner on She just passed a thousand likes at 19:50
Ingo Seifert on She just passed a thousand likes at 19:20
Roland Dressler on Google has won at 19:13
Volker Weber on She just passed a thousand likes at 17:49

Ceci n'est pas un blog

I explain difficult concepts in simple ways. For free, and for money. Clue procurement and bullshit detection.

vowe

Contact
Publications
Amazon Wish List
Frequently Asked Questions

rss feed  twitter ello  instagram

snapchat

Local time is 12:34

visitors.gif