

This is Nokia's Lumia 1020, a 41-megapixel Windows Phone camera  - yread
http://www.theverge.com/2013/7/11/4513484/nokia-lumia-1020-photos-features

======
fmstephe
That has to be a misprint. although it appears to be spread all over the
place. If you took photos at full resolution all you would achieve is using up
all your disk space and making it harder to sync with other devices etc.

Unless I have really missed something this must be a mistake.

Edit: As noted by jcarney it looks like the high MP sensor is sampled down to
create smaller files with high quality over-sampled pixels. That is quite
exciting.

~~~
hannibal5
Yes. It's the oversampling with the 1/1.2” size of the sensor that makes image
quality in low light really good.

Other feature is the ability to have usable digital zoom in camera without
immediately having low resolution shitty image quality.

------
kryten
megapixels are pretty meaningless.

A decent bottom end DSLR (Nikon D3100 for example) will run rings around it
simply because of the sensor size and optics.

~~~
jcarney
Which is why the phone generates a 8MP picture with the extra information from
the 41M and reducing noise.

[http://c699379.r79.cf3.rackcdn.com/Nokia%20808%20Pureview%20...](http://c699379.r79.cf3.rackcdn.com/Nokia%20808%20Pureview%20-%20sensor%20explanation.jpg)

Perhaps read the whitepaper before knocking it down as meaningless?

[http://i.nokia.com/blob/view/-/849564/data/2/-/Download1.pdf](http://i.nokia.com/blob/view/-/849564/data/2/-/Download1.pdf)

If you're comparing a phone camera with a DSLR, that's already saying
something.

Here's a review of the technology by a digital photography site.

[http://www.dpreview.com/articles/8083837371/review-
nokia-808...](http://www.dpreview.com/articles/8083837371/review-
nokia-808-pureview)

~~~
kryten
I know the details and understand pixel oversampling etc. In the real world
they produce acceptable photos for the type of device but it is nothing
special and definitely over-marketed.

I used an 808 for a week when they came out. Wishy washy colours, constant
over exposure and distortion due to the pissy little lens. Not what they were
promoting.

Whilst I compare this to a DSLR, a cheaper compact can do a better job of
being a camera.

Personally I drag a DSLR around everywhere with me but that's because I
started doing that sort of stuff before we had mobile phones and have
developed an appreciation of quality prints.

~~~
benjamincburns
> Wishy washy colours, constant over exposure and distortion due to the pissy
> little lens.

With the exception of maybe the distortion I'd chalk that up to crappy dynamic
nonlinear exposure heuristics trying to boost dynamic range. For an example,
take a look at the "HDR mode" in this guy's datasheet:
[http://www.aptina.com/products/image_sensors/mt9v034c12stc/](http://www.aptina.com/products/image_sensors/mt9v034c12stc/)

~~~
kryten
To be honest I think exposure was the software as you could reliably
underexpose it and get the result you wanted.

Colours, probably dynamic range as you state. Looking at the curves for a pure
white photo suggests range of blue was a little tight which is what made it
look like out of date Kodak ektachrome on a good day. That may be software
again bit I'm suspicious as the sensor on my D3100 doesn't exhibit that
problem. Perhaps its better quality control.

~~~
benjamincburns
Blue curves being off says they probably did a poor job on the transmittance
of their blue filter material. There is also a trend toward oversaturation in
cheap consumer cameras. Makes the consumer say "oh, it's so colorful!"

With cheap sensors the name of the game is always "get it close, and find a
way to hack it so most people won't know."

------
joshuaellinger
I've got a 900 right now. I've been waiting for this phone.

Not that it isn't totally overkill for my needs...

------
vengevine
Seems a bit overkill. Is this a phone with a camera or a camera with a phone?

------
hannibal5
Nokia N9 camera quality already killed any reason to buy compact cameras if
you also carry smartphone (unless you need zoom with compact but nobody seems
to need it). It had already image quality that matched all but the best
compact cameras. Lumia 930 and iPhone5 both have better quality than N9.

I know some people who travel around the world who own that earlier 41
megapixel Nokia 1808 PureView monster because its handy when doing inspections
and documenting stuff and gives really good pictures. They could have bought
any compact, SLR or phone combo they wanted but it hit the spot.

Lumia 1020 will have better image and video quality than 1808 and with optical
stabilization it will choice for many professions where you need camera all
the time, like Jorunalists without acameraman. I'm not just sure that people
in general care about image quality so much that it will be a hit. On the
other hand YouTube with all those stupid videos will be incredible marketing
channel.

