

Actual OIS performance: Lumia 920 against iPhone 5, Galaxy S III, HTC One X - Anchor
http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/25/iphone-5-lumia-920-image-stabilization-face-off/

======
potatolicious
_sigh_ So the OIS actually does work as well as claimed, which boggles the
mind why they felt they had to fake it in the ad.

~~~
randallu
So maybe The Verge's whole freakout over it was completely unwarranted? Maybe
Nokia knew what the effect of OIS would be when they made the ad -- after
having done the R&D to develop the camera in the first place?

~~~
objclxt
I disagree: I think it was somewhat warranted. The fact the end-result looks
similar to the faked result is beside the point.

Many countries, the US included, have decided that if you cannot fake product
demos in advertising _unless_ it is clear that's what's going on. Hence the
"Sequences Shortened" text on the iPhone ads.

It is rather unethical to produce a marketing video that fakes functionality
and doesn't make it clear that's what's going on. You may well not be over-
exaggerating anything, but personally I don't think that's relevant.

~~~
untog
I would argue that the "Sequences Shorted" text doesn't make anything clear at
all. It's a barely noticeable cop-out.

------
sabret00the
If we're honest, this is hardly surprising. Before Nokia made it's commitment
to Microsoft, they were a company at the forefront of phone technology,
including their cameras. However, what this does actually do is beg the
question of why they opted for Microsoft. I'm without a doubt in my mind that
if they were making Androids right now, they'd be dominating.

~~~
pmelendez
I know this is going to be controversial.. but they actually made the right
move. MS is supporting them and without that help, Samsung and HTC wouldn't
give them a chance. Also, in my particular point of view, WP is way more
aligned to Nokia's style than Android.

Honestly, as an user of the four OS (iOS, Android, WP and BB) my favourite is
by far windows phone. Not only it feels different but also I found it way more
stable. Everything is subjective anyway

------
JimmaDaRustla
Regardless of zoom levels or other disadvantages, this is a honest comparison
of true results you would get from each phone. It's a moot point to argue
technicals you have no control over.

Overall, the 920 just seems way clearer, and objects have much sharper edges.

~~~
at-fates-hands
I noticed that too - the colors seemed deeper and richer as well. The colors
on the iphone seemed a bit washed out.

Just another reason I will most likely get a WP when I'm due for another
upgrade this winter.

------
LinaLauneBaer
Others have mentioned the different "zoom" levels already. Please correct me
if I am wrong but doesn't the zoom level have a direct impact on the
differential caused by movement of the camera?

Imagine the following: You have two microscopes mounted on a similar device
like seen in the video. The first microscope shows everything two times larger
than the second one. If you move "shake" both microscopes the same way you
will see more "shakes" when looking through the first one. Isn't that correct
and can't this be applied to what is shown in the video?

~~~
mtgx
Engadget has been _suspiciously_ friendly to Nokia lately (I haven't seen them
take so many interviews with so many employees from one company before), but I
still find it hard to believe that they would increase the zoom level
themselves for the other smartphones to make them look worse on purpose.
Surely there has to be another explanation for why all the other smartphones
look zoomed in.

~~~
vaultboy21
re: engadget being _suspiciously_ friendly to Nokia.. i think that if you're
willing to actually send a reporter to Espoo, Finland (of all places), Nokia
would likely be happy to provide access. especially so, given what now appears
to have been a significantly overblown reaction to their introduction of the
technology (as the actual usage results appear to validate what was demoed,
even if not shot with the Lumia at the time)..

and the Lumia 920 camera apparently has a narrower focal length (which results
in a wider field of view), so it can capture more on-screen than than the
iPhone; hence it looking particularly 'zoomed-in' when compared side-by-side.

additionally, and i'm not entirely sure about this, but the digital image
stabilization software (in contrast to Nokia's actual/mechanical OIS) found on
the other phones may have some cropping involved to help smooth-out shaking
which would be typically most noticible around the edges..

------
aw3c2
Depending where the camera is located on each phone, that foam holder will
"amplify" movement on the outer sides. I hope they put the phones with the
cameras near to the center inside it and switched them too. Otherwise this
might be very wrong.

~~~
adestefan
I hope they positioned the phone how someone would actually hold it when they
were taking the video. For example, on the iPhone I'll always hold the phone
with the camera at the top (portrait mode) or the camera to the right
(landscape mode) since the volume buttons will then be up.

------
joeblau
I don't understand why Nokia doesn't just make a commercial instead of some
home movie blog post? Their tech is better so advertise that; Part of Apples
success is controlling the 5W's of presenting their information to customers.
Another thing is that if engineers with DSLR's are Nokias marketing
department, they are in big trouble.

~~~
mtgx
They did but they did it with a professional camera and implied it's the Lumia
920, when it wasn't. I'd be fine with them doing a commercial but actually
using the device to show its capabilities. Filming with a much more advanced
camera and then saying "that's how Lumia 920 does it, too" is just false
advertising, and that's what they did initially.

~~~
barista
so you are convinced that Apple used siri in all those commercials they show?

------
navs
Yikes, that is quite a large phone. Lumias look like great phones but must
they be so large?

~~~
IanDrake
It is large. It's thicker than my HTC Titan, but I suspect it will feel really
good in your hand. As it is now, the only surface contact I have when holding
my phone are the edges.

I wouldn't mind giving up a little thickness for comfort holding the device. I
think in the race to make things thinner we might have gotten carried away.
Imagine a phone as thin as box board...now imaging trying to hold it.

~~~
barista
920 has rounded edges that make it comfortable to hold. the sharp (jewel
like!!) edges of iphone make it uncomfortable. Lumia 900 is very similar in
how it feels in hand. Give it a shot and decide for yourself.

------
Anchor
Engadget has also done a low-light comparison today:
[http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/26/lumia-920-low-light-
shoot...](http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/26/lumia-920-low-light-shootout)

920 seems to live up to the promise also in this regard.

~~~
jdthomas
I wish they shot something with _motion_ in low light... From pictures my
friends post online, my biggest complaint about most point and shoot (and
phone) cameras in low light is not digital noise, but motion blur. I would
prefer manufactures to bump the gain and take faster exposures.

------
leeoniya
forget the image stabilization comparison. the 920 image _quality_ is
incredibly better than the others.

------
hospadam
On one hand - the image stabilization on the Lumia appears to be great.
However, the image quality on both the iPhone 5 & Galaxy S3 were much worse
than I've experienced in day to day use. I've used both phones personally -
and the video quality on the iPhone and GS3 is much better than what was shown
(even if it's not "stable"). Any idea on why the quality on those was much
lower than in real life?

~~~
mtgx
Were you walking while filming? He wouldn't be able to showcase the
differences in image stabilization for each phone if he tried to stay as still
as possible.

~~~
hospadam
Yes, in my day-to-day use of each camera I've been moving. I guess my point is
- there seems to be a massive quality degradation in what I've seen from
personal use.

------
yawgmoth
While this 'actual performance' is far from rigorous science, it's still great
to see the Lumia performing so well.

------
jonaphin
Not to give in to conspiracies of any sort, but these videos prove nothing.

1\. Why are the zoom levels different?

2\. I'm certain the HTC One X can shoot more decent videos than what we saw.

3\. Are we dealing with equivalent bitrates?

4\. Isn't Image Stabilization a post-processing solved problem? I mean, it's
great to have it in real-time (after a google search, it seems all three do
have the feature), but there's nothing wrong with post-processing when you
REALLY care about the final quality of your work.

~~~
anonymfus
1\. Lumia have wider field of view.

4\. Today commercially available video post processing algorithms can only
solve relative stabilisation between frames of video, because inframe
stabilisation is still very slow for modern hardware.

*Edited. 4 was "No, because post processing can only solve relative stabilisation between frames of video, it does not work within one frame."

~~~
schiffern
>4\. No, because post processing can only solve relative stabilisation between
frames of video, it does not work within one frame.

Apparently you haven't seen this:
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLLJBfRzXIQ#t=0m57s>

~~~
yread
try doing it in a mobile device with 30 full hd frames per second... Still,
it's pretty amazing, pity it isn't actually in CS7

~~~
schiffern
Who says post-processing has to be in real time?

------
mtgx
All of the others seem "zoomed in". I've heard someone say it's because the
others use digital stabilization, which means they have to crop the middle of
the image to stabilize it against the edges, or something like that. Is that
true? Because then OIS seems to significantly improve image quality in video
recording as well.

~~~
yread
It makes sense 920 has 26mm focal length, S3 16mm, iPhone 5 33mm
(equivalents). Smaller focal length - wider field of view so it makes sense
that iPhone feels zoomed in. I can't see the difference for S3, though. Magic?

~~~
mtgx
But even the iPhone 5 looks more zoomed in then Lumia 920, though. Look at the
initial filming, when he films the other people filming him. They are bigger
on the iPhone. The quality is poorer as well.

~~~
barista
read the message above you. The lenses have different focal length. 920 gives
you broader field of view so you can get wider picture and more light. iPhone
doesn't. That's why iPhone looks zoomed in.

------
jakejake
I think if you were trying to hold a still shot the image stabilization will
work great. When moving around, though, both cameras still look pretty bad to
me. The rolling shutter I think is still the weakest link. To be fair, even
high-end DSLRs don't have that solved, but it would be great to see somebody
come up with a solution.

