Nokia's Present & Future

Discussion in 'Mobile Industry' started by Arun, Dec 22, 2010.

  1. Mintmaster

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2002
    Messages:
    3,897
    Likes Received:
    87
    You're making poor assumptions again. It's Nokia's chip, so they can write drivers for it if they want. BSI sensors usually have DSP built into them, since they're CMOS, so if Nokia wanted to do any processing in hardware, they would.

    It's almost guaranteed that Nokia did this for cost and algorithmic flexibility reasons.

    Simple downsampling needs less than two ops per pixel and the MSM8960 should be able to do 5B+ instructions per second with the parallel nature of image processing. I think it's more than likely just poorly optimized coding of fancy algorithms, since image quality was the #1 priority for launch.


    EDIT: Take a look at dpreview's Lumia 808 review:
    http://www.dpreview.com/articles/8083837371/review-nokia-808-pureview

    The Pureview downsampling gave less sharp images than downsampling the 38MP photo in Photoshop.

    At 38MP, shot to shot delay was about 3 seconds for the 808. It's 3-4s for the 1020. So not much was lost. My guess is the bus transferring the data is the limitation.

    Also, your theory of using single samples for 1080p video would result in horrible aliasing.
     
    #2101 Mintmaster, Jul 30, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 31, 2013
  2. orangpelupa

    orangpelupa Elite Bug Hunter
    Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    Messages:
    7,094
    Likes Received:
    1,277
  3. french toast

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,667
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    Leicestershire - England
  4. wco81

    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Messages:
    6,196
    Likes Received:
    260
    Location:
    West Coast
    I haven't seen any ads for it over here though I usually skip through ads.

    $299 is a hard sell. Some carriers are doing buy one, get one free for Galaxy S4, others are knocking $49 or even $99 off the upfront price.

    How would people know it has a great camera unless they've been following this stuff?

    MS is trying to ramp up their own stores. You would think they'd have some big displays in them.

    Generally, AT&T stores aren't the best places to buy phones, except for an iPhone launch when people are queuing up everywhere.
     
  5. Silent_Buddha

    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    16,062
    Likes Received:
    5,007
    And for anyone that knows it has a great camera, they are probably quite put off by it not having an SD card slot to hold photo's taken with the camera.

    I really can't fathom who thought it was a good idea to not include an SD card slot with that camera module. If I were to take a guess, it's likely AT&T (they are one of the phone carriers that charges lots of USD for overages on mobile data) hoping people will take a lot of photos and use a lot of mobile data to store their photos.

    Regards,
    SB
     
  6. BRiT

    BRiT (╯°□°)╯
    Moderator Legend Alpha Subscriber

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    12,398
    Likes Received:
    8,607
    Location:
    Cleveland
    I would instantly have the 1020 if it had an SD card. Now I'm stuck to mull over all the other options. Le Sigh.
     
  7. Gubbi

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Messages:
    3,521
    Likes Received:
    852
    I don't get it. 32GB isn't enough for pictures ? The high res copies are 10MB a pop, that's more than 3000 pictures.

    Every singe review, I've read, laments the lack of apps, specifically apps to share images on the net, no native Facebook app, no Google+, Flickr is an old version and no Instagram. I can't remember anybody mentioning lack of storage.

    Cheers
     
  8. orangpelupa

    orangpelupa Elite Bug Hunter
    Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    Messages:
    7,094
    Likes Received:
    1,277
    the gps map takes a few GB. for musics, will take 10GB or more. maybe about 16 GB for photos and videos. Still a lot.
    but when traveling, its limited space. because cant bring spare sd card.
     
  9. Gubbi

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Messages:
    3,521
    Likes Received:
    852
    I guess that renders iPhone 5 and 4s 16/32GB versions useless as well then?

    It may be important to some people on this board, but for the vast majority of users it isn't an issue, IMO.

    Cheers
     
  10. orangpelupa

    orangpelupa Elite Bug Hunter
    Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    Messages:
    7,094
    Likes Received:
    1,277
    IPhone did not have tens of megabytes photo file.
     
  11. Mintmaster

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2002
    Messages:
    3,897
    Likes Received:
    87
    Agreed. One would think 1000 photos is enough capacity between trips to your computer.

    But the 1020 isn't a mass market phone (by that I mean it's not going to sell 50 million units). It's targeting the maybe the most photography oriented ~1% of buyers out of the billion smartphones sold per year, and those users are not only used to removable media in their cameras but also are the tech oriented type to appreciate expandability.

    It also doesn't solve Mize's issue of wanting a huge library of songs on his SD card available.

    I've seen it in a lot of reviews, actually.

    Then either delete the high res photos when you're done reframing or just take 5MPix ones. Either way you get way better photos than the iPhone takes.
     
  12. orangpelupa

    orangpelupa Elite Bug Hunter
    Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    Messages:
    7,094
    Likes Received:
    1,277
    for me the allure of pureview are those super hi-res pic to be post-edited on photoshop.
    but other than storage, the hi-res pic also nosi-er than 808.

    i'll save my money and wait for 1025 :D
     
  13. Mintmaster

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2002
    Messages:
    3,897
    Likes Received:
    87
    Once again, it's noisier because there's less noise reduction. That one guy you posted about definitely had something wrong with his OIS. The other photos show more detail in the 1020 pics.

    It actually looks more like the RAW image you get from a camera. For photoshop, that type of image is better to work with.
     
  14. Mize

    Mize 3dfx Fan
    Moderator Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    5,048
    Likes Received:
    1,097
    Location:
    Cincinnati, Ohio USA
    Sorry Mint, but I'm going to call you out on this. Noise is always bad and some detectors have more noise than others. If one photo has the same or better detail with less noise then that's not a result of more noise reduction, but simply a less noisy detector. You can never add more information beyond the signal-to-noise ratio so thinking that more noise is better to work on is silly. From all the shots I've seen the 1020 simply has a noisier detector array than the 808 which isn't surprising when you read about how they simplified the camera in the 1020.
     
  15. Helmore

    Regular

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2010
    Messages:
    466
    Likes Received:
    0
    Simplified it? Would you care to explain what you mean? Going from a FSI sensor to a BSI sensor doesn't seem like a simplification to me. The only simplification is the lack of a dedicated image processing chip, though calling that more simple is a matter of debate as well.
     
  16. Mize

    Mize 3dfx Fan
    Moderator Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    5,048
    Likes Received:
    1,097
    Location:
    Cincinnati, Ohio USA
    Shrank the sensor and removed the front end processing. It's fully expected that lower pixel area = more noise. Also, depending upon the A/D front end it's possible that the dedicated processing chip was inherently quieter as well.
     
  17. nutball

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2003
    Messages:
    2,146
    Likes Received:
    472
    Location:
    en.gb.uk
    I think the point was that if you're working with images in Photoshop, then often the less in-camera processing that's been applied the better. There are some very sophisticated non-real-time noise filters available for PS, eg. Neatimage, and if you're working with those it's better to have an image that hasn't been screwed up by the camera beforehand. Hence the reference to RAW.

    Obviously it's better still if the detector is inherently less noisy, but if the camera isn't doing the best possible job of noise removal then it's not really possible to make blanket statements about which yields the best quality images after the best-possible workflow has been applied.
     
  18. Mariner

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1,600
    Likes Received:
    237
    Does the 1020 offer an option to provide RAW files?

    Technically, this would be useful for the most serious of photographers, but that then takes us back towards the problem of non-expandable storage on the phone...
     
  19. orangpelupa

    orangpelupa Elite Bug Hunter
    Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    Messages:
    7,094
    Likes Received:
    1,277
    #2119 orangpelupa, Aug 7, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 7, 2013
  20. Gubbi

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Messages:
    3,521
    Likes Received:
    852
    Really ?

    IMO, the 1020 completely dominates the dusk and dark images.

    The noise in the zoomed-in images looks similar to RAW images from my 24Mpixel Nikon D3200 DSLR (lots of sensor noise), so I don't think the 1020 super sharpen the images. As a matter of fact I think the 808 applies a blur/noise reduction filter. Nokia has traditionally had very good noise reduction in software (fondly remembering my N95)

    The 1020 over-saturate colours (which I don't like) and it seems to compress luminance levels for better shadow/highlight detail (which I would have liked to be able to en/disable). All in all it seems at least on par with the 808, all IMHO.

    Cheers
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...