Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Technology

Nokia Lumia 1020 Video and Photo Shoot Preview 178

Posted by samzenpus
from the what's-the-word dept.
MojoKid writes "Nokia, perhaps more-so than any other smartphone manufacturer in the game right now, needed to find a way to make something special. The new Nokia Lumia 1020, though it sports essentially the same internals and display as Nokia's Lumia 920, most definitely is different, and perhaps even an attractive alternative, depending on your specific needs. 41 megapixels of resolution, floating image stabilization and a powerful camera app to back it up, will make the Lumia 1020 pretty 'special' to some people, some of whom might be considering a Windows Phone for the first time as a result. Initial impressions of the device and its camera performance, show Nokia's new flagship device does shoot impressive still images and video, thanks in part to the Lumia 1020's image sensor and stabilization features. Nokia's Pro Cam app is comprised of a slick dial interface that offers virtually all of the controls you'd find in a DSLR camera. From White Balance, to ISO, Focus, Exposure and Flash Control, it's all in there. When you snap a picture, the 1020's camera grabs two versions of the shot; a large full resolution (7700x4300, roughly) shot with a huge 11MB file size is captured and an additional 5MP image is derived from that and stored as well. The results, especially in decent lighting, can be impressive."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Nokia Lumia 1020 Video and Photo Shoot Preview

Comments Filter:
  • Only Problem (Score:4, Interesting)

    by organgtool (966989) on Monday July 29, 2013 @05:51PM (#44417379)
    The only problem I have with this phone is that it runs Windows Phone OS. The OS actually isn't that bad and the app support is definitely improving, but I just can't stand the home screen. With its pastel colors and overly-animated interface, it looks like they got the inspiration by watching Technicolor cartoons and browsing web pages from 1996. Whenever I see it, I almost expect to see animated GIFS of flames and a dancing Jesus. Other than the home screen, the rest of the OS isn't as bad as I thought it would be.
    • With its pastel colors and overly-animated interface, it looks like they got the inspiration by watching Technicolor cartoons and browsing web pages from 1996.

      This seems to be a misconception fueled by all the WP ads out there. Your home screen can be however you like it, your tiles don't have to form a rainbow and flip every second. I use a Windows Phone and I am perfectly happy with it, my home screen is simple and updates automatically to display notifications, weather and the latest headlines. The beauty of WP is that everyone's home screen is his/her own, so it's hard to pick up a friend's phone and appreciate the utility of the home screen. Try using one fo

      • It's not just the animations and color scheme that put me off. The monochromatic icons completely abandon the utility of color in helping to differentiate the icons. And the non-uniform tile sizes inject unnecessary visual inconsistencies (and I don't think that can be modified). And overall, the home screen is just not customizable enough to make it my own. My Android phone currently lets me display the weather, news headlines, stocks, calendar, and much more on the desktop which allows me to get a var
    • by unixisc (2429386)
      In my 520, there are just 20 colors, and for the skins, they have choices, other than black and white, of red, cyan and yellow. I wish they'd allow for the fusion colors like burgundy, olive, teal and so on, and for the theme colors, I wish they had allowed at least 256 colors. That would have made this phone more palatable. Also, most of the tiles generally adapt the theme color, except MS Office (red), IE (blue), SkyDrive (blue), OneNote (purple), Music & Videos (green), Games (green). Store and
  • by cristiroma (606375) on Monday July 29, 2013 @05:53PM (#44417395)
    Does it sync with Mac OSX Contacts and Calendar? Without handing over my data to Google (share Google calendar ...)?
  • by Citizen of Earth (569446) on Monday July 29, 2013 @05:57PM (#44417429)
    How much further ahead would Nokia be if the 1020 had been an Android phone?
    • It wouldn't have existed, since Nokia would be bankrupt without the financial help of Microsoft.

      • by rtfa-troll (1340807) on Monday July 29, 2013 @06:37PM (#44417757)

        It wouldn't have existed, since Nokia would be bankrupt without the financial help of Microsoft.

        A lie does not become truth if you just repeat it all the time. We keep hearing this all the time "Nokia was losing money" "Nokia's customers were abandoning it" "Nokia would have gone bankrupt". The truth:

        • Up until Steven Elop's burning platforms memo Nokia had always been profitable for many years;
        • Up until Steven Elop's burning platforms memo Nokia had continuing increasing sales.
        • Up until Steven Elop's burning platforms memo Nokia had consistently increasing profits (though not every quarter)
        • Nokia had a huge and growing cash mountain of several billions of Euros.

        If they did nothing they could afford to quietly and silently develop an Android phone far better than the ones Samsung puts out. It was announcing the decision to move to Windows phone and the cost of that change which killed Nokia. Not their past successful products.

  • Meh (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Doug Otto (2821601) on Monday July 29, 2013 @05:57PM (#44417433)
    The pictures don't even look that good. Blurring, CA issues and poor DOF.

    That's too many pixels for a sensor that size.
    • Well hopefully Nokia isn't trying to pass of photo and video from other devices as coming from the phone like they did last time.
  • by Jeremy Erwin (2054) on Monday July 29, 2013 @06:01PM (#44417455) Journal

    Nokia's Pro Cam app is comprised of a slick dial interface that offers virtually all of the controls you'd find in a DSLR camera

    But can you change the lens? Is the sensor large enough that depth of field becomes meaningful?

    The 1020's camera grabs two versions of the shot; a large full resolution (7700x4300, roughly) shot with a huge 11MB file size...

    My camera produces 20 megabyte raw files, but its sensor is only 14 Megapixels.

    • What does the sensor size have to do with the depth of field? The DOF is controlled by the aperture, not the sensor's dimensions. Unless you meant "field of view" instead of "depth of field", which is a different story.

      • by Teun (17872)
        Give it a try, a tiny sensor and lens combination does have a great depth of field, would such a system shrink to the size of a single point you'd have a perfect depth of field.
      • by D1G1T (1136467)
        You are incorrect. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circle_of_confusion [wikipedia.org]
      • I have an APS-C dlsr. If I put my 50mm f/1.4 lens, wide open, and photograph a subject 3 meters away, the depth of field is approximately 20 cm.
        If I managed to find a 75 mm f/1.4 lens (fast 85mm lenses are far more common), and a full frame camera to mount it on, the field of view would be similar, but the depth of field would be approximately 13 cm.
        Depth of field calculator [dofmaster.com]
        IIRC, the lumia has a 1/1.7 sensor-- bigger than most point and shoots, but smaller than APS-C, or micro four thirds-- with a crop fact

      • by thegarbz (1787294)

        DOF is controlled by aperture and by subject - background and subject - camera distances. On a smaller sensor if you want the same field of view you need change your subject distance for all other things staying equal or reduce the focal length of the lens. In either case this results in a reduced depth of field.

        This is why on a cameraphone you can't get any kind of decently low depth of field even with the f/2.8 lenses they often use.

    • by Teun (17872)
      The advantage of these small sensors is a very large field of depth and that's exactly what most consumers want, no fuzziness.

      Personally I like these types of camera's for extreme close-ups or macro photo's, precisely because of the huge depth of field.

      No one in his right mind would use these camera's for a nice bokeh.

  • If the quality is any bit respectable, it'll just mean more detailed selfies on imgur.

  • 7700x4300? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by MindPrison (864299)
    And yet we haven't seen a single 7700x4300 sample anywhere on the net ....yet...

    Not to my knowledge. Most of those reviewers on the net, links to flickr images with a max res of 3000x etc....

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      http://conversations.nokia.com/2013/07/11/nokia-lumia-1020-picture-gallery-zoom-in/ this picture seems to be close (first one of the city)

      or you could have used a image search engine to find it yourself... but i guess that is too much to expect, it is after all easier to just complain about something regardless of the truth

  • If it wasn't windows then I would put this phone on my candidates list. I don't understand why they got into bed with Microsoft. I program apps for the iPhone and then port them to Android but would love to have a better Android as my primary phone. I don't want to wear the hair shirt of BlackBerry or Windows. It is sort of like the days when a few of my friends were all wound up about BeOS and before that OS/2. They could come up with all kinds of reasons that BeOS or OS/2 were awesome OSs but sticking to
  • Anybody who really cares about good photos and video is going to use a dedicated camera with interchangeable lenses, a larger sensor, reduced rolling shutter and RAW. For everyone else, the current phone cameras are "good enough."
    • by hurfy (735314)

      I'd take my old P&S with a phone attached tho.

      These are so you don't have to carry a camera. If i am planning on taking pictures it would be nice to leave my phone behind as i am not really planning on using it much.

      That said....how is the PHONE? Some of my cohorts have $300 phones that sounds worse than my ANCIENT flip-phone after a couple dozen drops to the concrete :/ (makes note to stop dropping phone in front of said cohorts to freak em out..even if it is the one thing my phone does theirs doesn't

  • Imagine if this was running Maemo/Meego instead of windows phone.

    How good your hardware is doesn't matter if its locked to shitty software.
  • by Miamicanes (730264) on Tuesday July 30, 2013 @07:06AM (#44421387)

    The next step in video: cameras with internal framerate of 300fps that capture and save 100 of them with the precise timing of 50fps and 60fps video, combined with editing software that guarantees that as long as you stick to "splice points" falling every 100ms (the 1 frame in 5 for 50fps, and the 1 frame in 6 for 60fps, that both occur at the exact same moment in time before the next 9 frames diverge), you can shoot one source copy, then use it to generate native 50fps and 60fps output copies. Or, possibly, a version with outright asynchronous framerates that basically captures 60fps video with precise timing, adds a 7th frame 50#3 exactly halfway between frames 60#3 and 60#4, then quickly grabs a reduced-detail monochrome frame a few milliseconds before 60#2 and after 60#4, so that in post-production you could do motion-vector temporal rate correction on frames 50#2 and 50#4 that used the "quicksnap" frames to determine the exact grayscale detail & calculate the motion vectors, then derived the color by applying those motion vectors to the adjacent 60fps frames.

    In linear order, with some semblance of relative timing:

    50/60.1 --- 60.2 -- 50.2 - 60.3 - 50.3 - 60.4 -- 50.5 --- 60.6

    Then, for the next stage, keep the imaging sensor with raw 300fps capability, and grab additional frames in between the 50fps and 60fps key frames with alternating longer and shorter exposures to obtain additional dynamic range that could be retroactively applied to the adjacent 50/60fps key frames in post-production (practically rendering lighting problems for shows meant for TV irrelevant, and giving news networks an extra bit of headroom since they CAN'T go back to re-shoot some live event.

    For consumer gear, they could do something similar to skip the 50+60fps dual-framerate capability, and instead capture video at double the intended framerate, where every other frame is alternatingly over- or under-exposed, and enable the extra frames to either extend the dynamic range of the "good" frames, or do motion-vector transformations on the over/under-exposed frames to replace "key" frames that are themselves too dark or light to show directly.

    Or, some variant on cameras for news crews where you have one lens and 3 or more CCDs, but instead of using the different CCDs to capture red, green, and blue, you'd expose and sample one CCD with 50fps timing, one CCD with 60fps timing, and a third CCD that's lower-res & monochrome, with extended infrared sensitivity and selectable IR-cut filter. In bright light, the IR cut filter slides in, and the monochrome channel gets under-exposed. In dark light, the IR cut filter slides out, and the monochrome channel gets over-exposed. In really dark lighting, it gets over-exposed at half the framerate with tweaked 25fps timing. The idea is that given enough time in post-production, almost anything could be salvaged from bad lighting.

    Add fresnel lenses to high pixel density sensors so you can go in and re-render virtually re-focused frames after the fact, and adjust things like focal depth and focal plane to your liking, and you'll end up with a camera where nearly any problem can be fixed in post-production.

    The underlying technology is all here, and has been for quite a while. The only thing missing was the terabytes of storage space needed to capture multiple HD video streams simultaneously from multiple sensors capturing at different framerates, and software that's aware of it.

You will lose an important disk file.

Working...