Sleek Nokia Lumia details EXPOSED ahead of Thursday's disrobing You can’t keep a product launch secret these days – and it doesn’t help when your platform partner is incontinent. Nokia’s second 41-megapixel phone, and its first running Windows Phone, will be unveiled to the press in New York on Thursday. But leaks have already disclosed its name, specifications and design. The Windows …
It does doesn't it. Assuming it will be fair bit higher than 920/925 its not going to be cheap.
If the picture quality is good enough, I guess one could try to justify the price by not needing a compact point and shoot. However that would only apply to potential buyers who did NOT already have a compact and were in the marker for that and a new phone. Who would by a camera with only built-in storage tho? :)
That would be me then.
I never got even close to filling 32gb of SD card in my DSLR, and I never bought a compact because I use the DSLR for taking good photos, and the crappy camera in my phone for taking quick snaps. I frequently wished the quick snaps were better, but didn't want to carry another device.
Maybe I'm the only one, I don't know, but there's pretty damn good odds I'll be buying one of these as long as they don't get _really_ silly with the pricing.
Remember folks - this is what Symbian was thrown away for, because we were all told it was a "burning platform", and Android swerved because "there is no way to differentiate handsets", unlike, err, the way manufacturers can infinitely customize WP8. Just don't tell that to Samsung, Sony, HTC etc.
Actually, yellow is an appropriate color when you think of whos pocket Elop was in when he made this "decision".
Why on God's green earth would you need more than 32GB of internal storage on a cameraphone?
I have a "prosumer" DSLR with a 32GB card and have never even come close to filling it, even with thousands of photos taken over many months and being a ridiculously lazy bastard when it comes to offloading onto my computer.
Even if you also install hundreds of apps, dump gigs of mp3s and full-length movies and install offline map data for multiple countries on there, provided you do actually offload your photos once in a while, you won't use all 32GB.
The only silly choice here would be to not offload your photos. If you're "that" kind of person, remember to turn on the auto-upload and I really hope you don't lose your phone.
On the iPhone 4 the 32GB was a sweet spot. This camera has the potential of taking much larger pictures than the iPhone 4. I have no clue of what it's potential is towards filming.
Well maybe it's not so much of a problem as Apps still are missing from the Win Phone platform. At least those heavy apps taking giga bytes of space.
The iphone 4s i have now from my company has only 16GB, I have to sacrifice my music or my video taking possibilities. Right now there is no music on my phone, i prefer that to cloud services with their sunky quality.
Best of all would be 64GB. On a longer travel period even the 32GB was a bit little, but I had the possibility to move my videos to my old 64GB iPod.
Fair point - though I wonder how many people with phones with SD cards have them actually set up to save to the SD card rather than internal storage... (I have a Nexus, so this is a genuine question - what is the default save location for the camera on Android these days?)
A phone's different to a camera. I did a week in Nevada and Arizona and didn't fill the 8Gb card in the camera, but the 32Gb card in my phone is a bit tight with MP3s and navigation maps on it.
It will be interesting to see a comparison between this and a Galaxy Zoom 41 megapixels and clever software vs. a smaller sensor and proper optical zoom (and a card slot :-) ).
I strongly believe phones (and media players/tablets/etc come to that) should have microSD. But I don't think photos are the issue - it's more things like storing your music and video collection.
My dedicated camera still only has a 2GB card in it from years ago, and holds god knows how many photos. We've come a long way from Apple Quicktake and "holds 8 poor resolution photos at a time" (remember that flop? But I thought everything they released was a success!)
And at least this does have 32GB - the problem is when microSD devices only give us 16GB (or less). Though a 64GB option would be nice.
Seriously, it seems the whole marketing is based on the Camera specs. WTF? Are they selling a camera with a phone slapped on as an afterthought? Or Vice versa?
Can it make calls?
IF you really need a goood camera, why cant you just buy one and have the rest of the phone as a separate entity?
ANd they will also chareg upwards of £500 for thsi privilege.
Well, of course you can, and I think a lot of us do. I for one am getting quite pissed off with lugging a decent camera around, though, especially on holiday with kids, who always manage to provide you with loads of other stuff to carry. If I could get a phone with a good enough camera to do justice to those valuable memories I want to be looking at tearfully in my eighties, then I'd happily ditch the bloody camera.
Personally, I've recently let my point-and-push die a death and got a really nice Nikkon V1 as a good camera and I use my phone for snapshots and flash photos (the V1 doesn't have a built in flash). I find this a good combination, it's surprising how good some of the photos you can take on a modern phone are, but then if I'm going somewhere I want to photograph I've got all of the prosumer stuff on the V1, such as interchangeable lenses, filters, high speed photography, etc.
Back in the mists of time (2010) I bought a Nokia N8, I am quite into photography, and the idea of a decent camera on the phone appealed to me, although I didn’t think it would, in the end it replaced my compact camera as my go to device, and unless I was going out for a planned shoot (in which case the SLR was picked up) the N8 worked brilliantly, I can only remember one instance of taking a picture when I wished I had the compact instead of the phone, and while there were times I wished I had my SLR, it’s not practical having it with you all the time, and the benefits of not having two bits of kit in my pockets was the main point.
This is something I would be very happy to have, and if the price is quite high, that’s no problem, I’m not the type of person that needs shiny new when it comes out, I will just wait a few months and get it when it’s closer to what I am willing to pay.
"IF you really need a goood camera, why cant you just buy one and have the rest of the phone as a separate entity?"
If you need to do email, why can't you just buy a laptop?
If you want to listen to music, why don't you buy a separate MP3 player?
... just because you don't want a multi-function device doesn't mean nobody else does. Camera is one of the most widely used functions on phones, so clearly people value the ability to take pictures on a phone. A phone that can actually take GOOD pictures is therefore not a bad call.
Clearly they are spending all of this R&D cash on the camera because it is unimportant to the masses, as they carry a camera in their left pocket and a phone in their right pocket.
</sarcasm>
Only photo buffs have their camera on them 90% of their waking time. The rest of us have a camera in a drawer somewhere, where we occasionally dust it off for a trip or something. As mentioned before, the best camera for the job is the one you have on you. I take about 80% of my photos on my crappy phone sensor and I would love a better one next time.
Still won't convince me to take Win8 though until they get my banking app. I don't give a S**t about the 1bazillion apps what iPhone or Android or MS have - no banking app is a deal breaker.
If this was an DSLR I would agree. Optics is important if you indeed want to use full pixel count. If you use pixel binning, not so much. Actually, one may avoid using anti-alias filter on sensor, simply by keeping optics resolution under Nyquist limit of the sensor, and still benefit from extra pixels for noise removal algorithms. Which, judging by 808, is exactly what Nokia did before.
1/ Will it come with faked footage to make it seem much better than it actually is, as traditionally all Lumias have in the past.
2/ Will there be an Android option, so I don't have to suffer the humilation of owning a Windows Phone.
3/ Will it be a good as a small DSLR like the NEX-5R, otherwise, why should I bother?
DSLR Digtal Single Lens Reflex
1. The NEX-5R is not a DSLR
2. The NEX-5R is not a phone
3. The NEX-5R requires gigantic lenses to cover its sensor
4. The NEX-5R weighs 275g without a lens
5. The NEX-5R has no built in flash
Do you need any more?
I'm not saying this is the phone/camera for you but for a lot of people this is all the camera they will ever need, it will be way better than any camera they have ever owned before and it's a smartphone at the same time.
That said, no upgradeable storage is just idiocy.
The 920 is just as good as the faked TV ad. I shake mine like a monkey waxing his carrot and the video doesn't skip a beat. It really is that stable.
Read the 808 reviews in photography forums. Most seem to think it's as good as a DSLR. Of course I can't say anything about the 1020 until I get my hands on one.
What? You've got that back to front. Owning a particular brand of phone, clothes, car, etc is driven by "what you imagine other people will think of you when they look" for 99% of the population. Not wanting to own an MS OS is driven by hard, painful experience.
Sounds like Nokia could release a product to compete with the likes of GoPro, video cameras for 'extreme' sports (or duck-taping to quadropters). Obviously the market for dedicated camcorders is smaller than that for phones, but still!
http://www.theverge.com/2013/7/8/4503382/nokia-lumia-1020-sample-photo-joe-belfiore-flickr
I quite like this. At least it (kind of) confirms that there's still some clever bods over at Nokia and they can hang on to the tech. Symbian made it easy to drop in the specialist hardware needed to run the camera, so I'd like to think there's someone driving Windows development too. Will it function as well as the 808? I'd like to hope so, will probably end up buying one (sadly, my 808 is less useful without multi-calendar sync).
Target audience is easy. I take my 808 out and about where I wouldn't normally have a full range of camera kit with me. It's only a passing hobby, yet I know I can take some damn fine pictures while I'm cycling around or even just the random bugs in my garden (for example).
https://secure.flickr.com/photos/98654092@N02/9250662774/
https://secure.flickr.com/photos/98654092@N02/9247910369/
So Nokia have just won at phone cameras. Also, by association, have Microsoft as you have to have WinPho 8 if you want the best phone camera.
If that doesn't significantly increase market share for both then there's no hope for the platform as it stands.
*sigh* I like Nokia, I really do. They can turn out some magnificent hardware when they put their minds to it. I just wish this was running some Meego-a-like rather than WinPhone which I, personally, struggle to like.
So it's not really conveniently shaped as a phone and its photos aren't as good as a real camera? I can't help feeling this is like producing an MP3 player that can output 400Khz audio or something like that — yes, most people could tell the difference in a blind test but, no, nobody is sufficiently bothered about it to put up with the inconvenience.
So I guess it's just supposed to help attach better-than-usual photography to the Nokia brand and not actually to sell?
Just search the interwebs for comparisons of the previous Belle Pureview against things like the Lumix LX-5 before commenting... or, as the article suggests, the Reg write-up. The Pureview fits in jeans pocket; the Lumix does not.
There are more WinPho 8 phones in my local pub than the comments section of the Register would suggest. I haven't used one, but the users (be them converts from Nokia candybar dumb phones, older Android phones or 'feature phones') really don't seem bothered.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
