08-08-2013, 01:41 AM #1
- 114 Posts
So right now we have an option to upgrade to a new phone after her two year contract, but the problem is my mom doesn't need a new phone, she's perfectly happy with her Note 2. And since no one else in the family needs a new phone either, I was thinking about getting a Lumia 1020, not as a phone but as a travel device: For it's amazing camera and the extras benefits from HERE Drive+ and Maps. But I'm wondering if it is any better than an entry level point and shoot camera that we got for just over a hundred bucks, nothing much special over our smartphones. So is the Lumia 1020 better than such a camera, or is it better to get another device?
- 08-08-2013, 01:55 AM #2
1020 does take really good images, but the sensor is not as big as is expected from a smartphone. If you want a complete package 1020 is the best. It is compact, has most apps one could need, takes good pics both in daylight and low light, can store to cloud easily.
IMO I would buy a 1020 instead of an entry level point and shoot
08-08-2013, 09:48 PM #6
- 2 Posts
I have a Lumia 1020 and in perfect conditions the pictures are better than a point and shoot. There is a considerable tendency for flare. Even sun coming into a window on the other side of a room can ruin a photo. All camera phones have more flare problems than 'real' cameras. It has to do with the flat lens and no place to put a flare protector on.
- 08-09-2013, 12:18 AM #7
The 1020 will produce better photos and more usable photos than any $100 camera you can get right now. Also, no camera with similar size (130mm x 71mm x 10mm) and weight (158g) as the 1020 that can match in terms of image quality. And this is just comparing "cameras." Throw in Here Maps, Here Drive+, and the functionality apps in general and you've got yourself a much more versatile, practical, and useful device than just a camera, even if image quality didn't matter to you.
- 08-09-2013, 12:30 AM #8
Image quality is on par with a 90 dollar point and shoot camera, like a low end canon powershot, for instance. Not trying to troll, but to put it in perspective, they both take superb photos. Nothing remotely like a DSLR though.
For reference, I own several P&S cameras, a Canon T1i DSLR, and the 1020.
- 08-09-2013, 12:36 AM #9
I would say so... it does more than camera and has a freakin awesome lens that is good for day and night.
- 08-09-2013, 12:53 AM #12
08-09-2013, 01:33 AM #13
- 1,994 Posts
Even the N8 back in the day was, except for the lack of optical zoom. I still trump every single entry level point and shoot (I'd say price point being 50€) with both the N8 and the L920 :D
While some a tad more expensive Point n Shoots might be a bit better if for no other reason but the optical zoom.. ask yourself: how often will you carry the point and shoot compared to carrying your phone?
- 08-09-2013, 01:42 AM #14
Burst mode and consecutive shots I'd probably agree, maybe even throw in macro mode assuming the p&s can focus a lot closer. The post processing I was referring to was actual editing, cropping, rotating, white balance, contrast, sharpening, etc., which can be done quite efficiently with a number of apps.
Even if the cameras are on par with each other the video and audio recording on the 1020 would be superior. The p&s cam would also be lacking mapping and gps functionality, not to mention internet, email, and messaging should the OP choose to use it.
Out of curiosity, what are the dimensions & weight of the Kodak and Canon cameras your are using for comparison?
- 08-09-2013, 01:46 AM #15
At this point 1020/808 + DSLR is the way to go.. skip the P&S thing altogether.
Sure, there are a few cams out there that are pretty good.. like the RX100 and that full frame Canon.. but they are way too bulky to be considered compact.
Last edited by vlad0; 08-09-2013 at 01:21 PM.
- 08-09-2013, 02:53 AM #16
130.4 x 71.4 x 10.4 - Lumia
92 x 57 x 18 - Kodak (It's flat on both sides)
94.7 x 61.3 x 29.8 - Canon (There's a grip which makes it stick out on the front)
Both point and shoots offer ways to edit the photo on the device. Even though it's a tad thicker than the lumia, the Kodak fits much easier in my pocket. Not to mention it has SD card support and optical zoom. Also had the power to wirelessly sync photos to the PC which was pretty cool for 2007. Not bad for a hundred bucks at Best Buy.
- 08-09-2013, 03:00 AM #17
It will beat or at least be on par with any entry-level point and shoot.
Even then, you still can't beat the dimensions of the 1020 (it's way thinner than the 808, which was already compact as a camera)Apparently, there is not a single trace of Segoe UI on this forum.
08-09-2013, 07:51 AM #18
- 283 Posts
I agree with previous posters that the 1020 will lose to point and shoot cameras in many ways. I say this based on a quick comparison vs. my old camera from 2009. Sure, the 1020 captures more detail, but it is physically larger and heavier, does a poorer job with its auto settings (white balance, exposure), probably can't beat a decent optical zoom (I still need to test), has noisier video in dim lighting, fewer settings, can't focus as close, no external storage options, needs the camera grip to mount on a tripod, has a wider angle lens (may be good or bad), etc.
130.4 x 71.4 x 10.4 (97cm^3), 158g - Lumia 1020 (without camera grip)
87.0 × 54.5 × 18.4 (87cm^3), 115g - Canon PowerShot SD780 IS, around $200-250 in 2009
Of course, the 1020 has a number of advantages besides being able to capture more detail. Mainly the old saying: "The best camera is the one you have with you." It's good enough that you can take some good pics without needing to carry a separate camera around, which is the real game changer and the essence of a disruptive technology. It's the reason hardly anyone uses point and shoot cameras anymore. The 1020 offers the closest experience yet to a real camera instead of a phone camera.
So yeah, maybe there are some trashy entry level point and shoot cameras that the 1020 will beat in most ways, but there's still considerable room for improvement in my opinion. At some point I want to do a detailed comparison with sample pics but I'm not sure when I'll be able to get to it.
- 08-09-2013, 01:34 PM #20
I've tested the pureview system against all sorts of cameras.. it can hang with most low to mid end cameras out there, and certain older DSLRs
Here is a little test I did againt a mid range P&S: Canon SD 1200 .. its considered a decent cam by many
Here is another one against my Canon XTi
It does quite well against that as well.
Against another good P&S: Canon G15
And here are some samples against one of the best P&S for sale at the moment, the Sony RX100
And against something that is out of it's league.. the Nikon D800, but if you down sample both to about 8Mpix, the difference diminishes.. the Nikon is still way better tho
There is no reason for the 1020 not to do just as well.. or at least close to it.
96.9cc vs. 95.5cc
Nokia Lumia 1020 vs. Nokia 808 PureView - GSMArena.com
- 08-09-2013, 02:20 PM #21
another test done with a entry level 300$ P&S and 1020. Whose pics are better? (I say both deliver almost the same quality with 1020 a bit more saturated)
08-09-2013, 03:41 PM #23
- 283 Posts
- By John20212 in forum Nokia Lumia 1020Replies: 20Last Post: 08-12-2013, 10:06 AM
- By EBynum in forum Windows Phone AppsReplies: 1Last Post: 08-08-2013, 09:37 PM
- By mrdeezus in forum Windows Phone AppsReplies: 3Last Post: 08-08-2013, 06:09 PM
- By Abhishekbiki in forum Nokia Lumia 620Replies: 5Last Post: 08-08-2013, 01:44 AM