Me neither. I give Nokia props for this, but there's nothing they can do hardware wise to make me want to use WP8. I'd rather wait another year or two until an Android OEM makes something similar, and the wait will be well worth it.
Also the Sony Honami launching this year seems very interesting already: 20 MP sensor, possibly with oversampling, too, 12,800 ISO, Xenon, and some other technologies and lenses from Sony's point and shoots. It will also have a real processor (S800) to help it process all that data (which the Lumia doesn't, and even Elop admitted it might be a little slow).
Plus, there's the Moto X Clear Pixel to look forward to, and Nexus 5's Nikon technology this year, which even if they aren't as good, they should still be great, and they actually come with Android!
If I was a believer in crappy phone cameras I'd so totally go for that Lumia 1020. Since I'm not I'll just stay with my Lumia 820. It is absurdly funny how people are trying to chase the best possible camera in a phone while there're quite a bunch of even quite cheap P&S who are much better than the camera in a phone can ever be due to the physical constraints. Also interesting to see how Fandroids are shying away from Windows Phone which in comparison is simply the much better (faster/cleaner/better battery life/more functionality out of the box) system... unless someone wants to spend the cash for an iPhone...
Yes there are cheap P&S's which may take better photos than the 1020. Saying that, the reason why people are "trying to chase" the best camera phone is kinda obvious. They don't want to carry both and they would love if the only device they had to carry not only took GREAT photos but fetched their email, sent their documents, kept them up to speed socially, kept them entertained while they played games etc..
Use of the word "fandroid" helpfully marks your comment as junk. Shame I actually read it. As mentioned by MistaWet, some people only want to carry one device. If everyone simply accepted that phone cameras were never going to be as good as larger cameras then we'd still be stuck with 640x480 webcam quality... instead we have devices that can take perfectly serviceable photos.
TL;DR? Go somewhere else and whine, this thread is for comments.
Is there was a button in that "Pro Camera" app to activate WP8's Lenses feature to jump to other apps that can use the camera? I see a button that looks similar in the first video, but he didn't touch it.
The app looks great though (a million times better than the WP8 app "ProShot" that does largely have the same functionality).
One of the most impressive parts of the 808, that made it a complete package, was the microphone setup. Is there any news on what the new Lumia brings to the table compared to its spiritual predecessor?
The Lumia 920 already has 3 HAAC microphones and they work really well as demonstrated by many concert videos on youtube such as this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Sm1FLdZRk0
When will there be more information about low light performance? The videos didn't have anything in particular. Given how Brian would prefer bigger pixels for low light, is this still compelling?
Oh yeah. The 1020 has much better OIS than anything on the market and that plus the massive oversampling available makes this the best phone camera in all lighting situations.
it's really silly that they make a big deal out of common techniques. there's no special technology or magic. it's just a very high resolution sensor....
reinvented zoom - I think is a term for the combination of the sensor and cropping, that means it also includes all the engineering that goes into fitting the technology into a phone that is relatively thin.
simple cropping can be applied to normal phone camera, but wouldn't have the same amount of detail.
That is an oversimplification. The zoom function constantly changes the over sampling ratio so it utilizes the right amount of physical pixels per logical pixel. It is NOT cropping.
the oversampling algorithm is not straight averaging.
okay well then it's cropping + downsampling until the resolution is 5mp. of course the downsampling (or oversampling or whatever you want to call it) is not straight averaging; it's probably just bicubic interpolation.
IT IS CROPPING and downsampling. Sony P&S cameras had that feature (smart digital zoom or blah) decade ago. Also it is not 'loseless' either as the sensor is using bayer filter and IQ is limited by optics anyway.
It is quite amazing that Nokia which started as a cellphone company, not a camera company, has made the most credible near-professional grade camera-phone. It's heads and shoulders above the Galaxy Camera or Galaxy Zoom, and maybe somewhat comparable to the Galaxy NX, but then the latter is a camera turned phone, and Samsung was also a camera company as well as cellphone company, while Nokia never made separate cameras. Yet Nokia, not Samsung, or not even Sony whom Samsung was emulating, has the best camera phone!
I have to admit WP8, personally, is the thing holding me back from being tempted by this, and I can only imagine how nicer it would've been with Meego, but the camera UI looks fantastic, a great meager of the processing power of modern cellphone cpus with lens hardware. Hopefully, this will spur others like Sony or LG to also up the ante and bring to the market an excellent camera-phone as well!
It's not near-professional grade. It's regular-point-and-shoot-camera grade. Which in itself is a massive achivement, but calling it near-professional grade is wayy too much.
Why not introduce these amazing camera features in a Nokia Android phone? Samsung and HTC are selling both Android and WP8 phones. Why can't Nokia? You have a great reputation for building high quality phones. Just do it in the popular OS and you will be fine.
If Nokia could make an Android version of this, I would be really hard pressed to choose between the One and this, despite the One's massively superior SoC, screen and speakers.
Peanuts. They only need to sell a couple million Android phones per beat to beat that.
He's right. Nokia is downright stupid for keep the *exclusivity* with WP8 just for some pocket change. They would be selling 10x more devices with Android, then they'll ever sell with WP8.
Your equating 1 billion in straight profit to 1 billion in revenue. Big difference. Assuming they make 20% on a phone (big assumption), they would have to sell 5B in phones...5x times the number you quoted. And thats just to equate the MS deal, not beat it.
You'd have to make 5 billion dollars in revenue. Given that phones probably sell between 300 and 400 from the manufacturers that's still between 12 and 15 million phones they'd have to sell consistently per year. That's not easy to do in the already crowded Android market.
I suspect that Microsoft is also helping out a LOT with the software side too for their partnership.
I think it is because the specs required to run the android OS is a bit more than Win phone to be honest. and to be true to to the facts those other Manufacturers really dont have high end Windows phone
Have you actually used a good WP8 phone like the 920? The OS is so much nicer to use, fluid, and stylish. It perfectly suits Nokia.
I don't want yet another Android phone with a nasty skin. Theres also the fact that WP8 runs extremely well on this ageing SoC where as Android lags somewhat on this level of hardware.
If you can't see your GS3 lag, then you either have lesser eyesight than many people (don't mean to insult you, but I'm beginning to wonder if this is a real reason that some see the lag and some don't) or you have done significant tweaking to the ROM which most consumers don't want to do, shouldn't have have to do, and certainly voided your warranty in the process.
The only Android device I have ever seen on which I could not detect any "lag" is the Nexus 4. Even the Galaxy Note 2 "lags" too much for me to consider buying it. Android's hardware requirements to meet the level of smoothness that WP8 and iOS users enjoy is confounding. The fact that a "project butter" ever even existed is evidence that Google is aware of this issue and it is a problem. I've heard many people say for the last 2 years that Android no longer suffers lag, but that is not at all the truth in my experience, and it is the reason I waited so long to switch from iOS to Android despite the clearly better services (as a Google Apps user) available in Android. There's nothing more disappointing that reading a review of a new Android device which says it's "fast", "snappy", or "smooth", only to test it and find immediately that it lags just like all of it's predecessors.
Also, I would take the position that hardware may surpass software needs, but can never surpass software wants. For example, you can run Adobe Premiere on many budget laptops today because the *needs* are met, but it will not perform the same as running it on a custom built desktop with 5-10x the horsepower. Some software may not *need* much, but it sure does *want* a lot. Android seems to be a software that wants an awful lot in my opinion.
So it does 16:9 and 4:3... But the entire photo industry and education is built around 3:2 aspect ratio. Rule of thirds, print sizes, etc, etc. If you can't do 3:2, as a camera you're going to be a second class citizen, relegated to snapshots. Can this do 3:2 and nobody mentioned it, or is it just another device for a generation that doesn't care about "legacy form factors".
"When I heard that Nokia was working on getting the 41 MP profile camera I have to admit I pictured something resembling the PureView 808 with the same relatively large bulge, but just running Windows Phone"
Come on Brian, you can't be serious. When 808 launched most phones were 12mm thick - especially Nokia's phones (even in 2012, the Lumia 900 was that thick). So that means Nokia's "average thickness" was already bigger than most competitors.
Now most phones are 8mm thick, and some are even approaching 6mm in thickness. And you're telling me you're surprised that the Pureview phone went from 14mm to 10mm (discounting the camera bump on both cases)?
Please tell me that's actually not true, and you're just exaggerating. Because if it's true, then you aren't paying a lot of attention to technology trends..
Without the information that Nokia moved to a BSA sensor at a smaller pitch it is reasonable to assume they would reuse the same sized sensor again, requiring the thicker camera bulge from the 808. If Nokia wanted to go back to the sensor size of the 808 the 1020 would need to be even thicker than it is now.
Thank you Brian, by far the best coverage of the 1020! This is the greatest camera phone with an OS liability, even though it's less of a liability than Symbian. I want one, but there's software, and functions I need that's only available for Android/iOS which makes me hesitate.
Can you elaborate on what you want from WP8 that it lacks? Google services is one of them for sure. I'm just curious which ones are the specific ones you need.
That's exactly how I feel as well, WP8 is far more usable than Symbian, but it still is second to Android and iOS for me. Until the next version of WP (WP9?) or GDR3 with 1080p phones I really will have a hard time not keeping it as a secondary at best.
I don't see it particularly secondary if Facebook and Twitter apps meet or beat their counterparts and Microsoft starts closing the game void. What other areas are lacking?
You're not gonna get what your asking for. I find it funny how some of these people who complain what WP OS doesn't have are actually Android early adopters. How soon we forget what it feels like to be the new kid on the block.
It's not just the apps that are sometimes missing (although it's improved much and for me WP8 has everything i want) it's also the fact that WP8 still don't even support 1080p and quad core SoC's. Not only this but all WP8 phones lack any modern GPU, so gamers are also disappointed. This is all Microsofts fault not Nokias.
And with a camera like this on the 1020, if any phone needs a good 1080p display its this one so you can really appreciate the detailed shots. If you've used 720p and 1080 phones you will know that you CAN see a difference. Same goes for quad core as there seems to be a delay when pressing the camera button, being as theres no dedicated silicon to help process these massive images the dual core SoC has to handle it all.
If MS actually got off there arse and supported modern hardware this phone could have been perfect. Really disappointing as this phone could have been something very special. One of the reasons Samsung are doing so well now is because of the Galaxy S2, that phone put them on the map as it had the best hardware in all areas on release. Loads of people will purely buy a phone and be early adopters for great hardware, it's not a small niche like high-end PC hardware. Nokia/WP8 need a super phone like that.
Funny how lack of 1080p, that 99% of Android phones and 100% of iPhones lack is a huge liability for WP8.
What would that make an iPhone, that does not even support 720p? Tertiary at best? Or is there an "iPhone can do no wrong" double standard here, like I see on most of the clueless gadget sites? I would expect better from AnandTech.
That's definitely a huge sensor for a smartphone, but at 41 megapixels, it would have terrible noise characteristics... The HTC One got high praise for its large (2.0 micron) pixels, and with a sensor this big, Nokia could have gone simultaneously with bigger pixels and still much higher resolution than the HTC One...
That is true but this pixel pitch is used for 8 MP and 13 MP sensors on other high end phones with little LED flashes. Nokia has a Xenon flash to combat low light and then gets the advantage of more pixels for digital zoom and oversampling.
There is just one thing I don't understand - with the major restriction to a good lens system being the body thickness, then why the hell this phone has this huge and fugly bulge on the bottom? I have it hard remembering the last product that was that ugly... I don't think redefining "ugly" is in nokia's best interest right now...
@ddriver Your comment is probably the first covering the aesthetics side. If you contrast it with the majority of rather technical or usage-based comments accompanying this article, you'd notice yours does look a bit non-coherent with the whole... However since everyone is entitled to his/her own aesthetic opinions, and that angle is part of an consumption product review, is probably welcome here as well. Besides, I digress and do like the look of the phone as a whole, including the "specialized" round section at its back, that also signals its superior and differentiating camera technologies. I would guess tech lovers would appreciate a bit off, but of course to quantify these you'd need focus groups or related else.
I would guess tech lovers would appreciate a bit of this technology showing off, but of course to quantify this, you'd need focus groups or related else.
Would guess tech lovers would appreciate the camera technology showing off. Because that is precisely how optical lenses actually appear like in the pro cameras; they bulge...
PS; Do you like how my comments actually do present themselves as "this huge and fugly bulge on the bottom? I would add, in a telescoping way :)
>>Although imaging quality is a big emphasis for smartphone shoppers, it isn’t the only one, and the Windows Phone 8 pill is still a big one for me and many others to swallow.
You pretty much nailed my feelings with that last sentence. If they'd stayed developing their own OS, that would've helped. And if they'd made a 64Gig version of the 1020, that'd help too.
"Although imaging quality is a big emphasis for smartphone shoppers, it isn’t the only one, and the Windows Phone 8 pill is still a big one for me and many others to swallow."
There it is, in a nutshell. As long as Microsoft does not iron out all OS deficiencies and as long as the app developer community does not care, Nokia faces an insurmountable uphill battle. I like WP8 very much - but not in its current incarnation.
Your guys loss. Just got mine, its a freaking awesome Phone with a grown up OS and a built in great P&S Camera, For someone that owns a Pro DSLr, this unit is a revelation. Enjoy your jelly beans. Son has a HTC One, its very nice, but I much prefer my 1020. (which another Son also got..
Nokia have done a great job but I would have thought they would have been better off going for a an f2.8 lens ... giving better depth of field and hopefully improved image. What is the point of 41mp sensor if the corners are unusable ?
You people are ridiculous..i have a 521 and the camera quality is insane for 5mp cam...ive seen the quality of a 1020 there's barely any; to no camera noise,my 521 shoots at 2100x1490 on average
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
69 Comments
Back to Article
cj100570 - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link
Still not interested in Windows Phonebakedpatato - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link
So braveKrysto - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
Me neither. I give Nokia props for this, but there's nothing they can do hardware wise to make me want to use WP8. I'd rather wait another year or two until an Android OEM makes something similar, and the wait will be well worth it.Also the Sony Honami launching this year seems very interesting already: 20 MP sensor, possibly with oversampling, too, 12,800 ISO, Xenon, and some other technologies and lenses from Sony's point and shoots. It will also have a real processor (S800) to help it process all that data (which the Lumia doesn't, and even Elop admitted it might be a little slow).
Plus, there's the Moto X Clear Pixel to look forward to, and Nexus 5's Nikon technology this year, which even if they aren't as good, they should still be great, and they actually come with Android!
Daniel Egger - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
If I was a believer in crappy phone cameras I'd so totally go for that Lumia 1020. Since I'm not I'll just stay with my Lumia 820. It is absurdly funny how people are trying to chase the best possible camera in a phone while there're quite a bunch of even quite cheap P&S who are much better than the camera in a phone can ever be due to the physical constraints. Also interesting to see how Fandroids are shying away from Windows Phone which in comparison is simply the much better (faster/cleaner/better battery life/more functionality out of the box) system... unless someone wants to spend the cash for an iPhone...MistaWet - Saturday, July 13, 2013 - link
Yes there are cheap P&S's which may take better photos than the 1020. Saying that, the reason why people are "trying to chase" the best camera phone is kinda obvious. They don't want to carry both and they would love if the only device they had to carry not only took GREAT photos but fetched their email, sent their documents, kept them up to speed socially, kept them entertained while they played games etc..Spunjji - Tuesday, July 16, 2013 - link
Use of the word "fandroid" helpfully marks your comment as junk. Shame I actually read it. As mentioned by MistaWet, some people only want to carry one device. If everyone simply accepted that phone cameras were never going to be as good as larger cameras then we'd still be stuck with 640x480 webcam quality... instead we have devices that can take perfectly serviceable photos.TL;DR? Go somewhere else and whine, this thread is for comments.
warren96 - Monday, January 20, 2014 - link
Android would need more hardware resources..especially in ram so...?just2btecky - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
No problem, you'll get over the shock and awe. Peace:)therodt - Wednesday, July 17, 2013 - link
Annnd you wasted time reading the article still.damianrobertjones - Saturday, July 20, 2013 - link
Shame.jhoff80 - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link
Is there was a button in that "Pro Camera" app to activate WP8's Lenses feature to jump to other apps that can use the camera? I see a button that looks similar in the first video, but he didn't touch it.The app looks great though (a million times better than the WP8 app "ProShot" that does largely have the same functionality).
skiboysteve - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link
Very excited to get the software on my 920.really wish I could get this but I'm obviously still on contract. I'll hopefully get the 8974 version when my contract is up.
therodt - Wednesday, July 17, 2013 - link
I would say try the camera 360 app to get familar with it. it is pretty much that with some enhancementsjeremyshaw - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link
One of the most impressive parts of the 808, that made it a complete package, was the microphone setup. Is there any news on what the new Lumia brings to the table compared to its spiritual predecessor?Canbacon - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
I believe it is 3 HAVAC mics in different locations on the phone that record in stereo.Canbacon - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
ooops HAAC instead of HAVACEraser85 - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
The Lumia 920 already has 3 HAAC microphones and they work really well as demonstrated by many concert videos on youtube such as this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Sm1FLdZRk0Pfffman - Thursday, July 11, 2013 - link
When will there be more information about low light performance? The videos didn't have anything in particular. Given how Brian would prefer bigger pixels for low light, is this still compelling?skiboysteve - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
Oh yeah. The 1020 has much better OIS than anything on the market and that plus the massive oversampling available makes this the best phone camera in all lighting situations.aperson - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
"oversampling" = downsampling/subsampling"reinvented zoom" = cropping
it's really silly that they make a big deal out of common techniques. there's no special technology or magic. it's just a very high resolution sensor....
Malih - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
reinvented zoom - I think is a term for the combination of the sensor and cropping, that means it also includes all the engineering that goes into fitting the technology into a phone that is relatively thin.simple cropping can be applied to normal phone camera, but wouldn't have the same amount of detail.
skiboysteve - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
That is an oversimplification. The zoom function constantly changes the over sampling ratio so it utilizes the right amount of physical pixels per logical pixel. It is NOT cropping.the oversampling algorithm is not straight averaging.
read their white paper:
http://i.nokia.com/blob/view/-/2723846/data/1/-/Lu...
aperson - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
okay well then it's cropping + downsampling until the resolution is 5mp.of course the downsampling (or oversampling or whatever you want to call it) is not straight averaging; it's probably just bicubic interpolation.
nerd1 - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
IT IS CROPPING and downsampling. Sony P&S cameras had that feature (smart digital zoom or blah) decade ago. Also it is not 'loseless' either as the sensor is using bayer filter and IQ is limited by optics anyway.gnx - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
It is quite amazing that Nokia which started as a cellphone company, not a camera company, has made the most credible near-professional grade camera-phone. It's heads and shoulders above the Galaxy Camera or Galaxy Zoom, and maybe somewhat comparable to the Galaxy NX, but then the latter is a camera turned phone, and Samsung was also a camera company as well as cellphone company, while Nokia never made separate cameras. Yet Nokia, not Samsung, or not even Sony whom Samsung was emulating, has the best camera phone!I have to admit WP8, personally, is the thing holding me back from being tempted by this, and I can only imagine how nicer it would've been with Meego, but the camera UI looks fantastic, a great meager of the processing power of modern cellphone cpus with lens hardware. Hopefully, this will spur others like Sony or LG to also up the ante and bring to the market an excellent camera-phone as well!
dishayu - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
It's not near-professional grade. It's regular-point-and-shoot-camera grade. Which in itself is a massive achivement, but calling it near-professional grade is wayy too much.max1001 - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
Nope. Still better than $150 P&S camera. Dynamic range on P&S is a joke because there isn't none. Even DSLR struggle in sunny weather.Harriv - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
Nokia started as a paper mill in 1865. On the other hand, as Elop said, their first imaging patent is from 1994.Kasem Asawaprecha - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
Why not introduce these amazing camera features in a Nokia Android phone? Samsung and HTC are selling both Android and WP8 phones. Why can't Nokia? You have a great reputation for building high quality phones. Just do it in the popular OS and you will be fine.dishayu - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
If Nokia could make an Android version of this, I would be really hard pressed to choose between the One and this, despite the One's massively superior SoC, screen and speakers.thesavvymage - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
Nokia gets 1 billion a year from Microsoft for staying Windows exclusive, thats whyKrysto - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
Peanuts. They only need to sell a couple million Android phones per beat to beat that.He's right. Nokia is downright stupid for keep the *exclusivity* with WP8 just for some pocket change. They would be selling 10x more devices with Android, then they'll ever sell with WP8.
Krysto - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
per year*Bal - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
Your equating 1 billion in straight profit to 1 billion in revenue. Big difference. Assuming they make 20% on a phone (big assumption), they would have to sell 5B in phones...5x times the number you quoted. And thats just to equate the MS deal, not beat it.erple2 - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
You'd have to make 5 billion dollars in revenue. Given that phones probably sell between 300 and 400 from the manufacturers that's still between 12 and 15 million phones they'd have to sell consistently per year. That's not easy to do in the already crowded Android market.I suspect that Microsoft is also helping out a LOT with the software side too for their partnership.
Gadgety - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
I agree, but you have to remember that Elop came from Microsoft... and was the third largest personal share holder with a 7% share...therodt - Wednesday, July 17, 2013 - link
I think it is because the specs required to run the android OS is a bit more than Win phone to be honest. and to be true to to the facts those other Manufacturers really dont have high end Windows phonejbrandonf - Friday, August 2, 2013 - link
Not anymore.B3an - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
Have you actually used a good WP8 phone like the 920? The OS is so much nicer to use, fluid, and stylish. It perfectly suits Nokia.I don't want yet another Android phone with a nasty skin. Theres also the fact that WP8 runs extremely well on this ageing SoC where as Android lags somewhat on this level of hardware.
lmcd - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
What lag? My S3 (equal hardware exactly) is fluid. The hardware has surpassed the software's need.chadrandom - Monday, July 15, 2013 - link
If you can't see your GS3 lag, then you either have lesser eyesight than many people (don't mean to insult you, but I'm beginning to wonder if this is a real reason that some see the lag and some don't) or you have done significant tweaking to the ROM which most consumers don't want to do, shouldn't have have to do, and certainly voided your warranty in the process.The only Android device I have ever seen on which I could not detect any "lag" is the Nexus 4. Even the Galaxy Note 2 "lags" too much for me to consider buying it. Android's hardware requirements to meet the level of smoothness that WP8 and iOS users enjoy is confounding. The fact that a "project butter" ever even existed is evidence that Google is aware of this issue and it is a problem. I've heard many people say for the last 2 years that Android no longer suffers lag, but that is not at all the truth in my experience, and it is the reason I waited so long to switch from iOS to Android despite the clearly better services (as a Google Apps user) available in Android. There's nothing more disappointing that reading a review of a new Android device which says it's "fast", "snappy", or "smooth", only to test it and find immediately that it lags just like all of it's predecessors.
Also, I would take the position that hardware may surpass software needs, but can never surpass software wants. For example, you can run Adobe Premiere on many budget laptops today because the *needs* are met, but it will not perform the same as running it on a custom built desktop with 5-10x the horsepower. Some software may not *need* much, but it sure does *want* a lot. Android seems to be a software that wants an awful lot in my opinion.
Rick83 - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
So it does 16:9 and 4:3...But the entire photo industry and education is built around 3:2 aspect ratio. Rule of thirds, print sizes, etc, etc. If you can't do 3:2, as a camera you're going to be a second class citizen, relegated to snapshots.
Can this do 3:2 and nobody mentioned it, or is it just another device for a generation that doesn't care about "legacy form factors".
Krysto - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
"When I heard that Nokia was working on getting the 41 MP profile camera I have to admit I pictured something resembling the PureView 808 with the same relatively large bulge, but just running Windows Phone"Come on Brian, you can't be serious. When 808 launched most phones were 12mm thick - especially Nokia's phones (even in 2012, the Lumia 900 was that thick). So that means Nokia's "average thickness" was already bigger than most competitors.
Now most phones are 8mm thick, and some are even approaching 6mm in thickness. And you're telling me you're surprised that the Pureview phone went from 14mm to 10mm (discounting the camera bump on both cases)?
Please tell me that's actually not true, and you're just exaggerating. Because if it's true, then you aren't paying a lot of attention to technology trends..
Zink - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
Without the information that Nokia moved to a BSA sensor at a smaller pitch it is reasonable to assume they would reuse the same sized sensor again, requiring the thicker camera bulge from the 808. If Nokia wanted to go back to the sensor size of the 808 the 1020 would need to be even thicker than it is now.Brian Klug - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
This. Without moving to 1.1µm it would be just as thick as the 808. Plus the round capacitor.-Brian
iamadeer - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
Best. Article. Ever.Thank you for making sense in a world of bullshit tech-"journalists". Thank you.
Gadgety - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
Thank you Brian, by far the best coverage of the 1020! This is the greatest camera phone with an OS liability, even though it's less of a liability than Symbian. I want one, but there's software, and functions I need that's only available for Android/iOS which makes me hesitate.skiboysteve - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
Can you elaborate on what you want from WP8 that it lacks? Google services is one of them for sure. I'm just curious which ones are the specific ones you need.Brian Klug - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
That's exactly how I feel as well, WP8 is far more usable than Symbian, but it still is second to Android and iOS for me. Until the next version of WP (WP9?) or GDR3 with 1080p phones I really will have a hard time not keeping it as a secondary at best.-Brian
lmcd - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
I don't see it particularly secondary if Facebook and Twitter apps meet or beat their counterparts and Microsoft starts closing the game void. What other areas are lacking?MistaWet - Saturday, July 13, 2013 - link
You're not gonna get what your asking for. I find it funny how some of these people who complain what WP OS doesn't have are actually Android early adopters. How soon we forget what it feels like to be the new kid on the block.B3an - Saturday, July 13, 2013 - link
You both miss the point.It's not just the apps that are sometimes missing (although it's improved much and for me WP8 has everything i want) it's also the fact that WP8 still don't even support 1080p and quad core SoC's. Not only this but all WP8 phones lack any modern GPU, so gamers are also disappointed. This is all Microsofts fault not Nokias.
And with a camera like this on the 1020, if any phone needs a good 1080p display its this one so you can really appreciate the detailed shots. If you've used 720p and 1080 phones you will know that you CAN see a difference. Same goes for quad core as there seems to be a delay when pressing the camera button, being as theres no dedicated silicon to help process these massive images the dual core SoC has to handle it all.
If MS actually got off there arse and supported modern hardware this phone could have been perfect. Really disappointing as this phone could have been something very special. One of the reasons Samsung are doing so well now is because of the Galaxy S2, that phone put them on the map as it had the best hardware in all areas on release. Loads of people will purely buy a phone and be early adopters for great hardware, it's not a small niche like high-end PC hardware. Nokia/WP8 need a super phone like that.
Joe212 - Sunday, July 14, 2013 - link
Funny how lack of 1080p, that 99% of Android phones and 100% of iPhones lack is a huge liability for WP8.What would that make an iPhone, that does not even support 720p? Tertiary at best? Or is there an "iPhone can do no wrong" double standard here, like I see on most of the clueless gadget sites? I would expect better from AnandTech.
Guspaz - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
That's definitely a huge sensor for a smartphone, but at 41 megapixels, it would have terrible noise characteristics... The HTC One got high praise for its large (2.0 micron) pixels, and with a sensor this big, Nokia could have gone simultaneously with bigger pixels and still much higher resolution than the HTC One...Zink - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
That is true but this pixel pitch is used for 8 MP and 13 MP sensors on other high end phones with little LED flashes. Nokia has a Xenon flash to combat low light and then gets the advantage of more pixels for digital zoom and oversampling.ddriver - Friday, July 12, 2013 - link
There is just one thing I don't understand - with the major restriction to a good lens system being the body thickness, then why the hell this phone has this huge and fugly bulge on the bottom? I have it hard remembering the last product that was that ugly... I don't think redefining "ugly" is in nokia's best interest right now...Nexing - Saturday, July 13, 2013 - link
@ddriverYour comment is probably the first covering the aesthetics side. If you contrast it with the majority of rather technical or usage-based comments accompanying this article, you'd notice yours does look a bit non-coherent with the whole...
However since everyone is entitled to his/her own aesthetic opinions, and that angle is part of an consumption product review, is probably welcome here as well.
Besides, I digress and do like the look of the phone as a whole, including the "specialized" round section at its back, that also signals its superior and differentiating camera technologies.
I would guess tech lovers would appreciate a bit off, but of course to quantify these you'd need focus groups or related else.
Nexing - Saturday, July 13, 2013 - link
I would guess tech lovers would appreciate a bit of this technology showing off, but of course to quantify this, you'd need focus groups or related else.Nexing - Saturday, July 13, 2013 - link
Would guess tech lovers would appreciate the camera technology showing off. Because that is precisely how optical lenses actually appear like in the pro cameras; they bulge...PS; Do you like how my comments actually do present themselves as "this huge and fugly bulge on the bottom? I would add, in a telescoping way :)
imbetard - Saturday, July 13, 2013 - link
The phone does not have a fugly bulge. The camera grip attachment has a, well, grip.B3an - Saturday, July 13, 2013 - link
That bulge is the camera grip attachment you muppet.RYF - Sunday, July 14, 2013 - link
@ddriverI think you are referring to the add-on accessory which serves as the battery back, cover, holder as well to offer the mechanical shutter button.
For the phone itself, other than the camera bulge, it is flat down there.
barry spock - Tuesday, July 16, 2013 - link
>>Although imaging quality is a big emphasis for smartphone shoppers, it isn’t the only one, and the Windows Phone 8 pill is still a big one for me and many others to swallow.You pretty much nailed my feelings with that last sentence. If they'd stayed developing their own OS, that would've helped. And if they'd made a 64Gig version of the 1020, that'd help too.
Systembolaget - Tuesday, July 16, 2013 - link
"Although imaging quality is a big emphasis for smartphone shoppers, it isn’t the only one, and the Windows Phone 8 pill is still a big one for me and many others to swallow."There it is, in a nutshell. As long as Microsoft does not iron out all OS deficiencies and as long as the app developer community does not care, Nokia faces an insurmountable uphill battle. I like WP8 very much - but not in its current incarnation.
KennyG Jr - Tuesday, July 16, 2013 - link
Leave it to Nokia to make a great camera phone. Now it just needs to be water-proof.ezrasam - Thursday, July 18, 2013 - link
does it support RAW capture? Won't that be good to have?JETninja - Saturday, July 27, 2013 - link
Your guys loss. Just got mine, its a freaking awesome Phone with a grown up OS and a built in great P&S Camera, For someone that owns a Pro DSLr, this unit is a revelation. Enjoy your jelly beans. Son has a HTC One, its very nice, but I much prefer my 1020. (which another Son also got..Rentarant - Thursday, November 28, 2013 - link
Nokia have done a great job but I would have thought they would have been better off going for a an f2.8 lens ... giving better depth of field and hopefully improved image. What is the point of 41mp sensor if the corners are unusable ?warren96 - Monday, January 20, 2014 - link
You people are ridiculous..i have a 521 and the camera quality is insane for 5mp cam...ive seen the quality of a 1020 there's barely any; to no camera noise,my 521 shoots at 2100x1490 on average