Lumia 920

[dagamer34]

Those are horrible I really hope that was someone intentionally taking a bad pick with the 920 to make the Iphone 5 look better. If that really is the quality of the camera bye bye W8 and hello to a nexus 4.

This is why professional reviewers have standardized lightboxes and objective tests so the skill of the photographer doesn't come into question. Knowing a lot about photography makes a huge difference in how pictures come out.

 

[vi edit]

Here's the full review of that:
http://www.dialaphone.co.uk/blog/2012/10/30/nokia-lumia-920-vs-apple-iphone-5/

The other thing i'm noticing in a lot of pics is that they are very blury on the left hand side of the images.

I just have to wonder if the processing and noise reduction they are doing to process the low light stuff is just too over aggressive on everything else.

More pics:
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=56D6AAF6D18C0AB2&id=56D6AAF6D18C0AB2%21644#cid=56D6AAF6D18C0AB2&id=56D6AAF6D18C0AB2%213219

 

[Red Storm]

This is why professional reviewers have standardized lightboxes and objective tests so the skill of the photographer doesn't come into question. Knowing a lot about photography makes a huge difference in how pictures come out.

At the same time, I think it's pretty important to show how pictures look when taken outside of ideal scenarios, as the vast majority of photos are not snapped with things like standardized lightboxes around.

 

[darkewaffle]

Here's the full review of that:
http://www.dialaphone.co.uk/blog/2012/10/30/nokia-lumia-920-vs-apple-iphone-5/

The other thing i'm noticing in a lot of pics is that they are very blury on the left hand side of the images.

I just have to wonder if the processing and noise reduction they are doing to process the low light stuff is just too over aggressive on everything else.

More pics:
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=56D6AAF6D18C0AB2&id=56D6AAF6D18C0AB2%21644#cid=56D6AAF6D18C0AB2&id=56D6AAF6D18C0AB2%213219

It's only three shots, and personally I'd give the Lumia the edge in 2/3 of them. The close up definitely seems to lack clarity, but at the same time this is a very similar, up close shot from a 920 that managed to show some quite nice detail and clarity imo.

 

[vi edit]

Here's another:

http://reviews.cnet.co.uk/mobile-phones/nokia-lumia-920-review-50009101/#camera

Lumia:
http://cdn-static.cnet.co.uk/i/c/blg/cat/nokia-lumia-920-screens/lumia-920-camera-test-large.jpg

iPhone:
http://cdn-static.cnet.co.uk/i/c/bl...creens/lumia-920-camera-test-iphone-large.jpg

Check the bouy and the people on the bridge. It just breaks up in detail a lot faster. I do agree that the colors are more favorable on a lot of the Nokia shots. They are warmer/more desirable tones while the iPhone looks a bit cold and sterile. But as far as detail and sharpness Apple builds a pretty good phone/processing.

 

[vi edit]

Also want to note that initial battery life reviews have been rough.

From that cnet review:

"Although it packs in a capacious 2,000mAh cell, I found with pretty heavy use (downloading apps, using maps and tracking, sending numerous texts and emails) for around 4 hours it had gone from fully charged to around 25 per cent remaining. It certainly won't last an entire working day."

Other reviews have stated similar. Here's to hoping that it's just a new battery issue and that it will improve with some more cycles.

Will be interested to see when Anand's crew get's their hands on the device for a throrough workout.

 

[pandemonium]

I have a very difficult time not holding judgement against Cnet and their reviews. They almost always seem to "side" with the majority, and not the "truth" of tech. I dunno, just my observation.

I think waiting until more professional reviews are done would be the right course of action. The Verge's was very favorable...almost too good to be true. I'll be waiting for GSMArena's sampling and maybe even DPreview (if they happen to do one).

 

[openwheel]

nitpicking now.

 

[Rayb]

One of the first of many reviews to come for the Lumia 920.

 

[VashHT]

theverge gave it a pretty good score, the ecosystem score brought it down overall but other than that it's ranked as good as other high-end phones. In the video review they say the camera is really good all around, not just in low light. They also said the battery life was good and the screen is really nice too. Sounds like it's a pretty nice phone all around, I'm tempted to pick one up.

EDIT: Here's the review: http://www.theverge.com/2012/11/1/3584486/nokia-lumia-920-review

 

[Deeko]

I'll be picking up the 920. I've been using a Lumia since February so it would be hard to go without Nokia Drive. However, if I can't stand the extra size I'll be returning it for the much more size-friendly 8x.

 

[pandemonium]

Lol, good stuff.

The new addition is "PureMotion HD+," which is Nokia's branding for reducing latency and guaranteeing 60FPS on animations — with scientific papers backing it all up. Well, the phone seems to live up to those marks: swiping around in Windows Phone 8's various screens yields sharp transitions with crisp motion. If you're basing your smartphone buying decision on such things, the 920 is your phone. Also, I'm really, genuinely curious as to what makes you tick.

 

[VashHT]

I'll be picking up the 920. I've been using a Lumia since February so it would be hard to go without Nokia Drive. However, if I can't stand the extra size I'll be returning it for the much more size-friendly 8x.

Is the 920 that much bigger than the 900? I haven't really compared but I wouldn't think it would be much bigger, but if you're using the 800 then it would be a big jump.

 

[Deeko]

Is the 920 that much bigger than the 900? I haven't really compared but I wouldn't think it would be much bigger, but if you're using the 800 then it would be a big jump.

Ya know, officially on the spec sheet, the 920 is thinner...but if you look at the pictures, I think that's just at the edges. Based on the thickness compared to the headphone jack, it's definitely thicker than the 900 - but, it's curved, so it might be noticeable.

It's a bit wider too, and the 900 was already pushing a bit beyond the limits of what I considered comfortable to hold. So we'll see...it will be close. For me, anyway.

 

[s44]

Y'all do realize that the 920 is heavier than the Note 2?

 

[Rayb]

Their video review is ok, then you get to the written part and it starts to fall apart.
I can only say one thing about that review and it isn't flattering but their POV makes me laugh, specially when they knock the camera enhancements with stupid remarks.

A studied pro might say that they’re more accurate and true to life, but the vast majority of smartphone users don’t want to think about the nuances of optical imaging stabilization, they just want to take photos.

Does this mean that morons like Topolosky & Co prefer something less complicated?

I had a good laugh none the less! I'll be waiting for the Anandtech review.

 

[rockyct]

Y'all do realize that the 920 is heavier than the Note 2?

Within reason, I don't think people care that much about how much their phone weighs. A tablet matters a bit because you hold it by the edge so the torque does change how stable it is in your hand. There's also the thinking that people believe a phone is more solid and well built when it weighs more. I'm not saying weight isn't really an issue here, but more people will not like it's size than it's weight.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I think what they're saying is that while the 920's camera is nice and some people can appreciate it. Most of the population will just see 8MP and think "oh, that's standard now" and not really care about the extras because to them it takes pictures and they don't much care about it from a photographer's point of view. They should though, I wish more phones would use good optics and have the better image stabilization and low light quality.

 

[Muyoso]

Their video review is ok, then you get to the written part and it starts to fall apart.
I can only say one thing about that review and it isn't flattering but their POV makes me laugh, specially when they knock the camera enhancements with stupid remarks.



Does this mean that morons like Topolosky & Co prefer something less complicated?

I had a good laugh none the less! I'll be waiting for the Anandtech review.

I think what it means is that the pictures are probably more accurate to real life, but that is not what consumers want. Consumers want pictures that pop a little bit. They dont want to take a picture on a cloudy day and have everything dreary and awful looking.

 

[pandemonium]

Yup, consumers want oversatured, unrealistic captures. IE: iPhones. Sad, really.

 

[s44]

Yup, consumers want oversatured, unrealistic captures. IE: iPhones. Sad, really.

Gotta say, I love my HDR photo apps.

 

[finbarqs]

people will like what they like... Photography is always very subjective, and it's very much like high school:

you'll have different camps: You'll have your film purists who will not like anything but film. Then you'll have your photo shoppers, who will photoshop anything and everything to make "digital art". Then you'll have your "I like photos as natural as possible" where they'll take a raw image and say that's the REAL capture. No "post processing" cheating.

In the end, I just wish all these groups just got along!

 

[pandemonium]

Don't forget the group that takes beautiful, high quality photos and Instagrams them. All of them. D::'(

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Yup, consumers want oversatured, unrealistic captures. IE: iPhones. Sad, really.

iphones are unrealistic? so are half the cameraphones out there anyway. what do you expect?

It's like people liking AMOLED screens

 

[shortylickens]

iphones are unrealistic? so are half the cameraphones out there anyway. what do you expect?

It's like people liking AMOLED screens

They all followed the iphone cuz the iphone sets the pace (even when its clearly the wrong pace).