An interesting analysis of a few of my shots
More and more people send me shots and even articles to share here at the PureViewClub. I'm honoured, really - but I hardly ever find the time to share the results here. In this case I'll simply have to make an exception, since Harsh Verma from Varanasi (India) put a lot of time and effort in writing an analysis of my own shots.
He sent me a profound and extensive analyses of the ones I published from my day in Hilversum, the raw .DNG shots coming from my Lumia 1020 and 1520, compared with the 808 PureView - you'll find that post here.
Everything you'll read below is written by Harsh Verma.
Hardware sampling vs Software Sampling(808 vs 1020) Part 1.
Nokia 808 does the oversampling and processing in hardware, which is considered to be better than software processing done by the Lumia 1020. However Nokia Lumia 1020 with given Raw output gives option to process and do oversampling on more powerful machines than a mobile, in PC and laptops. With more varieties of options.
So I tested. For this all I did:
1) I oversampled the given raw .DNG files to 8mp (3840x2160 and 3264x 2448) of 808’s resolution in Lightroom 5.2 without any modifying any else parameter.
2) I am only comparing the details. As you have said, the weather and lighting conditions were different sometimes, so only focus is which sensor captures more detail at low iso levels(given).
3) Providing you the original oversampled 1020 files and edited files and crops as mentioned below.
4) First (or left) you will see the 808 PureView shots, below (or right) the 1020 crops.
The given 808 pic was under-exposed by -0.3 ev. So in Lightroom I increased the exposure by +0.3ev and maxed out Shadows to 100 to get the maximum detail from the pic. In Nokia 1020, as exposure was by default on 0.0, I just increased shadows to 100 too. Then took crops of the various elements in photograph.
808 8mp Original (ISO 100,Exposure 1/100 sec, Exposure -0.3ev )
1020 8mp Original( ISO 100, Exposure 1/430 sec, Exposure 0.0)
808 8MP( Increased Exposure by +0.3, Shadows to 100)
1020 8MP (Increased Shadows to 100)
Edited Max Detail Link http://sdrv.ms/19pIop4
Crops Link: http://sdrv.ms/1dqd8rd
On comparison, 808 has lost some details and as a result detailing and sharpness in 1020 is better. In last bycle crop, in window pane, look how the texts are sharp and visible in 1020.
As from exif, 808 pic isn’t underexposed, but in comparison with 1020, its quite dark. So I balanced the light levels in both 1020’s nd 808’s to same. And increased the shadows to max to see which camera brings more details. Next I took crops of several elements.
808 8MP Original (ISO 64, Shutter Speed 1/336 secs, Exposure 0.0 )
1020 Original (ISO 100, Exposure 1/530 secs, Exposure 0.0 )
808 8 MP( Increased Exposure by +0.50 and Shadows to 100)
1020 8MP (Increased Exposure by +0.60 and Shadows to 100)
Crops Link: http://sdrv.ms/1dqd62p
On pixel peeping, the 1020’s bit better than 808 in details. The difference is easily recognizable in darker areas, where 808 starts loosing some details like in floor,chair crops, 1020 with better details.While in lighter areas, you need to pixel peep to notice the marginal difference. Yet 1020 is more detailed.
III. No Entrance:
However both phones focused on different letters. Being center on focused area, only Letter ‘S’ was commonly focued.
808 8 MP Original( ISO 125, Shutter Speed 1/125 secs, Exposure 0.0)
1020 8MP Original( ISO 100, Shutter Speed 1/35 secs, Exposure 0.0)
1020 Original 8mp Jpeg link: http://sdrv.ms/1dqdyxI
Here I took the crop:
Though with 1020 due to getting closer to the board, bokeh effect looks more pleasing.
IV. Red Pepper:
Both images seems to be taken at different light conditions. I found this case interesting as I wanted to see the flexibility and jpeg vs raw fight.
First I took 808’s colour as standard and adjusted 1020’s white balance. I took center’s common focus point and made a crop. The detailing on comparison is equal by both.
808 8MP Original (ISO 160, Shutter Speed 1/33 secs, Exposure 0.0)
1020 8MP with 808’s colour as Standard ( ISO 219, Shutter Speed 1/30 secs, Exposure 0.0)
1020 Jpeg with 808's colour as Standard link: http://sdrv.ms/1dqdZrV
Crop 1 Link: http://sdrv.ms/1j3PCCn
Then I took 1020’s colour as standard and adjusted 808 with wb and a bit saturation to make like 1020.Again I took the common focus point and made crops. 808 has started losing fine details.
Here's the 1020 8MP Original (note you'll see the original 1020 shot first, next the 808 PureView shot with the 1020's colours as standard)
808 8MP With 1020’s Colour as Standard
808 Jpeg with 1020's colour as Standard link: http://sdrv.ms/JVuXSr
Crops (808 first)
Crop 2 Link: http://sdrv.ms/1j3PGCh
The aim of this was to test the level of editing the picture by both cameras maintaining the details. If we want to have picture like 1020’s colour or 808’s colour, how is the creative potential of images. Surprisingly 1020 wins here.
V. Tree hut
The given 808 PureView pic was under-exposed by -0.3 ev. So in Lightroom I increased the exposure by +0.3ev and maxed out Shadows to 100 to get the maximum detail from the pic. In Nokia Lumia 1020, I increased shadows to 100 too. Then took crops of the various elements in photograph.
808 8MP Original( ISO 160, Shutter Speed 1/50 sec, Exposure-0.3ev)
1020 8MP Original (1SO 100, Shutter Speed 1/30 sec, Exposure 0.0)
1020 Original 8mp link: http://sdrv.ms/1m3bzyE
808 8MP (Increased exposure by +0.3ev & Shadows by +100)
1020 8MP (Increased Shadows by +100)
Edited Max details 808 & 1020 Jpegs link: http://sdrv.ms/1dqdLB4
Crops Link: http://sdrv.ms/1gB3LTI
On comparing the crops I found, 808 during processing do increase some amount of sharpness, resulting in loss of details. While 1020 is very pure. See here the difference in leaves and top of house crop. Similar sharpness can be achieved with DNG, results can be formed like 808.
The Nokia Lumia 1020 has totally surprised me in the above comparisons. Having thirty percent smaller sensor size, less pixel size, even with higher iso, yet delivering image detailing equal to 808’s and even better, like in dark areas. The sensor takes bright photos.
The editing/post-processing possibilities with 808 PureView’s jpeg is quite large - much more than any other smartphones, due to its very minimal processing. Yet 1020 has larger possibilities.
Much more detail can be obtained from .DNG of the 1020 than from the .JPG of the 808. Like above, it was very easy for 1020 to make results like 808 (e.g in Red Pepper, No Entrance) but 808’s jpeg starts losing detail when you try to make it look like the 1020 images.
With 1020, we get over-sampling result of any resolution. These are the immediate advantages of raw highlighted through these comparisons.
by Harsh Verma, January 2014
I'd like to thank Harsh for all the time he took to analyze my shots, and have just one thing to add: the shots of the red peppers were made in the exact same (inside) light conditions. Well, there was a huge window nearby, but I don't recall any difference in light at all making those shots. I only recall the shop owner asking me if these were the most beautiful peppers I've ever seen :-)
I was surprised by his conclusion as well - I wonder what you think of the way he came to these conclusions, and if you agree with them. Don't hesitate to let yourself be heard below.