Let's go outside for a change. To a very small general aviation airport in my neighbourhood. Carrying three Nokia PureView devices, the Samsung, Sony and Jolla.
Yes, I know the comparison isn't completely fair, the Jolla being cheaper and never "camera centric" and all that. True. But its camera sotware has been recently updated and the Jolla still costs you €400: you might expect a pretty good smartphone camera module for that kind of money as well I guess?
There has been some confusement about the amout of MP the Jolla's camera has - and I've been adding a bit to it as well, I'm sorry to say. Based on a too quick glance on the internet I thought 3264 x 1840 pixels equals 4MP - but obviously (just do the math) it's 6MP.
Now why is Jolla mentioning 8MP for its camera? Probably because the sensor is that big - you know, like the 808 PureView and Lumia 1020 have a 41MP sensor, but you will only get 38MP in 4:3 and 34MP in 16:9 aspect ratio.
Like - for instance - the Samsung Galaxy Note 3 has a 13MP sensor but will only give you that in 4:3, and "only" 9.6MP in 16:9. The Jolla gives you 6MP in 16:9 and you can't change the aspect ratio to 4:3. So I guess it's 8MP when you would have had the possibility to use 4:3 - maybe after a future update.
Enough numbers. Let return to the small aviation airport. The light was bright, it was a clear afternoon and the clouds on the horizon made for an impressive scenery. All camera settings were on automatic - I didn't change the white balance, didn't put any focus to "infinity" (although that might have been wise in this case).
The shots aren't very interesting from an artistic point of view (although the clouds are beautiful). But to see how the different cameras cope with the contrast of the bright sunlight and the darker foreground - I think that's what makes these shots worth your while. And the 640 x 360 crops, of course, showing which offers you the best detail.
First the two smallest resolutions, 5MP coming from the Nokia Lumia 1520 and 1020 (shown in that order). Both devices chose ISO-100, the difference is remarkable - the light was exactly the same.
Now one might argue the grass looks very green in the last shot, but on a very bright sunlit afternoon, it actually looks this green. I think the 1020 has done a better job here - maybe because of the bigger sensor? Who knows... You'll see quite a bit darker shade of green in all the other shots though.