Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Nokia 808 PureView Camera vs iPhone 4S Camera

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    57

    Nokia 808 PureView Camera vs iPhone 4S Camera

    Nokia 808 PureView is released and features to give best camera quality. Equipped with 41 megapixel camera the phone is designed to provide rich images. This Nokia has break all the limits of phone photography. Now compared to that surely iPhone 4S lacks. I am looking for some kind of comparison between both cameras. The maximum resolution on Nokia PureView 808 is 5368 x 7728 pixels. While on iPhone 4S with 8 Megapixel camera you can get 960x 640 pixels. So obviously if we go with comparison of technical specs then Nokia 808 PureView rocks. Both phones are awesome with rich camera features. Does anyone has noticed any difference between image quality. Both are costly phone, but Nokia in comparison to iPhone is more affordable.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,573

    Re: Nokia 808 PureView Camera vs iPhone 4S Camera

    You are right that if we go with the technical aspect then surely Nokia is going to rule the charts. But there can be difference based on features. You know that iPhone 4S is rich in photography features while Nokia gives you more detailed images. 5368 x 7728 pixel is a big resolution. It can generate a very wide screen images size that can be framed on your wall. Compared to that iPhone 4S gives you more than a regular size image. What matters it he quality. If you are capturing such a high resolution picture then the most important thing to check is zoom in quality. If you had captured a big area with Nokia 808 PureView, on 100% zoom in the pictures does not blur out. While in iPhone this happens. I had tested this. Capture any image like a image of flower for example. Then zoom in till the last point. The image on iPhone will be blurry while on Nokia 808 Pureview is more clear. I cannot provide a sample of that but you can understand what I am talking about. The image remains faily visible on iPhone until you do not zoom it completely. This thing does not lack in PureView. It is obvious that @ 41Megapixel you will surely get the best quality image output. One more thing I want to add about image quality when taken outdoor. Like when you are capturing images in a cloudy day. There is no direct sunlight. At that point it is noticed that iPhone 4S has nice ability to manage the image colors and contrast. It does not spoils it on the other hand it generates a much vibrant image. The colors are well seen, as it looks like a processed image. While Nokia 808 PureView gives you standard image with dull color. The color quality of iPhone under such condition is awesome. Colors are perfectly blended in every part of image making it more vibrant. While in PurView the objects looks a bit dull.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    406

    Re: Nokia 808 PureView Camera vs iPhone 4S Camera

    Thats look a bit interesting post. I am using iPhone 4S and quiet satisfied with the image quality. One thing I agree is the zooming quality. That really blur out when you zoom in entirely. That really does not matter much as you require the entire image only. iPhone 4S is quiet not recommended for distant photos.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,014

    Re: Nokia 808 PureView Camera vs iPhone 4S Camera

    Luckily I got chance to see this phone at my friends place. In my last vacation I had capture more than 400 photos from iPhone. I had used some software to process my images and making it more clear. But in rare cases iPhone photos found that much low. Compared to that when I capture some photos from Nokia 808 PureView I found that this phone is not capable of giving you vibrant quality of image on low light. For example you are taking picture inside your home with single chandelier light. Here in day time the light looks low because of sunlight from window cover with window cover. I had taken photos of my friend. After transferring those photos to my laptop, I can explain the changes more clearly. iPhone 4S give more colors while Nokia 808 PureView gives realistic images. Realistic means images does not look processed. They appear as they are captured with little dull color. Like the clothes. A red color cloth in photo of Nokia looks regular while in iPhone 4S that same color has more vibrant quality. That is because of iPhone's iSight camera which is designed to capture more light compare to others. The images in iPhone 4S are more rich.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,863

    Re: Nokia 808 PureView Camera vs iPhone 4S Camera

    I will prefer to stick with iPhone for high resolution images. Because there are certain things which Nokia 808 Pureview lacks. As said above the color saturation is very important. I had seen some sample images on web. They had shown the difference both the camera. Where one thing that really is worth to discuss here. When the image is clicked the phone software is responsbile to process and generate image quality. Which is transformed to readable format. No phone captures a raw image format. Here compared to Nokia, iPhone is quiet better for hdr. I am talking about high definition resolution. For me I had noticed that Nokia 808 PureView is a bit dull. While iPhone does some additions to the existing making it more better in look.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 08-08-2014, 02:37 PM
  2. Camera quality of Nokia 808 Pureview
    By Satchel in forum Portable Devices
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 30-07-2012, 03:39 PM
  3. Nokia 808 PureView 41MP Camera & Full HD 1080p Video
    By broken1314 in forum Web News & Trends
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 26-06-2012, 05:23 PM
  4. Nokia E71 camera error (camera is in use by another application)
    By Bhaanumuarti in forum Portable Devices
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-05-2011, 12:12 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Page generated in 1,711,677,233.68657 seconds with 17 queries