2019/12/27

XIAOMI MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P vs SAMSUNG S20 ULTRA vs HUAWEI MATE 30 vs NOKIA PUREVIEW 808 vs PANASONIC DMC-CM1 vs SONY RX0 II vs RICOH GR III



Updated on 2020.02.19
Added Samsung S20 ULTRA


COMPREHENSIVE TEST OF PORTABLE LARGE SENSOR DEVICES: 1/1.54", 1/1.33", 1/1.2", 1", APS-C.
Sony RX0 II and Ricoh GR III are provided just for comparision. Other phones including iphone 11 don't worth a penny, because of small sized sensors [1/2.55"] and/or ugly compute processing, which is definetly in pubertal condition.

WHY I DON'T CONSIDER 1/2.55" SENSORS? 
I'LL SHOW YOU WHY:

1/1.2" NOKIA 808 SENSOR

1/2.55" XIAOMI MI MAX 3 SENSOR
NICE HUH?

WHAT I DON'T TEST: tele lenses [because of tiny sensors < 1/3"], hdr/ai, flash, video and overall performance

NOMINATIONS: best resolution, best dynamic range.

FINAL DESTINATION: selecting the best pocket camera for commercial purposes.

TESTED DEVICES [from smallest to largest sensor]

HUAWEI MATE 30 [2019] 1/1.54" 40Mpix RAW
XIAOMI MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P [2019] 1/1.33" 27Mpix RAW
SAMSUNG S20 ULTRA [2020] 1/1.33" 12Mpix RAW
NOKIA PUREVIEW 808 [2012] 1/1.2" 41.5Mpix JPG
PANASONIC DMC CM-1 [2015] 1" 20Mpix RAW
SONY RX0II [2019] 1" 15Mpix RAW
RICOH GRIII [2018] APS-C 24MPix RAW

USED SOFTWARE: Windows 7 SP2 x64, 7-ZIP 19, XNview 2.48, Affinity Photo 1.7, Topaz Denoise 6.1.
All devices were updated to the latest FW.

Test material don't pretend to any artistic value, just tech samples.

🔻🔻🔻🔻 SCENE INDEX

∎MI NOTE 10: CAMERA APPS
∎AUTO JPGS
∎MATE 30 [10Mpix vs 40Mpix]
∎DARK ROOM
∎ARCHITECTURE DURING OVERCAST WEATHER
∎CITY ROAD WITH BUILDINGS
∎DETAILS & DYNAMIC RANGE
∎BOKEH QUALITY
∎NUDE BRANCHES
∎MORNING DARKNESS
∎BRIGHT SUNSET
∎FINAL FIGHT + PANASONIC CM-1
∎ULTRA FINAL FIGHT: NOKIA 808 vs SAMSUNG S20 ULTRA

∎BRIEF CAMERA REVIEWS
∎FINAL CONCLUSION
∎ DOWNLOAD ALL

🔻🔻🔻🔻 MI NOTE 10: CAMERA APPS 

All camera apps were set to Camera 2 API mode
All enhancements were turned off [HDR, AI and other pop crap].
🔻 RAW [DNG]
MI NOTE STOCK
MI NOTE OPEN
MI NOTE SNAP
MI NOTE FX

MI NOTE 108Mpix
NOKIA 808

🔻 PROCESSED [JPG WIDTH 2888PX]
🔻 GRAB THEM ALL
RAW [DNG] + PROCESSED JPG
🔻 SIDE-BY-SIDE [pix are clickable]
XIAOMI MI NOTE 10 [DYNAMIC RANGE]

NOKIA 808 [DYNAMIC RANGE] 

 XIAOMI MI NOTE 10 [DETAILS]

NOKIA 808 [DETAILS] 

CONCLUSION:
        In terms of quality the difference between camera apps is pretty marginal. So it is a matter of taste which one you will use. The important thing to note is that camera application must have a native support of Camera 2 API.  If so - no compression or heavy processing of imagery will not take place.Overall pattern repeats again. Xiaomi: color gradations. Nokia: resolution and detail.

⏫ SCENE INDEX
 

🔻🔻🔻🔻 AUTO JPGS

🔻 UNPROCESSED JPG
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix RAW
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 108Mpix JPG
HUAWEI MATE 30 40Mpix
NOKIA 808
🔻 PROCESSED [JPG WIDTH 2888PX]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix RAW
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 108Mpix JPG
HUAWEI MATE 30 40Mpix
NOKIA 808
🔻 GRAB THEM ALL
RAW [JPG] + PROCESSED JPG
🔻 SIDE-BY-SIDE [pix are clickable]
XIAOMI MI NOTE 10 [RIGHT BORDER]
XIAOMI MI NOTE 10 108 Mpix [RIGHT BORDER]  
NOKIA 808 [RIGHT BORDER]  

HUAWEI MATE 30 [RIGHT BORDER]  
CONCLUSION:
        Nokia's jpg oversampling algorithm is unmatched till today.

1. Nokia 808
2. Xiaomi Mi Note 10 27Mpix
3. Xiaomi Mi Note 10 108 Mpix
4. Huawei Mate 30

⏫ SCENE INDEX
 

🔻🔻🔻🔻 MATE 30 [10Mpix vs 40Mpix]

🔻 UNPROCESSED JPG
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P
HUAWEI MATE 30 10 Mpix
HUAWEI MATE 30 40 Mpix
NOKIA 808
🔻 PROCESSED [JPG WIDTH 2888PX]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P
HUAWEI MATE 30 10 Mpix
HUAWEI MATE 30 40 Mpix
NOKIA 808
🔻 GRAB THEM ALL
UNPROCESSED JPG + PROCESSED JPG
🔻 SIDE-BY-SIDE [pix are clickable]
XIAOMI MI NOTE 10 [CENTER FRAME]

NOKIA 808 [CENTER FRAME] 

HUAWEI 10 Mpix  [CENTER FRAME] 
 
HUAWEI 40 Mpix  [CENTER FRAME]  
 
CONCLUSION:
        Huawei Mate 30 demonstrates very poor captures - details are totally washed out. 
40Mpix mode bring up some detail compared to recommended 10 Mpix mode, but overall difference is marginal. Xiaomi Mi Note 10 is much better and closer to golden standard of Nokia 808.

⏫ SCENE INDEX

🔻🔻🔻🔻 DARK ROOM  

🔻 RAW [DNG]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix RAW
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 108Mpix JPG
NOKIA 808
🔻 PROCESSED [JPG WIDTH 2888PX]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix RAW
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 108Mpix JPG
NOKIA 808
🔻 GRAB THEM ALL
RAW [DNG] + PROCESSED JPG
🔻 SIDE-BY-SIDE [pix are clickable]

 XIAOMI MI NOTE 10
NOKIA 808  



CONCLUSION:
       Pretty hard illumination condition for smartphones.
All images processed equally even through it lead to artifacts and color shifts. I've done this on purpose to find out problematic color channels. In dark conditions Xiaomi doing job a little better than Nokia.

⏫ SCENE INDEX
 

🔻🔻🔻🔻 ARCHITECTURE DURING OVERCAST WEATHER

🔻 RAW [DNG]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix RAW
NOKIA 808
🔻 PROCESSED [JPG WIDTH 2888PX]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix RAW
NOKIA 808
🔻 GRAB THEM ALL
RAW [DNG] + PROCESSED JPG
🔻 SIDE-BY-SIDE [pix are clickable]
XIAOMI MI NOTE 10 [FRAME BORDER]
 
NOKIA 808 [FRAME BORDER]

 
CONCLUSION:
        Nokia 808 provides better overall detail and sharpness, noise can be removed with less efforts compared to Mi Note 10. Although Xiaomi shows up better dynamic range and it is not a surprise considering the fact, that Mi Note exploiting modern BSI sensor instead of Nokia's FSI (manufactured by Toshiba).

⏫ SCENE INDEX
 

🔻🔻🔻🔻 CITY ROAD WITH BUILDINGS

🔻 RAW [DNG]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix RAW
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 108Mpix JPG
HUAWEI MATE 30
NOKIA 808
SONY RX0II
RICOH GRIII
🔻 PROCESSED [JPG WIDTH 2888PX]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix RAW
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 108Mpix JPG
HUAWEI MATE 30
NOKIA 808
SONY RX0II
RICOH GRIII
🔻 GRAB THEM ALL
RAW [DNG] + PROCESSED JPG
🔻 SIDE-BY-SIDE [pix are clickable]
XIAOMI MI NOTE 10 [LEFT BORDER]

XIAOMI MI NOTE 10 108 Mpix [LEFT BORDER]

NOKIA 808 [LEFT BORDER]

HUAWEI MATE 30 [LEFT BORDER]

SONY RX0II [LEFT BORDER]  
 
RICOH GRIII [LEFT BORDER] 

CONCLUSION:
        Ricoh demonstrates supremacy of APS-C sensor, followed by Nokia 808 and Xiaomi Note 10 [in RAW mode]. 108Mpix mode of Mi Note 10 introducing redundant sharpening, but on the other hand we can observe neat highlights. 1" sensored Sony shows up good dynamic range, but resolution falling apart if we compare it with 40Mpix 1/1.2" Nokia 808. Huawei is not welcomed for such (overcasted) weather conditions and struggles to bring up something persuasive.

⏫ SCENE INDEX
 

🔻🔻🔻🔻 DETAILS & DYNAMIC RANGE   

🔻 RAW [DNG]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix JPG [RAW missed in action]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 108Mpix JPG
NOKIA 808
SONYRX0II
RICOH GRIII
🔻 PROCESSED [JPG WIDTH 2888PX]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix JPG
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 108Mpix JPG
NOKIA 808
SONYRX0II
RICOH GRIII
🔻 GRAB THEM ALL
RAW [DNG] + PROCESSED JPG
🔻 SIDE-BY-SIDE [pix are clickable]

XIAOMI MI NOTE 10 [DETAIL]

XIAOMI MI NOTE 10 108 Mpix [DETAIL]

NOKIA 808 [DETAIL]

SONY RX0II [DETAIL]  
 
RICOH GRIII [DETAIL]

XIAOMI MI NOTE 10 [DYNAMIC RANGE]

XIAOMI MI NOTE 10 108 Mpix [DYNAMIC RANGE]

NOKIA 808 [DYNAMIC RANGE]

SONY RX0II [DYNAMIC RANGE] 
 
RICOH GRIII [DYNAMIC RANGE] 
 

CONCLUSION:
    In a few words. Detail: Nokia 808 & Ricoh GRIII rule the situation. Dynamic range: Xiaomi Mi Note 10 & Sony RX0II showed their strength at color reproduction and broad color gradients.

⏫ SCENE INDEX

🔻🔻🔻🔻 BOKEH QUALITY 

SCENE #1
🔻 RAW [DNG]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix RAW
NOKIA 808
🔻 PROCESSED [JPG WIDTH 2888PX]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix RAW
NOKIA 808
🔻 GRAB THEM ALL
RAW [DNG] + PROCESSED JPG
🔻 SIDE-BY-SIDE [pix are clickable]
XIAOMI MI NOTE 10

NOKIA 808
SCENE #2
🔻 RAW [DNG]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix RAW
NOKIA 808
🔻 PROCESSED [JPG WIDTH 2888PX]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix RAW
NOKIA 808
🔻 GRAB THEM ALL
RAW [DNG] + PROCESSED JPG
🔻 SIDE-BY-SIDE [pix are clickable]
XIAOMI MI NOTE 10

NOKIA 808 
 
CONCLUSION:
        Two comparisions provided, because i don't get the same focus point at the first test. Out of focus characteristic demostrates the quality of lens design. Bokeh of Nokia 808 is obviously more groovy, it brings some nice neat shapes and breathing texture. Just look at the zipper of the bag at the first scene and on the green curtains at the second one.

⏫ SCENE INDEX
 

🔻🔻🔻🔻 NUDE BRANCHES 

🔻 RAW [DNG]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix RAW
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 108Mpix JPG
NOKIA 808
RICOH GRIII
🔻 PROCESSED [JPG WIDTH 2888PX]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix RAW
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 108Mpix JPG
NOKIA 808
RICOH GRIII
🔻 GRAB THEM ALL
RAW [DNG] + PROCESSED JPG
🔻 SIDE-BY-SIDE [pix are clickable]
XIAOMI MI NOTE 10 [CENTER FRAME]

XIAOMI MI NOTE 10 108 Mpix [CENTER FRAME]

NOKIA 808 [CENTER FRAME]  

RICOH GRIII [CENTER FRAME] 

XIAOMI MI NOTE 10 [LEFT BORDER]

XIAOMI MI NOTE 10 108 Mpix [LEFT BORDER]

NOKIA 808 [LEFT BORDER]  

RICOH GRIII [LEFT BORDER]

 
CONCLUSION:
        Raw mode of Xiaomi Mi Note delivered pretty good results at this time. 108Mpix jpg providing punchy look with many details[?], but feels too distracting in terms of rude internal processing and visible artifacts. Sure, it looks cool downsized in Instagram, but it is definitely not an option for commercial photo: closer to borders "details" transitioning into harsh unpleasant noise. Left border: Nokia 808 looks very close to Ricoh GRIII.
 
⏫ SCENE INDEX

🔻🔻🔻🔻 MORNING DARKNESS 

🔻 RAW [DNG]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix RAW
NOKIA 808
RICOH GRIII
🔻 PROCESSED [JPG WIDTH 2888PX]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix RAW
NOKIA 808
RICOH GRIII
🔻 GRAB THEM ALL
RAW [DNG] + PROCESSED JPG
🔻 SIDE-BY-SIDE [pix are clickable]
XIAOMI MI NOTE 10

NOKIA 808 

RICOH GRIII 

 
CONCLUSION:
         Sony RX0II was out of the test because of minimum 1/4 shutter speed, so it was too dark for device. Xiaomi Mi Note 10 shows up better performance than Nokia 808 and brings up more color.  Some commentary here: Nokia shutter speed is limited to 2.7 sec, so i was forced to push iso to 100,  instead of generic 50, to bring up better object visibility, thereby lowering amount of detail, that could be captured. Ricoh is out of the question, just look at the results.

⏫ SCENE INDEX
 

🔻🔻🔻🔻 BRIGHT SUNSET  


🔻 RAW [DNG]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix RAW
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 108Mpix JPG [missed in action] 
NOKIA 808
🔻 PROCESSED [JPG WIDTH 2888PX]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix RAW
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 108Mpix JPG [only basic resize, no processing]
NOKIA 808
🔻 GRAB THEM ALL
RAW [DNG] + PROCESSED JPG
🔻 SIDE-BY-SIDE [pix are clickable]
XIAOMI MI NOTE 10

NOKIA 808 
 
CONCLUSION:
        Mi Note 10 in Raw mode delivered almost the same amount of detail as Nokia, but a tad smaller crispness. 108Mpix mode demonstrates awful noise at the edges of the frame, which can't be eliminated without losing detail in other areas. Dynamic range is of course better on Xiaomi device. Note: As you can see from above mentioned samples, Nokia allows quite neat processing flexibility, but this happens only under the good light conditions.

⏫ SCENE INDEX

🔻🔻🔻🔻 FINAL FIGHT + PANASONIC CM-1 

SCENE #1 [SUBURBS DURING OVERCASTED WEATHER]
🔻 RAW [DNG]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix RAW
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 108Mpix JPG
NOKIA 808
PANASONIC CM1
RICOH GRIII
🔻 PROCESSED [JPG WIDTH 2888PX]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix RAW
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 108Mpix JPG
NOKIA 808
PANASONIC CM1
RICOH GRIII
🔻 GRAB THEM ALL
RAW [DNG] + PROCESSED JPG
🔻 SIDE-BY-SIDE [pix are clickable]
MI NOTE 10 [CENTER FRAME]

MI NOTE 10 108Mpix [CENTER FRAME]

NOKIA 808 [CENTER FRAME]

PANASONIC CM1 [CENTER FRAME]

RICOH GRIII [CENTER FRAME]

MI NOTE 10 [BORDER FRAME]

MI NOTE 10 108Mpix [BORDER FRAME]

NOKIA 808 [BORDER FRAME]

PANASONIC CM1 [BORDER FRAME]

RICOH GRIII [BORDER FRAME]


SCENE #2 [FROZEN ICE: DETAIL]
🔻 RAW [DNG]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix RAW [focus point is different from other devices and image looks like blurry, despite the 1/300 shutter]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 108Mpix JPG [same here]
NOKIA 808
PANASONIC CM1
RICOH GRIII
🔻 PROCESSED [JPG WIDTH 2888PX]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix RAW [focus point is different from other devices and image looks like blurry, despite the 1/300 shutter]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 108Mpix JPG [same here]
NOKIA 808
PANASONIC CM1
RICOH GRIII
🔻 GRAB THEM ALL
RAW [DNG] + PROCESSED JPG
🔻 SIDE-BY-SIDE [pix are clickable]
Due to different focus point pixel peeping is useless, so just download files to take a look by yourself.

SCENE #3 [KINDERGARTEN PLAYGROUND: COLORS]
🔻 RAW [DNG]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix RAW
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 108Mpix JPG
NOKIA 808 [hazy lens]
PANASONIC CM1
RICOH GRIII
🔻 PROCESSED [JPG WIDTH 2888PX]
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 27Mpix RAW
MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 108Mpix JPG
NOKIA 808 [hazy lens:  dehaze workaround]
PANASONIC CM1
RICOH GRIII
🔻 GRAB THEM ALL
RAW [DNG] + PROCESSED JPG
🔻 SIDE-BY-SIDE [pix are clickable]

MI NOTE 10 [CENTER FRAME] -> messed up with angle

MI NOTE 10 108Mpix [CENTER FRAME]

NOKIA 808 [CENTER FRAME]

PANASONIC CM1 [CENTER FRAME]

RICOH GRIII [CENTER FRAME]

MI NOTE 10 [BORDER FRAME]

MI NOTE 10 108Mpix [BORDER FRAME]

NOKIA 808 [BORDER FRAME] -> messed up with lens haze

PANASONIC CM1 [BORDER FRAME] -> messed up with frame align

RICOH GRIII [BORDER FRAME]


SCENE #4 [TREE TRUNK: DETAILS + BOKEH]
🔻 RAW [DNG]
NOKIA 808 [hazy lens]
PANASONIC CM1
RICOH GRIII
🔻 PROCESSED [JPG WIDTH 2888PX]
NOKIA 808 [hazy lens:  dehaze workaround]
PANASONIC CM1
RICOH GRIII
🔻 GRAB THEM ALL
RAW [DNG] + PROCESSED JPG
🔻 SIDE-BY-SIDE [pix are clickable]

NOKIA 808 [CENTER FRAME]

PANASONIC CM1 [CENTER FRAME]

RICOH GRIII [CENTER FRAME]



CONCLUSION:
        Xiaomi Mi Note 10 shows up neat color & broad dynamic range. Nokia 808 stands for resolution & ergonomics. Panasonic CM1 demonstrates near to classic camera experience, provides great dynamic range, though resolution at extreme borders suffers a lot. It is obvious, that Panasonic's Leica lens design can't compete with Nokia 808's Carl Zeiss.

⏫ SCENE INDEX

🔻🔻🔻🔻 ULTRA FINAL FIGHT: NOKIA 808 vs SAMSUNG S20 ULTRA

SCENE #1 [SAMSUNG PHONE STORE]
🔻 RAW [DNG]
NOKIA 808
SAMSUNG S20 ULTRA
🔻 PROCESSED [JPG WIDTH 3000PX]
NOKIA 808
SAMSUNG S20 ULTRA
🔻 SIDE-BY-SIDE [pix are clickable]
NOKIA 808 [ZONE 1]

SAMSUNG S20 ULTRA [ZONE 1]

NOKIA 808 [ZONE 2]

SAMSUNG S20 ULTRA [ZONE 2]


SCENE #2 [DETAILS & BOKEH]
🔻 RAW [DNG]
NOKIA 808
SAMSUNG S20 ULTRA
🔻 PROCESSED [JPG WIDTH 3000PX]
NOKIA 808
SAMSUNG S20 ULTRA
🔻 SIDE-BY-SIDE [pix are clickable]
NOKIA 808 [ZONE 1]

SAMSUNG S20 ULTRA [ZONE 1] 

NOKIA 808 [ZONE 2]   

SAMSUNG S20 ULTRA [ZONE 2] 
 
🔻 GRAB THEM ALL
RAW [DNG] + PROCESSED JPG
CONCLUSION:
          This was an express test of Nokia 808 vs Samsung S20 Ultra under artificial light at Samsung store. Only RAW mode was tested [4000x3000]. Tried two camera apps [native + Open Camera] to achieve better resolution: no luck at all. It looks like that 4000 x 3000 is a h/w limit. As you can see from above samples, performace of shiny "new flagship" is pretty questionable, considering ULTRA insane price of the device. Signal-to-Noise ratio is simillar to Xiaomi Mi Note 10. Detail is almost on par with Mi Note 10 [which is 3 times cheaper]. SO NO REVOLUTION AT THIS TIME. IN TERMS OF DETAIL NOKIA 808 IS STILL A KING.

 ⏫ SCENE INDEX
 

🔻🔻🔻🔻BRIEF CAMERA REVIEWS


🔻🔻🔻🔻 XIAOMI MI NOTE 10 PRO 8P 🔻🔻🔻🔻
PROS:
+ great dynamic range for a smartphone
+ detail almost match golden standard of 808 [only in Raw mode & not better than Nokia 808]
+ quite fast AF 
+ wide range of camera appps available
CONS:
- pretty noisy sensor
- 108Mpix output suffers from harsh processing, washed out details & oversharpened center of the frame 
- quite big for my purposes
- rare auto-focus issues [not a con for me] 
- slow write speeds at 108Mpix mode [fixed after update]

🔻🔻🔻🔻 NOKIA PUREVIEW 808 🔻🔻🔻🔻  
PROS:
+ class leading resolution 
+ high quality lens, providing stunning bokeh
+ excellent ergonomics and overall IQ
+ very small form factor
+ availability of mods, which are improving picture quality  
CONS:
- poor dynamic range caused by old FSI  sensor [2012] 
- no real macro
- slow and unreliable auto-focus in dark conditions 
- slow auto-focus [not a con for me]
- lack of stabilization [not a con for me] 
- no RAW [is not a con, because Nokia's jpg provide so good resolution, which can be compared even with big brother rivals, like Ricoh GRIII]

🔻🔻🔻🔻 PANASONIC LUMIX DCM CM1 🔻🔻🔻🔻  
PROS:
+ dynamic range
+ ergonomics [excellent camera app]
+ resolution [only at the center of the frame]
+ RAW despite the fact that it is a 2015 phone
CONS:
- significant loss of detail at borders of the frame [left & right]
- not snappy auto-focus [not a con for me]
- pretty slow write speeds [not a con for me]

🔻🔻🔻🔻 SAMSUNG S20 ULTRA 🔻🔻🔻🔻
PROS:
+ responsive camera interface
+ good dynamic range
CONS:
- insane price
- resolution is falling apart in comparision with Nokia 808
- noisier than Nokia 808
- in terms of my feelings provided detail doesn't much even Xiaomi Mi Note 10 [which is three times cheaper]

🔻🔻🔻🔻 HUAWEI MATE 30 🔻🔻🔻🔻
PROS:
+ responsive camera interface
+ good stabilization  
CONS:
- awful picture quality, can't hold up againts all other nominees

🔻🔻🔻🔻 SONY RX0 II 🔻🔻🔻🔻  
PROS:
+ 1" sensor [very good dynamic range]
+ very-very tiny form factor
+ convenient tilting screen 
+ excellent 4k video 60p/100p  
CONS:
- low 15 Mpix count [resolution can't match glorious Nokia 808]
- slowest shutter speed is only 1/4 sec [night photography is expelled]

🔻🔻🔻🔻 RICOH GR III 🔻🔻🔻🔻
PROS:
+ superior resolution & overall sharpness
+ very compact form factor for APS-C sensor  
CONS:
- dynamic range could be better [but still very neat]
- bad video quality [though it's not a con for me]

⏫ SCENE INDEX

🔻🔻🔻🔻FINAL CONCLUSION 

  
        I'd like to be very short, so no mambo-jambo at this time. As you can see there is no perfect camera. Everything is compromise. I really like Xiaomi Mi Note 10: it is the best current'n'modern cameraphone. Device provides excellent dynamic range and almost the same amount of detail as Nokia 808. But i vote for Nokia Pureview 808 for it's unrivalled detail clarity, ultimate optical quality and really small, almost invisible form-factor. It will be impressive always-with-me backup for my main Ricoh GRIII street camera.

       Predictions regarding future cameraphones: Samsung announced Galaxy S20 Ultra, which will be based upon 108Mpix 1/1.33” sensor. It is the same sensor, which was used in Xiaomi Mi Note 10, with some custom modifications. I don’t think it will bring up more than 10% of improvements. In best scenario it will finally reach [but not surpass] Nokia 808 in terms of resolution. In real life performance Samsung S20 Ultra doesn't match detail of Nokia 808 for sure and more worse stuff is that it compete pretty badly with Xiaomi Mi Note 10, which is 3 times cheaper]. So all previous Samsung statements regarding "improved" 1/1.33" sensor used in Xiaomi Mi Note 10 is a cheap ad. SO NEVER EVER don't believe a hype.

    So, we don’t get cameraphone, which will be better than Nokia in every aspect in another 2 or 3 years. Or maybe OV48C 1/1.3" 48 Megapixel (8064x6048) sensor will save us all?
 
ps I had high hopes for Panasonic, but lens performance disappointed me to the bones. Despite that fact, i have to say that CM1 is very unique cameraphone and it will be valued for it's awesome ergonomics and sadly unrealized potential, for a long time from now on. 


Nokia Pureview 808 [2012]
Stay tuned for "NOKIA 808 SECRETS" article!

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SAY THANKS FOR MY WORK DON'T LET ME STOP YOU: 
 ANOTHER WAY OF HELPING WITH MY GOAL IS TO PURCHASE
DIGITAL GFX ART I AM PRODUCING WITH THE HELP OF PUTERS:

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

Trendy post! Looking forward to see the final conclusion!

spacedrone808 said...

If you find any errors or bad links please report back.
Thank you so much!

Anonymous said...

Very neat comparison, please keep it up.

Anonymous said...

Great stuff to follow

Unknown said...

Качественное сравнение, позволяющее выбрать устройство под свои нужды. Это вам не купленный dxomark.

Frank said...

Nice, but where is CM-1 results?

spacedrone808 said...

Frank, results are published. Enjoy comparison!

Anonymous said...

Thank you! All the legendary camera phones' samples in one place.

I have some approach suggestions if I may. Since 808 has no RAW option, i think all other cameras should use out of camera JPG as comparison. If you may compare 808 JPG with Note 10's 28mb JPG or CM1's 20mb JPG, that will reflect more true life performance. 808's JPG would correct a lot of its corner softness already.

Sk86 said...

Translated your sentence "Качественное сравнение, позволяющее выбрать устройство под свои нужды. Это вам не купленный dxomark" and can confirm that dxomark have pretty questionable reputation in terms of realiability and can't be rated seriously.

As for Nokia 808 resolution performance: yes it is way better than iphone 11. "Good" quality of modern cameraphones are mostly vaporware. iphone is a neat example.

spacedrone808 said...

>> If you may compare 808 JPG with Note 10's 28mb JPG or CM1's 20mb JPG, that will reflect more true life performance
You can be rest assured, than no cameraphone will not have any chance to compete against Nokia 808, it has best jpg engine ever.

Btw, there is a 108mpix jpg mode for Mi Note 10 almost in every test. Check it out!

Anonymous said...

Nice to see impartial review on the web

Anonymous said...

Unique review, which is covered all legengary cameras! Thank you!

Anonymous said...

Would be nice to see comparision with upcoming Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra!

spacedrone808 said...

>>Would be nice to see comparision with upcoming Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra!
Added hands-on preview test vs Nokia 808.

Anonymous said...

>>>> If you may compare 808 JPG with Note 10's 28mb JPG or CM1's 20mb JPG, that will reflect more true life performance
>>You can be rest assured, than no cameraphone will not have any chance to compete against Nokia 808, it has best jpg engine ever.

>>Btw, there is a 108mpix jpg mode for Mi Note 10 almost in every test. Check it out!

Your statement for Nokia 808 best jpg engine is likely true. It still doesn't address the fact that jpg is compared to RAW. It would be like comparing an out-of-camera jpg with an edited, photoshopped jpg.

While you provided a 108mb JPG sample, it might be better to compare with the 41mb JPG of Nokia 808 with the 108mb JPG down-sampled to 41mb.