PocketNow: Nokia Lumia 1020 vs Nokia 808 PureView

| August 14, 2013 | 35 Replies
Screen Shot 2013-08-14 at 09.53.10

Check the view finder

Michael Fisher from PocketNow looks at the top two shooters, the Nokia lumia 1020 and Nokia 808 PureView.

This, as Michael warns, is aimed at those just slightly geekier than the masses and isn’t an indepth photo comparison.

  • Michael says the only option in the US is the 1020 since the 808 isn’t available there, but chimes that you probably wouldn’t want to use the Symbian OS even if it was available BUT not because it’s ‘bad necessarily’ but being an older OS that is ‘not long for this world’. And this is mainly about cameras.
  • 5MP shots. Most shots in auto though some tweaked to get the best shot out of either device.
I thought the minimum focus distance was shorter on the 1020 so it could get closer to the subject?

I thought the minimum focus distance was shorter on the 1020 so it could get closer to the subject?

  • The OIS demo is weird, initially it looks super shaky unlike all other demoes. Michael says that’s an illusion from the split screen

Screen Shot 2013-08-14 at 10.21.36

  • Audio better on 808, colour reproduction truer on 808.
  • In video you can see how the 1020 AF works better on closer subjects (as queried in the caption above)
  • You can see how OIS helps later on
  • OIS assists in longer exposures in auto mode to deliver the low light performance that made the 920 famous. Michael says that comes at a cost of more noise but with the advantage of being able to see what you’re shooting.
  • With low light apparently the make or break of mobile photography, the 1020 wins handily.
  • Results in pretty much no light without flash are ‘remarkable’
  • Possible to approximate the same results on 808 with manual controls but due to lack of hardware image stabilisation, you’re not likely to get as clear a shot without a tripod.
  • With flash, similar performance on each phone.
  • Sharpening in 1020 helps in some instances. In the flash test, they could make out text in 1020 where 808 was ‘fuzzier’ but we’re told to watch for the daylight photos where this might not be as useful.
  • The sharpness in 1020 renders text more clearly in fluorescent lighting but at the cost of added noise.
  • With no light, no flash in the room, neither could do much apparently.
  • in daylight, the 808 does real world colouring the 1020 does not.
  • 1020 amps up saturation quite a bit.
  • 1020 photos much more vibrant but also less true to life.
  • Some white balance issues in auto mode.
  • Greens/yellows get boosted by the 1020.
  • On rare situation 1020 delivers cooler shots than the 808 (cooler by white balance context)
  • Michael say’s he’s not sure what Nokia’s reason was to tweak it that way but notes other popular smartphone manufacturers do the same.
  • From 808 to 1020, Nokia ‘consumerised’ the camera.
  • 1020 sharper but noisier. Camera app is slower, with smaller sensor and lacks ND filter.

Interesting to note that whilst you guys might understand the term ‘noise’ not everyone else does.

Screen Shot 2013-08-14 at 10.22.32

  • But in exchange you get OIS, and supreme low light performance that’s thinner, running on a modern platform instead of a dead one with a much richer, more intuitive view finder experience
  • Lumia users can set manual focus and shutter speed as well as a host of apps and tutorials that make the camera easier to learn and much more fun.
  • Which is better?
  • 808 delivers more ACCURATE photos.There’s no question about it.
  • 1020 gets more mileage out of its hardware.
  • Ultimately, PocketNow/Michael finds the 1020 gets close enough to the performance of the 808 to earn the true pureview name whilst also bringing many more features to the table and streamlining the features for the end user.
  • 808 results will be more pleasing to eye of a pro photographer but the trade off being stuck on a venerable dead end platform with far fewer features (i’m sure some of our readers might have something to say of the context of that sentence) doesn’t really seem worth it.
  • Given the choice, we think most folks would go for the 1020 and at the end of the day, that’s the one we’d recommend to a modern buyer.

Considering how much slimmer the 1020 is compared to the 808, and that it has OIS as well as a 41mp sensor it’s a pretty awesome job by the 1020 and deserves all the praises it receives from the reviewers. But props for Nokia on the 808 PureView too.

MNB IMG_0599Lumia 1020 vs 808 pureview nokia

Imagine if size wasn’t that much of a constraint and Nokia shoved what we saw in the 808 or even bigger sensor in the 1020?

Screen Shot 2013-08-14 at 10.24.27 Screen Shot 2013-08-14 at 10.24.18

Colourwise, I think that can be toned down in settings. It might benefit Nokia to slightly tone it down (though not at the cost of looking ‘washed out/dull’)

Screen Shot 2013-08-14 at 10.20.36 Screen Shot 2013-08-14 at 10.20.21


Yet another great job my Michael Fisher – ever since that very first video that we saw to now, he’s got a knack at presenting phones (and also helps that he kinda looks and sounds a bit like Tony Stark. We’ll ignore that RDJ is now HTC)


Category: Nokia

About the Author ()

Hey, thanks for reading my post. My name is Jay and I'm a medical student at the University of Manchester. When I can, I blog here at and tweet now and again @jaymontano. We also have a twitter and facebook accounts @mynokiablog and Check out the tips, guides and rules for commenting >>click<< Contact us at tips(@) or email me directly on jay[at]