Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-28-2012, 08:06 AM   #91
Veteran Member
Kenn100D's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Paranaque City, Philippines
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 690
In any case, misleading or not, Nokia has good track record of what it does and claim. Except with updates in the past. =).
People will still buy this phone because it works. As long as the output is good people will be satisfied.

02-28-2012, 08:08 AM   #92
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Umeå, Sweden
Posts: 755
QuoteOriginally posted by froeschle Quote
The idea of Nokia was to replace "a decent zoom lens in a camera phone" by "zooming by very high resolution image sensor". Thus, the obvious question is, which system this mobile could replace. Or in other words, which camera would give identical results, i.e. equivalent photos
Not talking about that kind of equivalence, I am talking about "equivalent focal length" and this term's lack of suitability when talking about this camera. Nokia realizes this, as in the white paper they never state any other focal lengths than 8 mm. It is an 8 mm (26 mm-e in 16:9 mode and 28 mm-e in 4:3 mode) prime lens and this camera + lens combo is not capable of taking photos with any other focal lengths, "equivalent" or otherwise.

That is the entire point, and I think I've made myself abundantly clear, so I'll now leave this thread to more constructive discussion.
02-28-2012, 08:37 AM   #93
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,644
QuoteOriginally posted by Erik Quote
I understand that, but this still means that if this sensor was cropped to what you might call "100 mm-e", you still often cannot get pictures with the same perspective as you could with an actual 100 mm-e lens -- so talking about a camera that functions by cropping in terms of "equivalent focal lengths" is misleading.
You're simply wrong here. If, for instance, you stand at the same point, shooting the same subject, with a 75mm lens on a FF camera and a 50mm lens on an APS-C camera, you get exactly the same perspective. You still don't necessarily get the same look, but that has to do with other qualities, like DoF in the image and the rendering qualities of the lenses. But the perspective will be identical. The only thing that matters is the distance to the object in question and thus which field of view it covers as seen from the photographers position - it's then up to the photographer to choose focal length, sensor size and amount of cropping to achieve that field of view.

I urge you to have a look at full size cityscapes shot with the 645D - if you look at 100% details they look as if they were shot with a super tele - very instructive.
02-28-2012, 08:44 AM   #94
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,644
QuoteOriginally posted by Erik Quote
Not talking about that kind of equivalence, I am talking about "equivalent focal length" and this term's lack of suitability when talking about this camera.
"Equivalent focal length" (i.e. 35mm-equivalent) is just a convenient measure of angular field of view. It's getting less and less convenient as more and more people haven't used 35mm film, I guess, so maybe we should try to train people to think in terms of horizontal (or possibly diagonal, but I think horizontal makes more sense) degrees of view instead. Or, even better, radians The FA31 could then be classified as a "π/3 lens" when used on film/24x36 sensors

02-28-2012, 09:06 AM   #95
Veteran Member
Eruditass's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,207
QuoteOriginally posted by Erik Quote
But the fact is that the "equivalent" focal length never ever changes. A picture taken at 35 mm-e is still 35 mm-e no matter how hard you crop it. As you know, focal length does not only determine field of view, but also depth of field and perspective, among other things, so it is completely useless to talk about the focal length changing in this case, because it does not. It's 8 mm (35 mm-e) no matter how you slice it.
Cropping affects the camera system the same way a teleconverter does, just in the digital instead of the analog domain. This includes affects on field of view, depth of field, resolution, noise/snr/light loss.
QuoteQuote:
It's not zoom in any sense that the word has ever been used thus far in photography; it's exactly like the common practice of taking a bird picture with a 300 mm lens and cropping it to a 600 mm-e field of view (because you have pixels to spare on your shiny new K-5.) Yeah, it now looks like the bird is closer, but it's still a picture taken with a 300 mm lens, and now you have less resolution per inch when printing.
But you're right, the term hasn't been used in this way before really.

QuoteQuote:
Cropping can not ever change the focal length, which is a physical property of the lens.
This is correct, in contrast to your earlier statement:

QuoteQuote:
But the fact is that the "equivalent" focal length never ever changes
QuoteOriginally posted by Erik Quote
OK -- but in that case, where's the cutoff point? As you "zoom in" on this camera, you go from binning, say, 16 pixels (actually, 16 groups of 4 monochrome photosites) to 1 to eventually 4 to 1, and at last, 1 to 1.* Where exactly do the "true RGB" pixels end?
This is a good point and is exactly what's missing from marketing, though Falk dives in a bit. It goes along with what you said here:

QuoteOriginally posted by Erik Quote
OK. I understand this is technically true, but I cannot agree that it is a useful way to think. If I have a photo taken at f/2.8 and crop it severely, it would still be wrong to me to say "this is picture with the depth of field of a f/0.1 lens".
At some point, all parts of the image will be larger than the circle of confusion and the effective depth of field will be 0 due to the lack of resolution in the source image. Does anyone know how this is accounted for?

Last edited by Eruditass; 02-28-2012 at 10:10 AM.
02-28-2012, 09:14 AM   #96
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
Panasonic GH2 2.6x 1080p and 3.9x 720p crop ETC mode

QuoteQuote:
But as the GH2 started to come into the hands of early users it became clear that there was something very special going on – a video mode called EX Tele Conv. Since this as such an awkward name I'm simply going to call it ETC from now on.

When shooting in 1920X1080 HD (including 24P Cinema mode) and when ETC mode is engaged, the GH2's 4608 x 3456 sensor is "cropped" to 1920X1080. In other words, only the central 2 Megapixels of the sensor's overall 18 Megapixels is recorded.

This has significant implications, almost all of them positive. Firstly, no line skipping, binning, or digital interpolation are needed. It's as if the sensor was only 2MP rather than 18MP. As a consequence the image recorded has a crop factor of 2.6X over the full Micro Four Thirds format. The best way to think of this is being akin to the crop factor of APS-C over full frame 35mm; which in that case is either 1.5X or 1.6X.

As a consequence, any lens put on the GH2 when shot in ETC video mode has an effective focal length of 2.6X of what's marked on the barrel. The new 100–300mm zoom therefore becomes a 260–780mm, with no loss of light! It's like shooting with a 2.6X teleconverter but without the image quality loss and without the light loss. There is essentially no IQ loss because the original sensor output is used; just a cropped portion of it. There is no light loss, because though it acts like a teleconverter, it isn't. There are no optical elements involved and no upressing or downressing.
Panasonic GH2 1:1 Mode Revealed

2.6x 1080p ETC mode with 20mm lens :

3.9x 720p ETC mode :
02-28-2012, 09:26 AM   #97
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,873
QuoteOriginally posted by bobmaxja Quote
Their friend will say , Wow , my phone can not do this
Too true.

Psychology >> Physics
02-28-2012, 09:29 AM   #98
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,871
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by jogiba Quote
2.6x 1080p ETC mode with 20mm lens :
Interesting comment, thanks!

Please, let me make three annonations, though ...

1. The 808 with 38 MP goes one step further than GH2 16MP.

2. The 808 offers the same kind of HD video mode too, i.e., crops even further than at the 3x tele zoom position.

3. The comment about no loss of light is misleading. The GH2 in uncropped video mode does line skipping and therefore, looses light when not cropping (like any other HDSLR). When cropping, the effects of the light-loosing narrowing of field of view and full sampling of the cropped region cancel each other out. But a better camera sampling more uncropped pixels would loose light exactly like it would with a TC. The 808 may just be such a camera.

02-28-2012, 09:39 AM   #99
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,244
QuoteOriginally posted by Jodokast96 Quote
As someone else pointed out to me, investors agree with you.

https://www.google.com/finance?client=ob&q=NYSE:NOK
Not a meaningful change, within the margin of daily trade range for the past 2-3 months. Still, an amazing Camera that I hope does improve Nokia's prospects as a company.

It's also got a descent internal memory setup - unlike many P&S cameras.
  • 16 GB internal user memory
  • Support for up to 48 GB with an external microSD memory card
  • Use as USB mass memory device for storing photos, documents and more
02-28-2012, 10:12 AM   #100
Veteran Member
Otis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis Fan
Rupert's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,123
Being a non technical person (dumb?) this is all fascinating but I am not sure how it relates to me? Does this mean I should sell off all my camera gear and get a new phone? I already have a camera phone, and I never use it....not even as a phone...maybe a couple of times a year. I hate phones, but love cameras.....am I running out of luck by being out of the loop? Should I move to a phone Forum? Should I browse E-bay for phones and not lenses.........it's all so confusing!
Falk, I trust you, help me out!
Regards!
02-28-2012, 10:25 AM   #101
Senior Member
jppp's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: SW Finland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 143
I fail to see the point of arguing what is or isn't equal to the 808, the focal length or zoom range. I think the main thing is that they came up with something new and it's up to anyone who cares to buy one to figure out what they can do with it.
It seems like an interesting piece of kit to me.
02-28-2012, 10:53 AM   #102
Veteran Member
ovim's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Tre, Finland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,227
As a Finn it's nice to see they (Nokia) have made something unique for a change and are now not just trying catch to up the other players.
02-28-2012, 11:17 AM   #103
Senior Member
userage's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 198
They murdered the competition... :| HTC brought out their 16mp Titan which was suppose to go against the N8. I guess Nokia thought to give them a big warning..

The phone is actually amazing though, the camera UI is also great! It may be Symbian, but thats a good thing. If it were Android its battery would barely last, not to mention it would need quad core's to process them. Symbian is a lot more efficient than any other OS. The camera UI also has a time lapse option which is handy, Not to mention the actual camera UI is probably the most customisable out of iOS(hardly any options at all), Android ( Decent amount) and WP7 (Decent as well but not easily accessible).

For a comparison, The time it takes for the Nokia to process the 38mp image is the same time it takes the Samsung Galaxy S II to process its 8mp. Nokia has only 1.3ghz single core against Samsung's 1.2ghz dual core.

The screens not bad either, its not as high res' as other phones, but its got Clear Black which means it has better visibility than other phones in sunlight. Plus a Nikon D5100 has a 640x480 res screen, the Nokia is 640x360. Thats not far off at all, the Nokia screen is most doubtingly better technology as well.

The phone also comes with Xenon flash and an LED for Video recording.

The images from the Nokia are truly amazing, the only point I see to get a P&S over it is optical zoom(?). They really bridged a gap between phones and cameras, no other phone manufacturer could have done so.

Well I guess I know what my next phone is going to be...
02-28-2012, 12:03 PM   #104
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,244
QuoteOriginally posted by userage Quote
They murdered the competition... :| HTC brought out their 16mp Titan which was suppose to go against the N8. I guess Nokia thought to give them a big warning..

The phone is actually amazing though, the camera UI is also great! It may be Symbian, but thats a good thing. If it were Android its battery would barely last, not to mention it would need quad core's to process them. Symbian is a lot more efficient than any other OS. The camera UI also has a time lapse option which is handy, Not to mention the actual camera UI is probably the most customisable out of iOS(hardly any options at all), Android ( Decent amount) and WP7 (Decent as well but not easily accessible).

For a comparison, The time it takes for the Nokia to process the 38mp image is the same time it takes the Samsung Galaxy S II to process its 8mp. Nokia has only 1.3ghz single core against Samsung's 1.2ghz dual core.

The screens not bad either, its not as high res' as other phones, but its got Clear Black which means it has better visibility than other phones in sunlight. Plus a Nikon D5100 has a 640x480 res screen, the Nokia is 640x360. Thats not far off at all, the Nokia screen is most doubtingly better technology as well.

The phone also comes with Xenon flash and an LED for Video recording.

The images from the Nokia are truly amazing, the only point I see to get a P&S over it is optical zoom(?). They really bridged a gap between phones and cameras, no other phone manufacturer could have done so.

Well I guess I know what my next phone is going to be...
I only have one question - Does VerizonWireless offer it
02-28-2012, 12:23 PM   #105
Banned




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H.
Posts: 5,979
any details on the price? I'm not really looking to purchase it, considering I have an iPhone 4s, but I wonder how much it will cost, specifically a non contract subsidized version. I would like to know how much this camera with a built in phone is worth.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, nokia, pureview, segment, sensor
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hasselblad's 200 megapixel H4D-200MS camera now shipping jogiba Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 3 07-01-2011 09:23 AM
The benefit of a SmartPhone for a photography business dugrant153 General Talk 6 05-13-2010 11:26 PM
Meet the 570-megapixel digital camera joodiespost General Talk 3 01-15-2010 12:10 AM
[WTF] Microsoft`s 196 Megapixel Camera Reportage General Talk 2 04-12-2009 08:33 AM
Pentax's 30 megapixel digital camera alderfall Pentax News and Rumors 31 03-27-2009 12:40 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:28 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top