Nokia Lumia 1020 taken to a football game, tells an epic story in pictures
The end result is the gallery of images that you can check out right below, and it’s a testament to how much mobile phone cameras have grown. The Lumia 1020 is, of course, a prime example, and its brilliant camera application with easy manual dials for shutter speed, ISO and white balance is part of making these images possible. To help achieve steadier shots and have the phone last through the whole game, a Nokia camera grip also came in handy. All in all, it’s the focus on making a great smartphone camera that enables such impressive images.
Some, however, may still object, saying that smartphones do not have the lenses to make for a true camera replacement (and this would certainly be true), but the perspective these photographs give is somewhat different. “Photography is about telling a story and people can do it with their camera phones as well as their big cameras” - this is the one big idea that the photojournalist that took these pictures wants to leave with this photo set. And it’s worth meditating upon, don’t you think?
Nokia Lumia 1020 taken to a football game, tells an epic story in pictures
1. darkkjedii (Posts: 12334; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
Stunning photographs. Go Denver this Sunday!
17. darkkjedii (Posts: 12334; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
I just got a feeling Wilson's gonna choke under the pressure. I'm a die hard Steelers fan, but I love Peyton Manning. Seahawks are beast though, and ya boy Richard Sherman is the truth. Seattle could do it.
40. darkkjedii (Posts: 12334; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
Not at all, but he's never been to this stage. It'll put a lot of pressure on him to preform. Choking isn't always a bad thing, it's part of the maturation process of being a great QB.
41. good2great (Posts: 1040; Member since: 22 Feb 2012)
kinda like Winston's performance against Auburn... you have to choke before you grow.
i'm a die hard Jags fan... but I wanna see Lynch do something spectacular...
15. akki20892 (Posts: 3603; Member since: 04 Feb 2013)
Wow look at that eagle. Stunning photos.
20. Bernoulli (Posts: 1473; Member since: 01 Sep 2012)
yep, definitely better than any Sammy camera!
26. ihavenoname (Posts: 1487; Member since: 18 Aug 2013)
Lumia 1020>Note 3>Lumia 920/920=GS4 on camera. Otherwise Samsung is miles better than Nokia.
51. Bernoulli (Posts: 1473; Member since: 01 Sep 2012)
Not really, after the lumia 1020 there's the 808 PureView, lumia 1520, lumia 928, lumia 925, lumia 920 then come sammys plastic line-up, there's no way om this universe Sammy is going to have a better camera on their flagship than any high end Lumia, and I'm not saying that to brag but it is true, based on comparison, the optical image stabilization really makes a huge difference.
57. jacobspeeds (Posts: 34; Member since: 26 Feb 2012)
the 808 beats the 1020 because of it's much bigger sensor and better imaging algorithms...1020 produces too many artifacts leading to an unclean image with upped saturation screwing up detail
58. Bernoulli (Posts: 1473; Member since: 01 Sep 2012)
After the Nokia black update the color saturation has dropped big time, and besides it still beats basic $600 DSLR cameras
27. SleepingOz (unregistered)
Right, but the camera on Samsung's flagships aren't bad at all. Moreover, that's the only thing nokia's got on Samsung.
37. Bilpocalypse (Posts: 301; Member since: 13 Oct 2012)
You're forgetting build quality, signal quality, and the clear black IPS displays and the audio recording, The only real advantages that Samsung has over it's competitors are on the software side, and that can't be properly compared between the two as Nokia doesn't have an Android flagship, and Samsung doesn't really invest alot into their Windows Phones.
52. Bernoulli (Posts: 1473; Member since: 01 Sep 2012)
That and the hardware, plus some of us like the promptness of Windows phone and don't appreciate androids lag.
2. lalalaman (Posts: 373; Member since: 19 Aug 2013)
Hand down...no comparison from any other smartphone.....
Nokia Lumia 1020 camera FTW!!:D
9. darkkjedii (Posts: 12334; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
Which along with baseball, are the two best sports on earth.
11. buccob (Posts: 1536; Member since: 19 Jun 2012)
Well... My country is very Americanized in its roots (even though recent goverments show different) so the most popular sport here is Baseball...
But I personally played soccer 13 years of my life and then decided to do something different...
I tried Wrestling, Tennis, Ultimate Frisbee and recently Rock Climbing which I love...
But definitely baseball gets the most attention nationally with crazy fans and awesome live shows. Kinda like American Football fans in the US
22. buccob (Posts: 1536; Member since: 19 Jun 2012)
Venezuela... for the moment... but with the political, economical and social situation this might change soon
36. darkkjedii (Posts: 12334; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
Heard a lotta good things about Venezuela. Sorry things aren't as good as you like, heck America has tons of issues too bro.
21. Bernoulli (Posts: 1473; Member since: 01 Sep 2012)
I'm sorry, but I don't think that it should be considered an athlete someone that weights over 300lb, we call that obese, plus the real football has an actual world championship held every 4 years, this time taking place in Brazil this summer.
31. freebee269 (Posts: 528; Member since: 10 Aug 2012)
Athletes come in all shapes and sizes. Open your closed mind.
33. darkkjedii (Posts: 12334; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
How about this: call the NFL, tell them that, and get back to us with their response. Keep in mind the NFL was just voted most popular sport for the umpteenth time.
54. Bernoulli (Posts: 1473; Member since: 01 Sep 2012)
Probably in a country where obesity rules a sport like this would rule, but on the civilized world real football is a killer for over 200 years, and no I don't feel like calling mcdonald's
35. darkkjedii (Posts: 12334; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
300lbs, 9% body fat, runs the 40 in 4.4, benches 550, squats, 6 bills. That's not an athlete, that's an elite NFL baller.
42. PapaSmurf (Posts: 8798; Member since: 14 May 2012)
A friend I went to high school with managed to finally lift 600lbs worth of weights about two weeks ago. That's almost five times my weight haha.
46. darkkjedii (Posts: 12334; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
That's power. I'm 247 and can bench 415 squat 500 and dead lift 495. No roids, pure will, and I used to be really outta shape.
55. Bernoulli (Posts: 1473; Member since: 01 Sep 2012)
And I can still kick their asses on a marathon, sorry long distance runner here, if there's one thing I learned from my coaches is never get big by any means, but hey whatever helps those guys, after all they don't have to run for long periods of time, since they take a break every 5 minutes
25. Bernoulli (Posts: 1473; Member since: 01 Sep 2012)
it's called let's eat mcdonald's for a year and get fat!
4. bakarock (Posts: 52; Member since: 29 Aug 2013)
can't wait to see Lumia 1020 successor, with 3000mah battery,1080p display, micro sd and quad core processor and existing 42mp processor..
28. SleepingOz (unregistered)
48. Liveitup (Posts: 1490; Member since: 07 Jan 2014)
If it came with Android I would not use the L1020, to me WP is a superior platform.
23. Bernoulli (Posts: 1473; Member since: 01 Sep 2012)
nah, I have a Lumia 1020 and on it's dual core runs faster than my old Sammy note 2 ever did, with absolutely no lag.
6. eisenbricher (Posts: 971; Member since: 09 Aug 2012)
No doubt, 1020 is the best smartphone cam.
10. tasior (Posts: 240; Member since: 04 Nov 2012)
I have 808 (predecessor), and I must admit, it's worth of all platform sacrifices. Games and apps, are for the moment. Pictures stay with You for the rest of Your life...
24. Bernoulli (Posts: 1473; Member since: 01 Sep 2012)
could not have said it better, I too have one! but with all due respect it was getting a little laggy, so I got myself the L1020, and you know at times I feel like the 808 takes slightly better 38 MP pictures.
34. jacobspeeds (Posts: 34; Member since: 26 Feb 2012)
I have one too...even though the Optical stabilisation is a huge advantage over the 808, the bigger sensor on the 808 outperforms the 1020 as of now...with the lumia black update, it just might exceed the 808's quality....
38. tasior (Posts: 240; Member since: 04 Nov 2012)
Bigger sensor is a bigger sensor. Software updates will not change that. It can, correct colours, and sharpen contours, and hide minor drawbacks, but it cannot exceed quality... I don't get why, they wanted to make it smaller. People, who think that size is crucial, won't pick it anyway, and 808 is still quite compact and convenient.
50. jacobspeeds (Posts: 34; Member since: 26 Feb 2012)
it's not improving the quality as such...the software wasn't able to use the sensor to the best of it's capabilities...the black update is just achieving the perfection that the current lumia software couldnt
56. Bernoulli (Posts: 1473; Member since: 01 Sep 2012)
It did and I can confirm it as of now, now pictures don't come with as much color saturation and I can zoom in and now it does outperform the 808, but the 808 still kills everything else out there
59. trinkner (Posts: 12; Member since: 28 Jan 2014)
I'm still on an 808, but am hoping the 1820 adds an SD slot. Can you tell me if the latest Black update removed the yellowish cast I see in so many 1020 photos of faces? Thanks.
13. notsobad (Posts: 7; Member since: 28 Jan 2014)
yet the only advertising point. if wp has no such cameras. what would they put up on the advertisements? i really wonder!
18. trinkner (Posts: 12; Member since: 28 Jan 2014)
Nice quality in details and stop-motion, but don't the faces look yellow in most of the photos?
19. nothingmuch (Posts: 181; Member since: 03 May 2013)
Im not doggin the phone here, they are good but dont the pics up to #7 seem dark for camera that supposedly made for lowlight images? Just asking?, it appears to be daylight out still in the background there.
43. g2a5b0e (Posts: 2550; Member since: 08 Jun 2012)
The game was in a domed stadium. The lighting is all artificial.
45. Penny (Posts: 1242; Member since: 04 Feb 2011)
I actually think the exposure levels are very appropriate for these photos. I hate overexposed photos as they tend to wash out images.
Also, note that the person who took these photos is a photojournalist. He or she is a pro, and probably had good control of how everything came out. This is probably how he/she intended the photos to look.
30. SemperFiV12 (Posts: 844; Member since: 09 Nov 2010)
All we like is the camera? Well obviously those critics have never held a Lumia, as the build quality surpasses Samsung or anybody not named Apple by a MILE. Holding a Lumia in your hand and a Samsung in the other, you can already feel the difference.
I'd also like to say operating system is another difference between Lumias and Android flavored Samsungs.... And I know it is subjective, but some people (as few as they may be) prefer WP to Android.
This post is not to knock Samsung, but seeing these "1020 is ONLY..." posts are ridiculous.
32. freebee269 (Posts: 528; Member since: 10 Aug 2012)
I know this post is just your opinion but expect the android enthusiests that feel it is their life duty to come to androids aid by defended it on every phone arena article to comment soon.
44. JEverettnow (Posts: 209; Member since: 11 Mar 2013)
I am a photography lover and I have yet to find a cell phone camera that takes acceptable photos
49. Penny (Posts: 1242; Member since: 04 Feb 2011)
Well, there are plenty of cell phone cameras that take acceptable photos, but I don't know if any one can take acceptable photos in every given situation. Cell phones tend to great in well lit, static shots with subjects in close range. The quality starts changing as any one of those variables starts changing, but not necessarily rendering the cameras unacceptable as evidenced by this article.
60. trinkner (Posts: 12; Member since: 28 Jan 2014)
Take a look at the photos by the Nokia 808 around the web. It comes very close to a dedicated digital SLR. I've stopped using my SLR entirely since buying an 808. In fact, I took a family photo using a tripod and my Canon EOS 5MP SLR this past December. I hadn't used it for a year or so. When I put the file into PhotoShop to crop it, I was surprised to see that its quality was lower than my 808's photos in terms of resolution and overall crispness. I know I could buy a more current DSLR with higher resolution and better color rendition than the 808, but I don't want to carry one around. I hike a lot in the Colorado mountains and love having a super camera in my pocket without having to carry the extra weight of a DSLR. The one DSLR feature the 808 can't match is the "throw" of the flash. The 808 does have a good xenon flash that is adqequate for restaurant, pub, or posed photos, but it doesn't throw enough to light up an large room the way my DSLR will. But then I rarely need such a flash as I don't take those sorts of photos often. The other shortcoming of the 808 is extreme macro shots which its lens can't handle as well as a dedicated macro lens of a DSLR. But you can still take good-enough photos of spiders and flowers, etc.