Camera Comparison: Samsung Galaxy Camera vs Galaxy S III, Galaxy Note II, iPhone 5, Nokia 808 PureView

16. Nathan_ingx posted on 28 Jan 2013, 09:46 14 0

What's disappointing here is that the Galaxy camera has been beaten by cameras on phones. Not demeaning them, of course, but the Galaxy camera is a device that is solely meant to perform as a camera and it being not better than these phones is not much of improvement. I know it can do other things than it being a camera but that's not an excuse.

38. Droid_X_Doug posted on 28 Jan 2013, 13:57 3 2

PA did a bit of holding the thumb on the scale however. Things like not including the multiple pre-programed scene modes that come stock with the G Camera, passing mention of the 21x optical zoom, limiting the image taken to 8 Mp. The positioning of the G Camera is as a compact P&S camera with 21x optical zoom and optical image stabilization for both photos and video that has Internet connectivity with the Android UI.

The 21x optical zoom comes into its own when you are trying to take a picture of something far away. Two photos that I was able to take courtesy of the 21x zoom immediately come to mind - one was of a sailboat on the S.F. Bay that I took from the waterfront of Sausalito. The sailboat was probably 1 mile away, but the 21x optical zoom brought the sailboat right into the frame to the point where numbers printed on the sail were readable. A second photo was during the recent Mavericks surfing competition. There was a U.S. Coast Guard cutter that was keeping water-borne onlookers from getting up close and interfering with the surfing competition. The Coast Guard cutter and company were again about 1 mile from where I was taking the picture. Trying to replicate both photos with an iP5 (or L920, for that matter) would not be possible. The digital zoom would not be up to the challenge.

I could have done way better with a dedicated telephoto lens on a FF DSLR and tripod, but not with the convenience of a compact camera that fit in my jacket pocket. I think there is a place for something like the G Camera, and hope that Sammy invests in developing it further.

43. Nathan_ingx posted on 28 Jan 2013, 15:03 2 0

I understand and agree with the point you made...and that's an area where phones still have miles to cross.
But other than that, i still stand corrected. 8 megapixel or not the quality of a dedicated camera has to be different. Else, there's no point in owning one just for the sake that you can zoom something extremely close without noise and pixelation. I hope the Galaxy camera II does a better job with the image quality.

• This comment is posted in response to #38 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #38 Hide

46. protozeloz posted on 28 Jan 2013, 15:51 0 1

the issue with the image quality is more related with the dumbed down resolution, there is no point in testing a camera at a setting people are not going to use

• This comment is posted in response to #43 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #43 Hide

63. Nathan_ingx posted on 28 Jan 2013, 20:10 3 1

Like i said, minimized resolution or not, IT IS A DEDICATED camera. And it doesn't mean a smaller resolution will have more bad image quality. Better get that right first

• This comment is posted in response to #46 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #46 Hide

124. Integer posted on 12 Feb 2013, 15:15 0 0

Why do they always put embarrassing cameras in android phones? If I left it at that, the first thing someone will reply with, is that this new phone will have a 13MP camera. As if microscopic pixels that are intended to collect light is somehow better than larger ones.

I understand people are dumb, and to most, more MP is better, but common, the engineers know that isn't true, why not leave it to them, and install a larger sensor with fewer pixels that's actually usable...

SGCam sensor is 31.81x smaller than a Full Frame.

They should reduce the MP count to 2MP to get the quality per pixel up.

• This comment is posted in response to #46 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #46 Hide

125. Integer posted on 12 Feb 2013, 16:13 0 0

Zoom is not a measure of reach, but rather the wide to long ratio.

In summary, the 'reach' of the Galaxy Camera is 86mm which doesn't sound all that impressive until you factor in the crop ratio which gives it an equivelant reach of 483mm

To avoid confusion, every camera ever made can have 'equivelant reach' via croping. (MP obviously drops as you crop, but who cares how many MP the camera is if it's smugy ugly anyway when viewed 100%

• This comment is posted in response to #38 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #38 Hide

22. MONUQ posted on 28 Jan 2013, 10:06 12 1

Lol PA don't have courage to put more of better devices.....like Lumia 920 and Sony Xperia Z....

23. No_Nonsense posted on 28 Jan 2013, 10:13 10 1

Xperia Z isn't available yet and the 920 quality is more or less the same as iPhone 5/S3 in normal situations. In low light and stability of pics/videos it trumps them though.

41. applesauce posted on 28 Jan 2013, 14:52 1 1

True, but in the concluding paragraphs, the GCam beats in low-light situations, something the 920 excels in above pretty much anything below DSLR-grade.

• This comment is posted in response to #23 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #23 Hide

7. freebee269 posted on 28 Jan 2013, 08:42 3 0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_3E9carE8w&feature=player_embedded

11. Lauticol posted on 28 Jan 2013, 08:52 0 0

Thank you, but I'm looking a review with the 808 included. Also we don't know if the update Portico is in that Lumia (the camera gets improved with the update)

18. Nathan_ingx posted on 28 Jan 2013, 09:50 1 1

You do know that the 808 is a Symbian phone and not a Lumia don't you?

• This comment is posted in response to #11 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #11 Hide

112. Lauticol posted on 29 Jan 2013, 10:25 0 0

When I said "in that Lumia" I was referring to the 920

• This comment is posted in response to #18 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #18 Hide

30. RiseAgainst94 posted on 28 Jan 2013, 11:22 1 0

The conclusion claims that this camera can beat any phone indoors or in low light but what PA failed to do is add the Lumia 920 which has by far the beat low light photo quality. The 808 pureview is by no means a replacement as Nokia has since allowed their senor to stay open longer to allow more light in, a feature not found in the 808 Pureview.

36. TheCynicalTechie posted on 28 Jan 2013, 13:43 0 0

It is adjustable actually. There is a shutter speed option, but without OIS it will look blurred and ugly.

115. cripton805 posted on 29 Jan 2013, 11:32 0 2

I saw a shot of a 920 in a dark room. The flash is more focused than some other phones Ive seen. So that can be a negative or positive thing. The surrounding image looks darker compared to other phones. Maybe scenery when there is some light present? Like I mentioned here earlier even on the 808, the night is not too great because of glare and someone mentioned tweaking settings to help. If the 920 has this issue, that can be a problem.

44. applesauce posted on 28 Jan 2013, 15:11 3 0

GSM Arena and All About Symbian/All About Windows Phone have come to similar conclusions, and also had the foresight to include the Lumia 920:

http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_camera_vs_nokia_808_pureview-review-873.php
http://allaboutwindowsphone.com/features/item/16398_Flagship_head_to_head_Nokia_Lu.php

http://allaboutwindowsphone.com/features/item/16087_PureView_shootout_Nokia_808_vs.php

http://allaboutwindowsphone.com/features/item/16500_PureView_shootout_round_two_No.php

The GCam has some positive attributes, but, IMHO, it's massively overpriced. I can get a Galaxy Player and a decent P&S for less money. The 808 PureView is still a tad overpriced, but for portability and overall quality, it would be the one to take my money if I knew I were going somewhere during the day and there might be some sudden photo opps. At least, until the next-gen Lumia comes out

39. -RVM- posted on 28 Jan 2013, 14:34 9 0

Actually GSMArena says PureView > Galaxy Camera:

"Anyway, the Nokia 808 PureView is the smartphone equivalent of a decades-old world record. A combination of genius, inspiration and hard work - and perhaps a bit of good luck - that's just impossible to match even if all the ingredients are there. We don't think anyone was surprised at the Nokia 808 PureView getting the better of another digicam. But we won't be surprised either if connected cameras do to cameraphones what Android did to Symbian."

65. fahqman posted on 28 Jan 2013, 20:16 1 7

iphone 5. I have note 2.

66. chaoticrazor posted on 28 Jan 2013, 20:22 2 2

and how have you come to this conclusion? explain as i know its bs

96. Anamela233 posted on 28 Jan 2013, 23:47 1 2

why waste time on explaining to a fanboy like you sir?

• This comment is posted in response to #66 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #66 Hide

109. chaoticrazor posted on 29 Jan 2013, 09:27 0 0

what kind of fanboy am i kid?

please try to think before answering lol

face it he cant explain his bs and you are just a cheerleader cheering him on

• This comment is posted in response to #96 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #96 Hide

8. chaoticrazor posted on 28 Jan 2013, 08:51 20 4

well shows how much you read as the 808 isnt 41mp just has a 41mp sensor. full res 34-38mp photo's are the highest it takes not 41mp

but ofcourse on this android oriented comment section this would happen

12. No_Nonsense posted on 28 Jan 2013, 09:15 19 1

"The 808 loses to the GC" (indoors and low light situations) according to PA. To my eyes the 808 beats the GC hands-down. Sorry, but I think the conclusion is a joke.

25. tashreef posted on 28 Jan 2013, 10:15 15 1

Can't you see 808 Pureview is a "Phone"

Where as GC is "Camera" only job is to take good pictures..... but still it lacks. behind 808 pureview.....

102. apocalypsebc posted on 29 Jan 2013, 01:00 1 0

The Lumia 920 would beat it in night time photos and in stable video recording. I dont know why the Lumia 920 wasn't in this comparison!

14. chaoticrazor posted on 28 Jan 2013, 09:26 21 1

please say your joking

note 2 as number one really? no one can say this seriously.

15. freebee269 posted on 28 Jan 2013, 09:30 23 0

iphone 5 better than the 808? lol clearly "you're holding it wrong".

26. tashreef posted on 28 Jan 2013, 10:18 9 0

Looks like you own Note 2.....

BTW nice joke han........ i can't stop laughing .....

31. srgonu posted on 28 Jan 2013, 11:33 0 13

I have note 2, it has much natural colors and photos are better than iphone5 (friends) in good light situations. But in low light iphone5 did a great job wrt photos and videos.
In the photos above we can see over saturation with iphone5 wrt to galaxy phones.

32. cripton805 posted on 28 Jan 2013, 12:19 0 2

I can agree with this because you can choose what colors you want.You can choose if you want natural or enhanced. Idk wether its better or not. They all take great pictures. I dont really care because Im not taking pictures to frame on an entire wall. Its not like were comparing Apples to Grapes.

33. cripton805 posted on 28 Jan 2013, 12:20 0 0

What about settings?

28. freebee269 posted on 28 Jan 2013, 11:15 0 0

i'm with you. a comparison poll with a bunch of similar shots for diff camera's allowing us to choose which we think is best without knowing which shot was with which camera would be the best way to do it to rule out being bias.

35. cripton805 posted on 28 Jan 2013, 12:54 4 5

I think you need to go back and look at the shots again. Pureview was clearly the worst by far. Look at all of the glare. Its even extremely visible in the sky like Rays of light.

37. TheCynicalTechie posted on 28 Jan 2013, 13:46 5 0

Yes, but it had the most detail with the least amount of noise. If the glare is too much, lower the exposure a bit.

45. cripton805 posted on 28 Jan 2013, 15:46 0 2

Then that would also affect the quality of the rest of the picture... By a lot. Which is the whole point of taking a clear picture.

• This comment is posted in response to #37 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #37 Hide

49. deadhead posted on 28 Jan 2013, 17:40 3 0

Nokia's jpeg algorithm has been on the neutral side since the N8 came out.. the processing used in the 808 is from the same family, so naturally, the color reproduction is very neutral.. it geared toward an easier post process.

Now.. you can always bump up the saturation and set it to vivid colors, and then it becomes a different animal..if you like that sort of thing. All the other need vivid colors to hide the poor quality of the jpeg, the 808 can afford not to do that..

68. cripton805 posted on 28 Jan 2013, 20:35 0 0

Id really have to see samples. I cant say it would help if I havent seen it done. The change in settings also changes the rest of the picture, so I cant make a judgement on something I havent seen.

With the pictures provided, this is my opinion.

79. MC1123 posted on 28 Jan 2013, 21:54 4 3

android fanboys cant accept the fact that their precious s3/note2 and even galaxy camera came on last place!!!

they are so pathetic!

89. Anamela233 posted on 28 Jan 2013, 22:41 1 3

I guess that is why 99. 9% of people buy Samsung phones over the 808 lol