x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Options

HTC One vs Nokia Lumia 920 vs 808 PureView: technical comparison

0. phoneArena posted on 21 Feb 2013, 07:50

“The myth that the more megapixels a camera has the better the pictures, is a big fat lie.” That is how HTC daringly started talking about its hugely important HTC One…

This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 08:28 7

19. amansingal14 (Posts: 309; Member since: 08 Sep 2012)

thanks for the red thumb fanboys, just telling you the truth as a professional photographer. (Using L920 for moments I don't have my Canon)

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 08:45 8

41. Victor.H (Posts: 774; Member since: 27 May 2011)

Fair points, but let's not rush the conclusions. OIS is one part of the story where Nokia might have an edge, but the faster shutter speed of the HTC One comes as an important advantage. So let's wait to see and compare samples before calling out a winner.

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 08:47 5

43. amansingal14 (Posts: 309; Member since: 08 Sep 2012)

Correct sir...

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 09:28 7

72. jsdechavez (Posts: 758; Member since: 20 Jul 2012)

You have no idea how fast the Nokia 808 gets: 1/2747 of a second!


posted on 21 Feb 2013, 10:14 6

127. -RVM- (Posts: 331; Member since: 19 Oct 2011)

You forgot to mention lossless zoom among special features of 808. Which is one of it's most important features.

posted on 22 Feb 2013, 07:52

272. bon24x7 (Posts: 211; Member since: 30 Aug 2012)

there you go Nokia hater Victor...

"some" samples....


posted on 21 Feb 2013, 08:39 3

32. Toivoja (Posts: 7; Member since: 21 Feb 2013)

hmm... Nice comparison but will wait if the rumored EOS will pop out on monday.

I'm hoping that when doing the comparison on HTC one vs Lumia 920 vs 808 Pureview in photographs, you release the information on which version the phone is running in. This is because have read many reviews on 808 and turned out that the phone was running old software. Also as 920 got the Portico update and as amansingal14 said, it fixed algorithms and bugs.

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 08:45 3

40. amansingal14 (Posts: 309; Member since: 08 Sep 2012)

Thanks for acknowledging such a long comment...

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 08:40 1

35. preet27in (banned) (Posts: 173; Member since: 07 Jul 2012)

AND BTW.... PUREVIEW... totally crap software and a heavy bricck? no1 wants it. rather ppl want a better built and beautiful looking designs and damn good camers all together?? nokia 808 pureview dosent stand good at all in terms of any of those components, except the camers. and future always waits dear. leave it to the future. not the PAST.

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 08:49 6

46. Toivoja (Posts: 7; Member since: 21 Feb 2013)

808 was Symbians Sunset. It was how Symbian should have looked like for the touchscreens from the beginning. Altough the camera hump might push away some users, those who are willing to forget about it will have a great phone with a fast interface and very good quality... you know, you could even change the battery all by yourself. So it's not always about the raw power, it's how you use it. I think Bruce Lee (when he was alive) could kick Muhammed Ali's ass (when he was at his hight).

But you have your own opinions on hating Nokia's products...will respect them.

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 19:45 4

214. -box- (Posts: 3991; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)

I'd rather have an 808 PureView than a Galaxy Camera

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 22:13 2

234. MC1123 (Posts: 1256; Member since: 12 Nov 2012)

totally agree!! loseless zoom is the best and without loosing its quality! while galaxy camera is BS!!!!

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 08:46 4

42. FireDragon (Posts: 117; Member since: 13 Nov 2009)

I am one of those who always say "Higher MegaPixels are just sales pitch (confirmed by Fujifilm years ago)" And while I am happy with 3mp smartphone camera I have to admit that 6mp should be the least in a smartphone. (I own N8 too by the way)

Because there are moments where pictures taken from 3mp phone-camera is not good enough to send out to print only because of its size, not the quality. You never know when you need to have it. perhaps not all the users will run into such situations but there has to be ^option^ for us too, because after all we are talking about Super Expensive High End Smart Phones.

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 08:56 11

50. shikroi (Posts: 187; Member since: 24 Sep 2012)

All I see is PA's continued attempt to shift attention away from the 808 towards competition that the One may be able to handle, despite the fact that htc implied they could best the 808. If Nokia were to release an infographic that claimed their devices were superior to the note 2 or the HTC one you guys at PA would be ready to tear them apart (like yesterday when you called nokia "hot headed" and "arrogant").

In the pixel size comparison PA deliberately left out the fact that the 808 still has a bigger pixel size than the 920 or the one, albeit virtual. All they mentioned was the fact that it has a bigger pixel size than the 920 and left it at that.

In the lens section PA deliberately left out the fact that while the one has a larger aperture than the 808, its probably a poorer quality lens the carl zeis lens.

The features section was the funniest. PA listed a bunch of features for the one which would be the equivalent of listing cinemagraph and its gif making, object removing capabilities as well as panorama as features for the 920. Not only that, PA left the features of the 808 at xenon flash, because apparently that's the only unique thing it can do. No mention of lossless zoom, oversampling, saturation adjusting,dedicated image chip etc. This framed the picture so the HTC appeared as the most feature rich phone.

All in all it seems you were trying to shift the attention away from 808 comparisons in attempt to save HTC's face after HTC called out the 808 pureview, insinuating that their camera would be better.

This is rather silly because this whole article started as a camera comparison between the 808, 920 and one. However all of a sudden the 808's camera didn't matter in this comparison because its thicker and heavier (as for being heavier; its only around 165g which is lighter than the 920). An under handed tactic used so that PA could figuratively toss it out the window and pit the one against something less formidable. This made me ask the question, is this a phone comparison or a camera comparison?

And to make matters worse PA went on to insinuate that the 920's tech is garbage. So the amazing low light photos and videos from the 920 now makes it a gimmick and not worthy of the pureview name only because it doesn't have a massive sensor. Even though its been said that pureview is about amazing new imaging technology; yet you guys decided to bring that up.

Either way if the intention was to compare the one to the 920, PA should have refrained from mentioning the 808 in the title, or anywhere else in the article. IMO the only purpose the 808 served in this article was to be overlooked and subject to indirect
understatements. It turns out that all PA wanted to say was that the one may prove to be formidable to the 920, sgsIII, note 2, ip5, etc. However PA didn't have to make a mockery of the 808 and 920 to do it. This came off as a butthurt response to the recent comments about the one's cam IMO.

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 09:37 4

74. Victor.H (Posts: 774; Member since: 27 May 2011)

shikroi, you might want to look at the world outside your conspiracy theory lens. Also, actually read the article first before jumping into fanboi rage. If you read it, you'd see that we've clearly indicated that the 808 has bigger pixels. We have also stated numerous times that with its larger sensor AND bigger pixels it is no match for the HTC One.

Next, "Its PROBABLY a poorer quality lens." We don't know about the quality of the lens and that's why we haven't commented on it. You obviously don't know either, but somehow want to convince us it's reasonable to post assumptions based on thin air?

Feature-wise, we've focused on OIS and the ImageChip, and you are right to mention there are more details about the HTC One. That is not intentional and we've given it this extra attention because of its novelty.

The 808 part of your post is a subject of opinion - the device is popular in its niche but you can't deny a 0.55-inch thick Symbian phone is a niche. Everything else is wishful thinking. We're genuinely excited about all the technologies mentioned, and this is a technical comparison, but we appreciate your opinion.

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 10:10 10

119. MarioGomez (banned) (Posts: 40; Member since: 21 Feb 2013)

Get a life troll and stop trolling and moderating every comment that disclose your hate feeling toward Nokia and Windows.

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 11:01 1

159. shikroi (Posts: 187; Member since: 24 Sep 2012)


posted on 22 Feb 2013, 08:50 3

277. dr_fajardo12 (Posts: 118; Member since: 26 Aug 2012)

shikroi destroyed u. simply in last cameraphone comparision sammy 3 was the best cam (despite the fact that iphone5 was way way better than sammy s3 before that according to pa and despite the fact that before that s3 was just a little better than iphone 4s). now the best camera phone is ONE. just one time won the n808. u r a joke pa.

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 09:04 10

57. Sarajevo (Posts: 38; Member since: 30 Nov 2012)

Technical comparison? You made comparation between two devices those showed its muscles and one device (HTC One) that stated that it has a muscles. But, nobody see it yet! So, when you will have pictures and videos taken from HTC One, compare them to PV808 and L920 and take and give us your conclusion. Of course, try to find L920 with an updated app for camera (where problems of fuzzy images are solved).

If these are pictures and video taken from HTC One above, it is not even comparable to PV808 or L920.

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 10:11 6

120. MarioGomez (banned) (Posts: 40; Member since: 21 Feb 2013)

Again , all comments supporting Nokia are moderated by the troll editor Victor H,

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 23:22

240. chadrick0814 (Posts: 212; Member since: 23 Nov 2011)

Then maybe you should try another site. Wouldn't that solve the problem?

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 22:19 2

235. MC1123 (Posts: 1256; Member since: 12 Nov 2012)

totally agree!! PA and this editor are crap!! they cant accept facts!! they want to make android as good as it gets even though it is not what people think!! they want it to have a good image but in reality its not, its crappy and choppy, not as powerful as symbian and you still need 3000mAh to last 2 days!! while symbian is power efficient! 808PV just got all the best of it!!

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 09:06 3

61. DerryAhmad (Posts: 287; Member since: 05 May 2012)

I actually couldn't care less about the camera 'specs' of the phones given in the article.
I'm very curious on seeing the actual photo comparison between HTC One and Nokia Lumia 920.
Based on specs, One is the current contender of the reigning Lumia 920 in terms of low light photography in cameraphone. But we need to see the photo comparison before passing judgement based only by specs.

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 09:41 3

80. R-vjn (Posts: 262; Member since: 07 Jan 2013)

Being a photographer, the technical comparison of the HTC One's camera beats the competition.
Great F2.0 aperture (captures more light), and the lower no of pixels in the same sensor size as the 920 means there wont be noise during night shots with higher ISO, which the phone automatically selects.
Also the F2.0 aperture means the phone wont need to use higher ISO range because more light is passing into the sensor.

Overall, it looks great. But I'm waiting for a real world performance.

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 10:03 4

109. amansingal14 (Posts: 309; Member since: 08 Sep 2012)

Carl Zeiss lens vs HTC One's Usual lens...

Even Carl Zeiss' f2.8 lens could perform better than the usual f2.0 lens...

Still OIS in Nokia would tend to be better as the whole Optical unit moves instead of just the lens. Pixel Sampling technology in 808 tends to reduce any trace of noise and so does OIS in Lumia 920.
Also less than 5 MP would mean extremely small images, and the algorithms made by HTC are also criticized a lot, while Nokia has excelled its Algorithms in 920 after Portico update and 808's algorithm was already perfect...

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 09:57 7

100. Guarulhos (Posts: 39; Member since: 19 Sep 2012)

Erroneous And Incomplete Information !

Technichal Specifications Digital Camera 808 PureView PRO:

* Optical Assembly: Carl Zeiss Vario Tessar Wide Angle 26 mm

* Construction Lens: 5 Elements, 1 Group. All Lens Surfaces Are Aspherical

* Features Lens: One High - Index, Low - Dispersion Glass Mould Lens / Mechanical Shutter With Neutral Density Filter

* F-Number / Aperture: f/2.3984375

* Focal Length: 8.02mm

* Focus Range: 15 Cm - Infinity

* Iso Sensitivity: 50 - 1600

* Shutter Speed Minimum: 2,7s

* Shutter Speed Maximum: 1/2747s

* Flash: Xenon (3rd Generation) And Led (2rd Generation)

* Reach In Shooting Of Flash: Up To 4 Meters
* AF Light: Yes (Single Led 2rd Generation)


* Format: 1/1.2”

* Surface: 85,36mm² (10,67 x 13,33mm Or 8mm Diagonal)

* Pixel Size: 38 MP (1.4 Microns) / 8 MP (3.07 Microns) / 5 Megapixels (3.91 Microns) / 3 MP (4.89 Microns)

* Total Pixel Are Used: 7728 x 5368 - 41.4 MP

This Clarified, Understand:

Image Sensor 808 Is FSI, No BSI !

Pixel Size Is1.4 µm, Or Up To 4.89 µm, No 4.1 µm !

Lens Features Is f/2.3984375, 8.02mm, 26mm, 5 Elements, 1 Group. All Lens Surfaces Are Aspherical !

P.S: Therefore, Correct Information !

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 10:04 4

111. Victor.H (Posts: 774; Member since: 27 May 2011)

Thanks, we've corrected those.

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 10:13 7

126. MarioGomez (banned) (Posts: 40; Member since: 21 Feb 2013)

Or you are correcting this information Victor ..
Or you are intentionally wanted just to bash Nokia

I really hate your faked and biased articles which are filled with fibs all the time.

Phonearena, Fire this troll Victor.

I'll report you to everywhere .,. until I see you out of here

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 10:18 5

132. Guarulhos (Posts: 39; Member since: 19 Sep 2012)

Thanks for the fast and accurate fixes, this proves that this site is seriously and always seeks fairness !

But they still lack correct:

808 is Wide Angle Lens 26mm, No 28 mm !

posted on 21 Feb 2013, 10:26 1

137. Bfrenz (Posts: 188; Member since: 26 Aug 2012)

Weird. Nothing to say.

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories