# The Lumia 1020...final death blow to the Point and Shoot?



## jrista (Jul 14, 2013)

I just read some of the reviews on the Lumia 1020. I have to say, from a photography standpoint, *I am REALLY impressed.* It finally brings the true PureView 808's 41mp sensor, the 6-element Zeiss lens from the 925, and full Xenon flash to a phone pretty much built for photography. Their pro photo software looks rather nice, giving you complete control over all the standard aspects of exposure (i.e. want to do a long exposure and blur people walking by...you can). I love the fact that it has the extended battery "grip" accessory, too.

http://www.nokia.com/global/products/phone/lumia1020


So, does this mark the true end of the point and shoot, and the beginning of full blown photography phones with all the features we *photographers* have come to expect from an actual camera? To date, phone cameras have been geared more towards the instagrammer crowd...the Lumia 1020 seems to be positioned more for pro photographers who want something simpler, but still just as capable, for a handy every-moment alternative to a DSLR.

Is it only me who thinks this?


----------



## northbyten (Jul 15, 2013)

I definitely think so.

I use my Nokia 920 more often than my Canon, I prefer the colours and levels out of the box.

I think if Nokia continues on this path, all major camera manufacturers are going to have a hard time outpacing them.

I've gone through the sample photos of the 1020 on flickr and I cannot believe it especially at it's price.

I'm actually surprised that the closest thing to this is the Samsung Galaxy NX.


----------



## jrista (Jul 15, 2013)

northbyten said:


> I definitely think so.
> 
> I use my Nokia 920 more often than my Canon, I prefer the colours and levels out of the box.
> 
> ...



Thanks for the reply. I guess not many Canon users really care about the possibilities of something like Nokia's Lumia line. 

Anyway, I agree about color...however I think that is more the screen on the Lumias than anything else. Once I import, the color actually looks a bit too saturated, where as when I view them on my phone (which, ironically, is a WAY better screen than even my Apple CinemaDisplay), they look so fantastic.

I still have a little over a year on my 920 contract, so I probably won't be getting a 1020 (or at least, not right away). I am quite intrigued by it, though...and will probably end up with the 1020, or whatever follows it, when my current contract period is up.


----------



## expatinasia (Jul 16, 2013)

I am very interested in camera phones. If the Lumia 1020 was anything but Nokia, I might even consider buying it, but alas it is not. 

Samsung recently launched the Zoom which has not had the best of reviews, and Sony are expected to launch the Xperia i1 Honami - a 20MP smartphone with Qualcomm Snapdragon 800 processor to take on the Samsung and Nokia camera / phone.

If Sony could add a phone to something as capable as the RX100-II I would definitely buy it. In fact if Canon could team up with a phone maker and create something as good as the RX100-II (or even better) but with smartphone functionality and similar Canon menu system to what is in the DSLRs for the camera, then I would buy that without a doubt.

I think we are still some way from the death of the p&s but we seem to be heading in that general direction. This could also affect the DSLR market as the camera phones get better and better, people will eventually grow tired of lugging the weight, extra size and attachments around.

Nokia, needs to do some serious PR and image building in my opinion, as the brand has almost 0% appeal for me.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 16, 2013)

There is little doubt that camera phones are hurting the market for P&S cameras, but they are far from dead. 

So far this year, they have shipped 434 Billion Yen worth this year. You know the old saying, A billion here .. A billion there ... 

http://www.cipa.jp/english/data/pdf/d-201305_e.pdf

Of course, they have sold 35.7 billion worth of mirrorless, so we may see 10% of the P%S value by next year.


----------



## jrista (Jul 16, 2013)

expatinasia said:


> I am very interested in camera phones. If the Lumia 1020 was anything but Nokia, I might even consider buying it, but alas it is not.
> 
> Samsung recently launched the Zoom which has not had the best of reviews, and Sony are expected to launch the Xperia i1 Honami - a 20MP smartphone with Qualcomm Snapdragon 800 processor to take on the Samsung and Nokia camera / phone.
> 
> ...



What do you have against Nokia? You clearly seem to like the Lumia 1020...so what exactly has Nokia done wrong there? Seems they have succeeded WITHOUT marketing to me. If you simply don't like the name, well I guess I don't consider that grounds not to buy something. If the technology is excellent, the technology is excellent. It doesn't really matter how the company markets, or who's name is on it. I think your preventing yourself from getting a phenomenal phone with the best camera on the market just because of some name hate. Nokia's PAST problem was that they were unprepared for the onslaught of Apple and the iPhone...however...*so was everyone else!* Lumia is an excellent brand, with excellent features and competitiveness. It only seems to get better as time goes on. If you have ever actually used one, your dislike of the Nokia name would disappear in a heartbeat. 

Remember the old saying? "The best marketing is when you don't have to."


----------



## expatinasia (Jul 16, 2013)

jrista said:


> What do you have against Nokia? You clearly seem to like the Lumia 1020...so what exactly has Nokia done wrong there? Seems they have succeeded WITHOUT marketing to me. If you simply don't like the name, well I guess I don't consider that grounds not to buy something. If the technology is excellent, the technology is excellent. It doesn't really matter how the company markets, or who's name is on it. I think your preventing yourself from getting a phenomenal phone with the best camera on the market just because of some name hate. Nokia's PAST problem was that they were unprepared for the onslaught of Apple and the iPhone...however...*so was everyone else!* Lumia is an excellent brand, with excellent features and competitiveness. It only seems to get better as time goes on. If you have ever actually used one, your dislike of the Nokia name would disappear in a heartbeat. Remember the old saying? "The best marketing is when you don't have to."



jrista, your caps lock kept getting stuck in that post! 

I do not dislike Nokia, nor do I like Nokia, and that is their problem - at least from my perspective. And that is why I say that in my opinion Nokia really needs to do something about its brand image.

For example, I like Mercedes and BMW, and while I respect Jaguar I would, rightly or wrongly, probably prefer the two German brands over a Jag.

The great thing about technology, and innovation is that I can applaud Nokia, admire what they have brought to market, and now eagerly await what the response from Sony (in particular) and Samsung is going to be. I am in no rush, my life will not change no matter how great a camera/phone is, and if I get one today, or in a year's time, it really does not matter. We are still in early days of the true camera/phone so things are only going to get better, which is great for us - the consumer.

Oh and btw - the rumour on the Honami is that it will be able to record up to around 4000x2000 in video clips (yep, 4K). That and the Snapdragon 800 processor, and the rumoured 1/1.6-inch sensor make me salivate! Not bad for a phone!


----------



## jrista (Jul 16, 2013)

expatinasia said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > What do you have against Nokia? You clearly seem to like the Lumia 1020...so what exactly has Nokia done wrong there? Seems they have succeeded WITHOUT marketing to me. If you simply don't like the name, well I guess I don't consider that grounds not to buy something. If the technology is excellent, the technology is excellent. It doesn't really matter how the company markets, or who's name is on it. I think your preventing yourself from getting a phenomenal phone with the best camera on the market just because of some name hate. Nokia's PAST problem was that they were unprepared for the onslaught of Apple and the iPhone...however...*so was everyone else!* Lumia is an excellent brand, with excellent features and competitiveness. It only seems to get better as time goes on. If you have ever actually used one, your dislike of the Nokia name would disappear in a heartbeat. Remember the old saying? "The best marketing is when you don't have to."
> ...



Hmm...that usually means the entire thing is CAPS. Only two words of my post were caps, and quite explicitly so.  Strong difference between a stuck caps key and careful, intentful use...



expatinasia said:


> I do not dislike Nokia, nor do I like Nokia, and that is their problem - at least from my perspective. And that is why I say that in my opinion Nokia really needs to do something about its brand image.
> 
> For example, I like Mercedes and BMW, and while I respect Jaguar I would, rightly or wrongly, probably prefer the two German brands over a Jag.
> 
> ...



I think the car analogy is flawed. You buy a car with the intention of owning it for years, even a decade. You expect the company to build them to a specific level of quality such that they will last for that duration of time. You also expect the company to stand by their workmanship over the lifetime of any warranty, provide high quality replacement parts, etc.

Comparing a smartphone with a car is a little ludicrous. You generally own a smart phone for two years at most. The expectations regarding long-term parts support...well, they generally aren't there, with one exception maybe being replacement of cracked screens. Even in that respect, the cheapest and more reliable approach is to use a third party (just look into the statistics on how often iPhone screen replacements end up getting broken again, needing replacement multiple times.) In two years time on average, you'll probably be upgrading your smartphone to the next great thing. I don't think that there is ANY kind of "We stand by our product" that even resembles a corner of a shadow of what you get from BMW or Mercedes from Samsung or Sony when it comes to their phones.

So, again...I think your short changing yourself by excluding Lumia as an option for the simple reason that Nokia is the manufacturer. Personally, having owned a wide number of phones over the years, including HTC, Samsung, Nokia, as well as several iPhones, I have to say I am particularly happy with the build quality, software quality, and reliability of the Lumia 920 I have. It feels solidly built, stronger than all the iPhones I've owned, and far more sturdy than any Samsung phone (they all feel like featherweight plastic that will shatter if touched by a pin). The only other phone I've owned that felt as solidly built as the Nokia was the HTC, however it had a number of other detractors that turned me off of it (their software isn't that great), and it was as heavy as my 920 while being smaller in form factor (so, sturdy, but overly so).

I wouldn't write off the Lumia line of phones simply because it's Nokia. They are extremely well built, sleek and aesthetic in design, the screens are phenomenal (truly...one of the key reasons I picked the 920 was its screen...higher pixel density than the Apple Retina, better microcontrast...simply beautiful) and, back to the original purpose of this thread....their cameras are phenomenal! ;D


----------



## expatinasia (Jul 16, 2013)

jrista - I am not going to buy a Nokia as I do not desire a Nokia. It is a brand that makes me yawn, actually it does not even do that - I pass it in Duty Free and rarely even stop. I do not know why that is, but there you go. If the Lumia 1020 was on Android then maybe, but it is not.

I am sure we both agree that there are exciting times ahead for the camera/phone. Whether it is Sony (an ex-user), Samsung (a current user) or some other manufacturer I really do not care.

When they make camera phones that are as capable as the RX100-II or even the RX1 then I will take note.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 16, 2013)

Nope. My g15 has a hot-shoe.


----------



## jrista (Jul 16, 2013)

expatinasia said:


> jrista - I am not going to buy a Nokia as I do not desire a Nokia. It is a brand that makes me yawn, actually it does not even do that - I pass it in Duty Free and rarely even stop. I do not know why that is, but there you go. If the Lumia 1020 was on Android then maybe, but it is not.
> 
> I am sure we both agree that there are exciting times ahead for the camera/phone. Whether it is Sony (an ex-user), Samsung (a current user) or some other manufacturer I really do not care.
> 
> When they make camera phones that are as capable as the RX100-II or even the RX1 then I will take note.



Well, to each his own, I guess. Like I said, I think your short changing yourself, to restrict yourself to a specific phone OS and not even "look" simply because of a company name. If your content to wait until Samsung produces something similar (which I suspect should happen sooner or later), I'm sure there will be a product out there that suits you.

In the mean time, I'm happily considering a Lumia 1020 for myself. I have held off on buying a more portable camera because I wanted something that would be easy to always carry around with me, without losing out on quality. I can't think of a better way to do that than to embed a 41mp camera (that actually gives you the option of taking full 41mp photos when using pro photog mode) into my phone...I already always have my phone on me, so that neatly solves the problem in its entirety right there.


----------



## DanielW (Jul 16, 2013)

I guess I'd like to keep things separated while batteries have just enough juice for one day on those huge screen phones. I'd rather shoot as much as I like, use the flash as much as I like, without having to think if I can get through the day. (These things change rather quickly, though.)


----------



## distant.star (Jul 16, 2013)

.
I don't know anything about this, but I keep hearing the point & shoot segment is shrinking due to smart phones having good cameras that do stills and video. Makes sense to me given how most people react to photography.

The issue seems more redundancy than perceived camera quality or versatility. I don't think people buy smart phones for their cameras although they may play some role in deciding which specific smart phone to buy -- phone vs phone, not phone vs point & shoot camera. The smart phone is the desirable object so it gets acquired. And once you have it you pay $1000 or more per year to operate it. Most folks aren't committed enough to photography to add more expense with a dedicated small camera. Why buy a separate thing if it only does what the phone will do? The photographer community can argue better image quality, increased versatility, etc., but most people don't care that much. The phone gets a picture -- instantly they can send it electronically to friends & family. Even a point & shoot with WIFI is going to be dependent on a WIFI connection so it may not be instant gratification. If they want a print they can go to Walgreen's or CVS and get one for five or 10 cents. Hell, even the cheapie little "portrait studios" at Walmart and Sears are shutting down.

For several reasons, photography one of them, I used to carry a small compass. Now I have one in my smart phone so I'm not buying a compass anymore. Redundancy. There was a time I carried a small reference book with lots of photography info -- DOF guides, ASA (ISO) info, flash guides, a gray card, etc. I don't consider buying such guides today because all that, and much more, is in my phone (well, not the gray card, I guess!). Redundancy. I see and hear a trend toward younger people not using wristwatches -- their phones give the correct time. Redundancy. I've even stopped wearing a wristwatch most of the time. I also often carried a stopwatch, especially for sport events -- my phone does that now. Redundancy. The greatest stopwatch/watch/compass/etc. ever made for a smart phone has no influence on whether I buy any of those objects individually. They get the job done in the phone, and that's all I care about.

Anecdotally, I just don't see people using point & shoot cameras anymore. I see either smart phones or bridge/DSLR cameras.


----------



## candyman (Jul 16, 2013)

@distant.star
+1 agree with your observation


----------



## Jay Khaos (Jul 16, 2013)

I feel like the P&S market is already dead.. since the Galaxy's and iphone's 8mp cameras. That could just be my opinion. Not saying people won't buy them... because I DO feel like people will continue to buy dedicated P&S cameras simply because they feel like they need a camera.... or because it's a closer step to "being a photographer". And once you get to the more decent ones, you're approaching the price and size of a dslr anyway.

But unlike 5-10 years ago, I dont think owning a P&S gives you a shred of credibility. In my opinion, the gap between what I can do with my iphone and DSLR isn't filled with a P&S. Even the fancy SLR-shaped ones with big lenses.


----------



## itsnotmeyouknow (Jul 16, 2013)

distant.star said:


> .
> I don't know anything about this, but I keep hearing the point & shoot segment is shrinking due to smart phones having good cameras that do stills and video. Makes sense to me given how most people react to photography.
> 
> The issue seems more redundancy than perceived camera quality or versatility. I don't think people buy smart phones for their cameras although they may play some role in deciding which specific smart phone to buy -- phone vs phone, not phone vs point & shoot camera. The smart phone is the desirable object so it gets acquired. And once you have it you pay $1000 or more per year to operate it. Most folks aren't committed enough to photography to add more expense with a dedicated small camera. Why buy a separate thing if it only does what the phone will do? The photographer community can argue better image quality, increased versatility, etc., but most people don't care that much. The phone gets a picture -- instantly they can send it electronically to friends & family. Even a point & shoot with WIFI is going to be dependent on a WIFI connection so it may not be instant gratification. If they want a print they can go to Walgreen's or CVS and get one for five or 10 cents. Hell, even the cheapie little "portrait studios" at Walmart and Sears are shutting down.
> ...



The trouble is that many people use this philosophy of not bringing a compass on to a mountain too seriously. In the UK there have been numerous call outs to the (voluntary) mountain rescue teams to rescue them because the battery in their phone has run dry. The trouble is that redundancy might be apparent, but that doesn't mean it's real.


----------



## cayenne (Jul 16, 2013)

jrista said:


> I just read some of the reviews on the Lumia 1020. I have to say, from a photography standpoint, *I am REALLY impressed.* It finally brings the true PureView 808's 41mp sensor, the 6-element Zeiss lens from the 925, and full Xenon flash to a phone pretty much built for photography. Their pro photo software looks rather nice, giving you complete control over all the standard aspects of exposure (i.e. want to do a long exposure and blur people walking by...you can). I love the fact that it has the extended battery "grip" accessory, too.
> 
> http://www.nokia.com/global/products/phone/lumia1020
> 
> ...



I don't think there is much of anyone (camera or other phones) that will have much to fear from competiton from this phone, as long as it is running Windows.

;D ;D

Cayenne


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 16, 2013)

Sensor is a lot smaller than the one in say an RX100. Fixed lens (yeah you can sort of digitally zoom with the high MP a count a bit but still). etc. So I don't see where you are coming from. It's great for a phone though. For some it may be enough, either they go fully serious and DSLR or this though.


----------



## caruser (Jul 16, 2013)

itsnotmeyouknow said:


> The trouble is that many people use this philosophy of not bringing a compass on to a mountain too seriously. In the UK there have been numerous call outs to the (voluntary) mountain rescue teams to rescue them because the battery in their phone has run dry. The trouble is that redundancy might be apparent, but that doesn't mean it's real.


Battery life is a very real problem with modern smartphones, you get all the features, but not for very long!


----------



## caruser (Jul 16, 2013)

distant.star said:


> Anecdotally, I just don't see people using point & shoot cameras anymore. I see either smart phones or bridge/DSLR cameras.


And, it appears, many iPads and other tablets, seems like more than p/s cameras...


----------



## jrista (Jul 16, 2013)

DanielW said:


> I guess I'd like to keep things separated while batteries have just enough juice for one day on those huge screen phones. I'd rather shoot as much as I like, use the flash as much as I like, without having to think if I can get through the day. (These things change rather quickly, though.)



I make pretty heavy use of my Lumia each day, and it gets at least 9 hours of battery life. It doesn't have a Xenon flash, but it does have an exceptionally bright duel LED flash (very high MCD). I'm not sure that the screen is really the primary power draw anyway...the bigger draw is usually the LTE and WiFi, both of which I keep on at all times now since AT&T went the way of Verizon, and is now capping bandwidth at 5Gb/mo (I browse enough high def photography and videos on my phone that I can burn through that). 

One of the things I like about Windows Phone 8 is that it is actually quite efficient, and when the battery drops below a certain threshold, you can configure it to enter a low-power mode where it will only turn on the LTE or WiFi if you actually need to use it. That usually extends my battery another three hours, so I can usually get 12 hours a day out of my 920.


----------



## jrista (Jul 16, 2013)

cayenne said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > I just read some of the reviews on the Lumia 1020. I have to say, from a photography standpoint, *I am REALLY impressed.* It finally brings the true PureView 808's 41mp sensor, the 6-element Zeiss lens from the 925, and full Xenon flash to a phone pretty much built for photography. Their pro photo software looks rather nice, giving you complete control over all the standard aspects of exposure (i.e. want to do a long exposure and blur people walking by...you can). I love the fact that it has the extended battery "grip" accessory, too.
> ...



Have you actually used a Windows Phone 8 device? They are certainly not a joke, and after owning several generations of iPhone, I much prefer the Metro experience. The app gap is shrinking fast, and most of the apps I want are already available, and those that aren't are either coming, or I can write myself. I'd also point out that as the Android vs. iPhone battle has raged, iPhone has been losing, while Android and Windows have been gaining. Windows market share is about doubling every year, particularly with the Nokia Lumia phones. Again, I think people who skip past a Lumia just because its Nokia or just because its Windows are short changing themselves.


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 16, 2013)

distant.star said:


> I just don't see people using point & shoot cameras anymore. I see either smart phones or bridge/DSLR cameras.


Most of my photography at work is done on an ipad.... For what I need, it is way more convenient than a DSLR. The pictures are not as good, but they are certainly good enough and the convenience is unbeatable.

Wildlife photography is a different story... Long lenses on a dslr can't be beat. I am not the type to walk up to a polar bear, shove a phone in its face, and snap away while it chews on my leg...

There is a time and place for both DSLR's and phones, but as the abilities of phone cameras increases, p/s cameras get squeezed out. Phone pictures are good enough for Facebook and the bulk of the market is in that area.

BTW, I have been watching the Tour de France, almost everyone you see taking pictures along the race is using phone cameras and p/s.... Very few DSLRs.....


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 16, 2013)

itsnotmeyouknow said:


> The trouble is that many people use this philosophy of not bringing a compass on to a mountain too seriously. In the UK there have been numerous call outs to the (voluntary) mountain rescue teams to rescue them because the battery in their phone has run dry. The trouble is that redundancy might be apparent, but that doesn't mean it's real.


I carry compass, paper map (never had the batteries die on a paper map), food, water, matches, space blanket, headlamp, and emergency shelter on day hikes away from the roads... I have found lost and exhausted hikers and brought them out of the woods after dark, and once overnighted with a couple an brought them out in the morning. People think that as soon as they don't show up that someone goes looking for them.... You are lucky if the search starts in 24 hours...be prepared to spend the night out!


----------



## zim (Jul 16, 2013)

jrista said:


> Have you actually used a Windows Phone 8 device? They are certainly not a joke, and after owning several generations of iPhone, I much prefer the Metro experience. The app gap is shrinking fast, and most of the apps I want are already available, and those that aren't are either coming, or I can write myself. I'd also point out that as the Android vs. iPhone battle has raged, iPhone has been losing, while Android and Windows have been gaining. Windows market share is about doubling every year, particularly with the Nokia Lumia phones. Again, I think people who skip past a Lumia just because its Nokia or just because its Windows are short changing themselves.



No point in having that argument really, not going to win anything.
I find the 'apps gap' irrelevant in about 5 mins I'd downloaded (free) every app I'm likely to need on my phone. (Nokia 925 win8)

I think what Nokia are doing is facinating, apart from IQ what I want to see improving substantially though is focus and shutter lag.


----------



## distant.star (Jul 16, 2013)

itsnotmeyouknow said:


> The trouble is that many people use this philosophy of not bringing a compass on to a mountain too seriously. In the UK there have been numerous call outs to the (voluntary) mountain rescue teams to rescue them because the battery in their phone has run dry. The trouble is that redundancy might be apparent, but that doesn't mean it's real.



If you go to a grocery store and take no money, you get no food.

Trouble is, I said nothing about mountaineering, backpacking or even day hiking. I know there are fools who think a smart phone is a tool in the wilderness; those people get what they deserve. Unfortunately, they call us to come rescue them because they are unprepared and don't know what they're doing.

I have zero tolerance for idiots in some backcountry areas using cell phones to call emergency services to deliver water -- and such things happen. However, my comments had nothing to do with this.

The multiple examples I cited to make a case for redundancy are very real, including the compass. You can also probably make a case that after a nuclear war your smart phone won't work, but that old reliable point and shoot camera will. How would that be relevant to this discussion?

There's a useful book I frequently recommend to people:

_The Art of Clear Thinking_ by Rudolf Flesch.


----------



## MrFotoFool (Jul 16, 2013)

itsnotmeyouknow said:


> The trouble is that many people use this philosophy of not bringing a compass on to a mountain too seriously. In the UK there have been numerous call outs to the (voluntary) mountain rescue teams to rescue them because the battery in their phone has run dry. The trouble is that redundancy might be apparent, but that doesn't mean it's real.



If the battery in their phone was dead, then how did they call the rescue team?


----------



## jrista (Jul 16, 2013)

zim said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Have you actually used a Windows Phone 8 device? They are certainly not a joke, and after owning several generations of iPhone, I much prefer the Metro experience. The app gap is shrinking fast, and most of the apps I want are already available, and those that aren't are either coming, or I can write myself. I'd also point out that as the Android vs. iPhone battle has raged, iPhone has been losing, while Android and Windows have been gaining. Windows market share is about doubling every year, particularly with the Nokia Lumia phones. Again, I think people who skip past a Lumia just because its Nokia or just because its Windows are short changing themselves.
> ...



Shutter lag on an electronic shutter has always been an oddity to me. Is it simply because most smartphone cameras (and, for that matter, P&S cameras) insist on making a cutsie and unbelievably annoying little fake shutter click when people press the button? I figure, assuming the lens is focused, taking a picture should be near instantaneous...


----------



## cayenne (Jul 17, 2013)

jrista said:


> cayenne said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...



So far, I've not been able to stomach *ANY *version of Metro, no matter the platform it is on...I think M$ is really shooting itself in the foot with this, and it is showing with Win8 sales.

But to each his own...I prefer to play with Linux and OSX these days, and only run windows (win7) on VMs for apps that absolutely won't run on anything else. 

But whatever pleases a person.

I have been curious, however, who the _guy _was that was buying the Windows phones....nice to meet you!


----------



## cayenne (Jul 17, 2013)

jrista said:


> zim said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...



If I recall correctly, at least in the US...the sound was MANDATED by law, to foil upskirt photographers that were taking pics of chicks walking around in skirts without them knowing.

Apparently enough of a ruckus was raised and it was mandated that cameras on phones make a sound when they were activated.

C


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 17, 2013)

I have to concur that Win-8 sucks big time on a desktop. Metro has no business on a PC machine...

but on a tablet device or a phone, Its far better than my Iphone. The only reason I haven't jumped ship is that the more and more stuff you buy on itunes and the app store, the more it ties you down on the system.  I couldn't switch if I wanted too with all my purchases.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 17, 2013)

jrista said:


> DanielW said:
> 
> 
> > I guess I'd like to keep things separated while batteries have just enough juice for one day on those huge screen phones. I'd rather shoot as much as I like, use the flash as much as I like, without having to think if I can get through the day. (These things change rather quickly, though.)
> ...


 
Although I'm not a smart phone user, I bought my son a smartphone for his birthday last weekend. He and I looked at the Samsung, Nokia, Motorola and Apple phones and the Nokia windows phones were very good, the display was excellent. 

I ended up buying him a used iphone for a couple of reasons.
1. I did not want to be tied to a contract.
2. He has been using a ipod for several years and has a big investment in music, which would be difficult to transfer to a different device.

If not for that, the Samsung Galaxy S4 and the Nokia phones are at the top of the class.

Although the average phone buyer does not place the camera at the top of his list of priorities, buyers are certainly aware of the camera capability, and those who are photographers are even more particular.

I went to my aunts 90th birthday and took the iphone along to try it out. Although under the indoor conditions, it certainly could not compete with a DSLR, or even a good point and shoot, it did a passable job in the situation, the main issue being the low shutter speed which caused a slight blur.


----------



## bchernicoff (Jul 17, 2013)

I thought this was a good read on the camera module: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/07/15/nokia_lumia_1020_technical_walkthrough/


----------



## jrista (Jul 17, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> I have to concur that Win-8 sucks big time on a desktop. Metro has no business on a PC machine...
> 
> but on a tablet device or a phone, Its far better than my Iphone. The only reason I haven't jumped ship is that the more and more stuff you buy on itunes and the app store, the more it ties you down on the system.  I couldn't switch if I wanted too with all my purchases.



It did, I agree. I think Windows 8.1 fixes most of that, though. It still isn't ideal, but a hell of a lot better than what it was. That's Microsoft's MO, though. It always takes a couple versions for quirks to iron out. Also, keep in mind, people utterly HATED Windows XP when it first hit (I remember reading scathing, hateful articles months and months after its initial release), and it was over a year before it became the most used and most loved Windows OS ever. I don't suspect things will be any different for Windows 8...and it is a hell of a lot better release than Windows Vista was (so the next major release should be a pretty significant improvement even over Win8.1).

Microsoft has a different release MO. Apple builds up an unquenchable fervor by not releasing ANY details about its releases until the day they unveil. (Well, they did....seems that may change under Cook, and I guess we'll see whether that is to the detriment of apple in the long term.) Microsoft has always approached releases with lots of software leaks, beta versions, community technology previews, etc. I think that can be good and bad, but these days, it seems it gives people too much time to play with new products before they are even released, encounter all the pre-release bugs, and decide they don't like the product. I would prefer Microsoft take the old Apple/Jobs approach. Don't release anything until its done, and when its released, make sure its solid, and make it a big party. They wouldn't lose people in the beta and CTP phase that way, they wouldn't get a bunch of pre-release bad press, and they would gain the benefit of people being antsy and excited to see and use the next greatest Microsoft thing. People just end up bored with the bugs before new Windows versions are actually released, the excitement is gone, so the release suffers, and it takes longer to build momentum. 

Maybe the MS reorg will change things...but I don't really trust Ballmer to be anything other than a raging tool...so....


----------



## distant.star (Jul 17, 2013)

cayenne said:


> If I recall correctly, at least in the US...the sound was MANDATED by law, to foil upskirt photographers that were taking pics of chicks walking around in skirts without them knowing.
> 
> Apparently enough of a ruckus was raised and it was mandated that cameras on phones make a sound when they were activated.
> 
> C



That can't possibly be law/regulation. I have a Canon Powershot A1200 that has a fully silent shutter mode. No noise whatsoever. Canon would not sell a product that did not comply with law.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 17, 2013)

jrista said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > I have to concur that Win-8 sucks big time on a desktop. Metro has no business on a PC machine...
> ...



Windows 2000/NT - Good

Windows ME - Bad

Windows XP - Good

Windows Vista - Bad

Windows 7 - Good

Windows 8 - Bad

Windows 9 - ? Fill the blank.

I love M$ products but not when they revamp something the first time. The second attempt is usually perfect.


----------



## jrista (Jul 17, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



Yup, that's pretty much it!  It would be nice if it became:

Windows 9: Good
Windows 10: Good
.
.
.
Windows N: Good

I get the feeling it will probably be more along the lines of : 

Windows 8: So-So
Windows 8.1: Better
Windows 8.2: Even Better
Windows 8.5: Good
Windows 9: Better than Good
Windows 9.1: Even Better than Good

And if there are six to eight months between each release, then reaching Even Better than Good could take years. Assuming they don't end up continuing to flipflop.


----------



## cayenne (Jul 17, 2013)

distant.star said:


> cayenne said:
> 
> 
> > If I recall correctly, at least in the US...the sound was MANDATED by law, to foil upskirt photographers that were taking pics of chicks walking around in skirts without them knowing.
> ...



I was only talking towards camera phones...


----------



## cayenne (Jul 17, 2013)

jrista said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...



I think windows 8.x would be likely received MUCH better, if they would give the user the choice, especially with respect to a real computer (laptop/tower) to completely divorce the Metro UI from the system and allow you to go fully and ONLY into a classic desktop only paradigm.

I think that's largely the main gripe about it, trying to use a tablet UI on a desktop (even if it had touch, not many want to keep their arms up off the desk a lot, constantly touching the screen)....

I hear Win8 is pretty snappy and does good things with memory management, but if they don't allow classic computer users to turn Metro OFF, I think they're gonna lose business. People are NOT in a rush to migrate off Win7, businesses certainly aren't going to migrate, heck, they're just now coming off XP still in many cases.

I mean, look at Apple...they don't have the same OS on the tablet/phone that they have on the computer...iOS vs OSX...different beasts. Sure, they are converging to some extent, but not to the same extent MS tried with Win8.

My $0.02,

cayenne


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 17, 2013)

^-------- My gripe with apple is this. In 2006, Ditched all my Apple computers for my first PC build thats still doing work for me today.

Buy a new Idevice, It needs a new itunes.
New Itunes needs a new OSX.
New OSX requires a New Machine.
Old Programs will not run on new OSX.
Buy new programs for the new OSX.
Rinse and Repeat every 24 months.

OSX - Windows - Linux. Pick your poison.

:|


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 17, 2013)

cayenne said:


> I think windows 8.x would be likely received MUCH better, if they would give the user the choice, especially with respect to a real computer (laptop/tower) to completely divorce the Metro UI from the system and allow you to go fully and ONLY into a classic desktop only paradigm.
> 
> I think that's largely the main gripe about it, trying to use a tablet UI on a desktop (even if it had touch, not many want to keep their arms up off the desk a lot, constantly touching the screen)....
> 
> ...


 
I have Windows 8, and I agree, turning Metro off would work for me, I have no intention of buying a 27 or 30 inch touch screen, its impractical to hold up my hands in any event.


Right now, there is a simple solution, its called Start 8 and costs $5.00. It does away with the Metro screen, you boot right into the legacy screen, and the start menu is back!

A relative, who is a Microsoft manager also uses start 8 on all his PC's, it works very well.

On a tablet or cell phone, windows 8 is fine.


----------



## jrista (Jul 17, 2013)

cayenne said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



Why? Seriously, Why?

There are several reasons I don't see any reason to do that. First, if you don't want the new start menu, then you might as well stick with Windows 7. If you want that kind of desktop, then there is very little benefit to moving to Windows 8. Aside from doing away with a lot of the more fancy glass effects, which improve performance a smidge, and a slightly faster boot time...Windows 8 in desktop mode is nearly identical to Windows 7 in desktop mode. There isn't any compelling reason to move to Windows 8 if you loath the new Metro UI that much.

Second, Microsoft has long had the desire to move to a 2D immersive, interactive experience. They started with the "Office 2019" videos from a few years ago, and recently have a few new ones. For the latest, see the following link and click "Future Vision":

http://www.microsoft.com/office/labs/index.html

You can see the older videos here:

http://blogs.technet.com/b/next/archive/2011/10/25/looking-back-on-2019.aspx#.Ueb_kI3bPzw

There are some awesome concepts in those videos. The ubiquitous touch integration on all 2D surfaces, phones, tablets, and other devices that work in harmony, and allow instant transfer of data and responsibility, etc. I really want that. I can't wait until I can tap my phone on my glass coffee table in my living room, and see the days photos, my schedule, etc. all in a clean, pristine 2D touch interface. Windows 8 is the first real stepping stone I've seen towards this vision from Microsoft...and they first started releasing the Offie 2019 videos at least five or six years ago.

The way people complain about the new 2D UI...I think its just the fact that it is new and uncomfortable. I know too many people who have seen Corning's videos of ubiquitous touch computing, and said they would love such a thing...then say they hate Windows 8. Well, hey....pretty much ANY of the Office future concept UIs could be created on Windows 8 today. The parallax scrolling seen in the corporate agriculture apps could be done right now (actually, its already done on the Office Future Vision site I linked above, and it performs like fluid glass on IE10). The transfer of responsibility can already be done today with XBox Glass, which allows you to either remotely control an XBox, or transfer responsibility for playback of music or video from a tablet to a TV. And all people can do is complain about it. Sorry, but that just boggles my mind. 

It's just a matter of time before better apps find their way into the Windows Store. Some already are...some of the fitness apps are already getting quite good (i.e. FitBit), and offer very advanced interactive UIs. I think it is also just a matter of time before the kind of advanced manufacturing and agriculture apps find their way into real-world corporations. They just need people to have the vision for them, and to develop them. I don't know when ubiquitous touch computing finds its way into tabletops, windows, walls, etc., but I can't wait.



cayenne said:


> I think that's largely the main gripe about it, trying to use a tablet UI on a desktop (even if it had touch, not many want to keep their arms up off the desk a lot, constantly touching the screen)....



I agree a bit here, touch shouldn't be the primary mode of interaction for a desktop. I think Windows 8.1 has already fixed a lot of that, and even that being said, Windows 8 started out with very good mouse and keyboard support. You never HAD to use touch for the start screen...it has always supported mouse and keyboard. For that matter, it also has great support for a remote control...I use Windows 8 on my Media PC, and use the remote to move around the tiles and run programs. The remote works well in most Microsoft Win8 apps as well...for example, I just hit the left or right buttons to scroll through news articles, up and down to scroll through emails, etc.

I think the complaints about the new start screen not working on a desktop are overblown. I also think that Microsoft has done a poor job educating new users how easy it is to use the mouse to control the new UI. Closing an app, for example, often baffles people. It is actually a simple gesture...point to top of screen, click and hold, drag to bottom. It's a simple, fluid motion once you know it exists...most people don't...and that's the real problem. It's one of Microsofts fundamental problems...they have a severe gap in helping their users KNOW how to use their OS.



cayenne said:


> I hear Win8 is pretty snappy and does good things with memory management, but if they don't allow classic computer users to turn Metro OFF, I think they're gonna lose business. People are NOT in a rush to migrate off Win7, businesses certainly aren't going to migrate, heck, they're just now coming off XP still in many cases.



In Windows 8.1, you can't entirely decouple yourself from Metro, but you can get pretty close. You can boot directly into the classic desktop now, and do everything you used to do...with the exception that the restored start button still brings up the start screen, rather than the classic start menu. There are a myriad of third-party tools (really just registry hacks) that restore the classic start menu. You can do that, if that's what you want...but again, Why? You might as well stick with Windows 7 until it EOLs if that's really how you feel. If you are entirely uninterested in moving into a new era of computing, it isn't like Microsoft is holding a gun to your head. 



cayenne said:


> I mean, look at Apple...they don't have the same OS on the tablet/phone that they have on the computer...iOS vs OSX...different beasts. Sure, they are converging to some extent, but not to the same extent MS tried with Win8.
> 
> My $0.02,
> 
> cayenne



I guess I think that the dual-platform nature of Windows 8 is its strength against iOS. I think that is how most people feel as well. Windows RT is largely a flop. People don't WANT just Windows Metro, even just on a tablet. People, including myself, explicitly held out for Surface Pro, because we WANT that dual nature. I really love it. I waited years for the ability to run Lightroom on a tablet out in the middle of nowhere Colorado, where I can tether my DSLR to my fully mobile, fully featured PC that neatly rests in the palms of my hands, and effectively get a large screen view camera out of a lowly Canon 7D. I didn't need any extra accessories, custom cables, or anything like that to get it working, either. Personally, I think that is a highly valuable thing. That's something no other company has offered me yet, not even Apple.


----------



## magic koala (Jul 17, 2013)

I actually like my HTC Windows Phone. The interface is consistent and simple and it is much easier to use than an Android phone (try giving an Android phone to somebody 60+ and over, I feel the Android phones are more for the tech-customizable-oriented people). I like the simplicity of iPhones as well but I think the Windows phones are quite easy to use. My HTC phone is also a lot thinner, lighter than the iPhone, and the LCD is fantastic. Battery life, admittedly, is so-so but I've just learned to have a lot of USB chargers laying around. Also their speech recognition still needs some work (as compared to Android - man, it is good).

As far as the camera capabilities, I think most people will admit that iPhone cameras can produce very good pics and even the camera in my HTC phone can produce great colors and picture quality - good enough for me to point on a monitor and ask people which one was taken by a DSLR and which one by phone (obviously we're talking outdoor pics). Sometimes I even use my phone as a lighting source when I want to take pics inside a dimly lit place. I just turn on the flashlight app, get a white paper napkin for diffusion and there you go.

I've always wondered why we don't have phones with the thickness of a Canon S95 and a proper zoom lens. I'd put that in a small case on my belt. It'd just be a multi-purpose device. Sorta like a p&s but you can have it upgraded to be a phone - linked to your regular cellular carrier.

Not sure why we would pick one brand over another - most cellphone makers wouldn't be in biz if they didn't perform to a minimum. Most of us switch cellphones as often as 6 months to one year so I just pick the model that has the right OS, price point and features.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 17, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



Actually they are all sort of bad. It's a shame stuff like AmigaOS and such are forgotten and stuff like Windows hangs around.

Anyway, the above list is sort of accurate, but they also never did anything as radically silly as trying to think that a tablet interface is ideal for desktop usage. Like we really want to smear greasy fingers all over photo-editing monitors or hold arms up and lean up to reach 24-36" monitors (or worse if you hook it to an HDTV too).


----------



## jrista (Jul 17, 2013)

magic koala said:


> I actually like my HTC Windows Phone. The interface is consistent and simple and it is much easier to use than an Android phone (try giving an Android phone to somebody 60+ and over, I feel the Android phones are more for the tech-customizable-oriented people). I like the simplicity of iPhones as well but I think the Windows phones are quite easy to use. My HTC phone is also a lot thinner, lighter than the iPhone, and the LCD is fantastic. Battery life, admittedly, is so-so but I've just learned to have a lot of USB chargers laying around. Also their speech recognition still needs some work (as compared to Android - man, it is good).
> 
> As far as the camera capabilities, I think most people will admit that iPhone cameras can produce very good pics and even the camera in my HTC phone can produce great colors and picture quality - good enough for me to point on a monitor and ask people which one was taken by a DSLR and which one by phone (obviously we're talking outdoor pics). Sometimes I even use my phone as a lighting source when I want to take pics inside a dimly lit place. I just turn on the flashlight app, get a white paper napkin for diffusion and there you go.
> 
> ...



Speech recognition in Windows Phone 8 is phenomenal. It isn't as interactive as Siri, but it is flawless, and even works in noisy environments now. If you haven't tried it, its worth messing with a Windows Phone 8 device in a store somewhere...the voice control, voice texting, etc. is pretty nice.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 17, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Actually they are all sort of bad.



That's a bold statement.


----------



## jrista (Jul 17, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Actually they are all sort of bad. It's a shame stuff like AmigaOS and such are forgotten and stuff like Windows hangs around.
> 
> Anyway, the above list is sort of accurate, but they also never did anything as radically silly as trying to think that a tablet interface is ideal for desktop usage. Like we really want to smear greasy fingers all over photo-editing monitors or hold arms up and lean up to reach 24-36" monitors (or worse if you hook it to an HDTV too).



I'm curious if the assumption, that you MUST use touch to use the start screen, is a common one. The start screen is not inherently touch only. You can use Windows 8 without touch, and it works just fine. There is no reason to touch a screen in order to be capable of using the new start screen. If that is what most people think, then I guess it is no wonder that people aren't buying Windows 8. 

I'd also point out that it works even better on an HDTV. I have Win8.1 on my Media PC, attached to a 46" Samsung. I use the standard Media PC remote to control it, along with a companion Logitech T650 touchpad for supporting any of the gestures (which, I'd add, is fully compatible with any desktop, allowing you to take advantage of the touch interaction without needing to ever touch a screen, if that kind of think irks you.)


----------



## magic koala (Jul 17, 2013)

jrista said:


> magic koala said:
> 
> 
> > I actually like my HTC Windows Phone. The interface is consistent and simple and it is much easier to use than an Android phone (try giving an Android phone to somebody 60+ and over, I feel the Android phones are more for the tech-customizable-oriented people). I like the simplicity of iPhones as well but I think the Windows phones are quite easy to use. My HTC phone is also a lot thinner, lighter than the iPhone, and the LCD is fantastic. Battery life, admittedly, is so-so but I've just learned to have a lot of USB chargers laying around. Also their speech recognition still needs some work (as compared to Android - man, it is good).
> ...



I do like the speech recognition but it could be better. For example, I was in the post office with two friends - one with Android and one with iPhone. I had the windows phone. My friend was getting stamps for xmas cards so for fun, we all pulled out our phones and asked our phones: how much is xmas card postage? The android and iphone responded with some dollar value: 40 or 50 cents or something like that. My phoen's answer: Kardashian.

But for the most part, it does work very well.


----------



## cayenne (Jul 18, 2013)

jrista said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > Actually they are all sort of bad. It's a shame stuff like AmigaOS and such are forgotten and stuff like Windows hangs around.
> ...



I think the gripe is, like with my other statements....that they didn't keep touch on TOUCH products (phones, tablets, etc)....they tried forcing the same paradigm on real computers too, ones people use a mouse and keyboard with, especially for work/business where a tablet isn't going to cut it.

Metro should have a 100% on/off switch setting for desktops and laptops that don't have or need touch...THAT alone would have made Win8 more successful.

I'm glad you like it...I do computer work for a living (contract consultant specializing in Oracle database admin), and I can tell you anecdotally (sp?) from anyone I work with in the industry, not a single one likes Win8, and if they have purchased a new computer lately that came with Win8, they quickly either put Win7 or Linux on it.

Some have played with it on tablets, and some say its ok, I don't see much enthusiasm for it one way or the other.

But in business, which *is* the majority of MS's business, you're not going to see much further adoption past the Win7 version, until they can fully divorce metro from the workspace....at a minumum, the cost of retraining people for this adds a lot to the bottom line (the reason why Linux is in the server room, and not the desktop for many businesses). It just doesn't fit into the business world of workers....especially if the business is hard core IT.

LOL..hell, many in the business world still don't like the ribbon interface (self included), and that has been out for awhile....but it works.



But, that's another thread... 

C


----------



## jrista (Jul 18, 2013)

cayenne said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > LetTheRightLensIn said:
> ...



Well, just a note...I am in the same industry. I design software architecture and develop enterprise level software. In my experience, a blanket statement that "not a _single_ one" is unrealistic. I know a lot of people who moved to Windows 8 the day it was available at a company of over 40,000 people. I also know some people who reverted to Windows 7. Some of them stuck with Win7, some ended upgrading again to Win8.1. The rest, well, they just stick with their iPad. 

I also think the notion that much "training" is really needed is grasping at straws. The company I work for now has already started rolling out Win8. Our customers companies are shifting quickly to Win8 as well, the majority from WinXP (skipping right past Win7). Assuming one never uses a metro app, Windows 8 is little different than any prior version of Windows since 95. The only real "training" that needs to be done is on the new start screen...and it really only takes the average person about five minutes to figure that one out. See a tile, click a tile. (Oh, sorry, it only really takes about 2 seconds!)

There are also additional enterprise features in Windows 8.1 that allow it to be just as fully controlled as any other version of windows by a central admin team. Hell, for certain kinds of use cases, it is possible to lock down a single metro app in "kiosk" mode...which could be useful to maintain a certain app for say reception, a different one for sales, a third for customer support, etc. Give it a couple more minor versions, and I see plenty of enterprise-ready functionality filtering into Windows 8. Again, this is the first release. Microsoft hasn't moved away from their flip-flop yet, so I suspect companies are still waiting for Windows 9 before they upgrade from Windows 7....regardless of the facts.


----------



## northbyten (Jul 29, 2013)

Windows 8.1 is better than Win 8 and I wish people could use it just to see that it's a far better product.

WP8 works perfectly for me and it's your choice whether you like WP8 or not, no need to push your opinion on others.


----------



## danski0224 (Jul 29, 2013)

I would really like to get the Lumia 1020, but in the USA the only carrier option right now is AT&T.

No thanks. Not really a smart move on Nokia's part if they want to sell devices.

I haven't really dug deeply into getting an unlocked version, but so far I haven't found anything definitive that indicates that all features on a US spec unlocked phone (especially LTE) would work on T-Mobile.

I have not been impressed with the iPhones.

The latest top Android offerings from HTC and Samsung both seem to have their issues.

The last new release handset I purchased, the HTC Amaze, burned me with poor bluetooth performance. T-Mobile never corrected the problem and I eventually had to get rid of the phone. I really liked the camera on that phone.

I've been using a Sensation for almost 2 years and right now I'm considering Cyanogen now that there is a stable release and all features work.

I tried Windows phones in the past and still own a HD2, but the MS support there was lacking.

T-Mobile has eliminated the "subsidized" phone pricing so you pay full retail for a new phone. Granted, it is over time and the plan pricing reduction seems to work out to be the same. Even so, these current model smartphones clock in at ~$500 a pop, plus ~$100 a month to use. It's getting to be a bit much and I wish they were more durable.


----------



## cayenne (Jul 29, 2013)

northbyten said:


> ...... no need to push your opinion on others.



Isn't that kind of a necessary part of having a conversation?

If no opinions are "pushed"....this forum is gonna get mighty quiet.


----------

