Shared publicly  - 
 
WOW! A 41-megapixel camera on a phone!
At the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, Nokia has just announced the 808 Pureview, a flagship Symbian device with a 41-megapixel camera.
288
176
Sufyan Mukadam's profile photoOscar Flores Huidobro Vázquez's profile photoRhesa Jonathan's profile photoSoftware y Tecnología's profile photo
173 comments
Ken Gao
+
1
2
1
 
Actually monster.
 
How many pictures can it take before it runs out of memory?
bish s
+
1
2
1
 
+steve varndell With the monster cards that you can buy now-a-days, probably a good many pics! :)
 
Nokia will always be the best , when it comes to stupid rubbish phones ! what a shame..
 
hmmm on a dead-end platform. Just want to know why?
 
41 megapixel camera with 512mb of ram and 16gb of space - translation: 25 minutes to take a photo, camera stores a total of 5 photos. Then you get to see them on stunning 4 inch, 360 x 640 pixel screen.
 
Elop has been over exposed to Ballmer and has contracted Ballmeritis... Symptoms include, stupid, dumb, ridiculous and being bat shit crazy...
 
Up next: the camera that let's you make phone calls!
 
Yeah only slightly overkill. More megapixels doesn't mean a better photo.
 
So you can see each hairs? Sorry not to be rude...
 
+Stuart Duncan And no doubt taking those five photos would kill the battery, so you could probably forget making calls / surfing the web / uploading the pictures afterwards (oh gawd, imagine how long it would take to upload a full-size photo to online storage...) unless you had it hooked up to a portable generator, which kind of defeats the purpose of a mobile phone...
 
+Ben Norwood on a Lumia device and it would tempt many a person, Symbian makes me scratch my head.
 
I am very sceptical - through such a small lens on such a small sensor so many pixel... unless nokia has a completelly new technology, which I doubt
 
I wonder if the camera's just point-and-shoot, or whether it carries any of the customisation settings you'd find on a dedicated camera (e.g. manual / programmed / various priority modes / macro / optical zoom)?
 
Would rather have a larger sensor and better lens. More megapixels doesn't automatically equate to better images. Though maybe they've come up with technology to overcome that.
 
Great specs do not a great phone make. This sounds like a marketing gimmick similar to the comically oversized Galaxy Note. Just another desperate attempt to pull people's eyes away from iPhones.
 
I'd assume unless you were planning to severely crop the resulting picture or print it out on A3 (full size - 1cm borders = 61.8MP @ 600dpi), not many people would need 41 MP (e.g. A4 full sheet no borders = 34.8 MP @ 600dpi, A4 - 1cm borders = 29.4 MP @ 600dpi)
 
Do you know how difficult it is to do anything constructive, quickly, with big image files? And Deborah Green has got it right. Poor lens = poor pics.
 
megapixel is so 00s, it's about lens and sensor
 
Nice but does it still have the issue of being a windows phone?
 
Why not focus on low light performance, no one needs more than 8mp on a phone! This is so ridiculous!
 
yes, but what is your carrier's upload cap?
 
its a 5mp camera with interpolate function. sounds better on the data sheet than it is...
 
That's like a plane with 20 wings...
 
High megapixel = high memory usage. This will just eat up the storage and will do nothing to improve the quality of the picture.
 
This is cool. The end of digital cameras as a stand alone device is near if it is not here already.
 
+Sampath Rajapakse from what I see in the specs, the "7 to 1" is just for the final output. It's not really going to make a better image.

It's using all of the pixels when it takes the photo, even though they are oversampled by the software. Going that route, they give you a 5MP photo, that must have the camera's internal software process all the pixels for the final image. Not much different than using NR software to remove noise, but they also return a 5MP image instead of the full file you would typically get when using NR software.

Seems to me they are simply pandering to the general public that would think that more MP=better pictures.
 
It spits out a 5MP photo using a 41MP lens
 
+Howard Kwong In the page from Nokia it says it then compresses the image to 5MP, so theorically the storage use it the same. I also think there will not be much of an improval.
 
41 Mpixel on a sensor the size of a pinhead, combined with even worse optics ;-)
 
+Sampath Rajapakse you also can't use the D800 to qualify that more MP=better quality. The sensor is that camera is bigger, and in a whole different league compared to the Nokia. It can support a higher MP with less noise than a smaller less advanced sensor would.

That should be apparent by the price difference between the phone and the Nikon.

Edited, changed brand, I meant Nokia not Samsung.
 
This is a bad joke. Such a waste of dynamic range, CPU power(battery), low light capabilities and our memory cards.
 
When my sister told me about it earlier today, I though it was a typo. 41??? Wow...
 
That's actually not that ridiculous as it sounds. It actually makes 5/8MP pictures but for example you can use digital zoom without loosing the quality of the picture. It will just take better photos compared to current mobile phone cameras. I'm pretty sure it won't save 41MP pictures on your phone memory card.
 
It'll be better than the overrated iphone.
 
I think this is more about getting around the limitation of optical zoom in a small form factor than capturing 41MP images. When a 5PM camera uses digital zoom, it decimates (skips pixels) so it's missing a lot and creates extra noise. This uses multiple pixels for improved images, while digital zoom only reduces the multiple, making zoom the same quality as a non-zoomed 5MP image, while macro could be very high quality.
 
Nokia is resorting to gimmicks now. Shame on you Nokia. Google should just buy them
 
Why 41.. Any logic...? It should have been 69.. at least for a fun :)
 
I heard Nokia's shares dropped after the launching of this phone because despite the 41 megapixels, software is old.
 
It takes a pic with a sensor of 41megapixels and Carl Zeiss optics and downsamples it to 5megapixels. In Audio, it's standard practice to record 24bit 96khz and downsample to cd quality. I think it's a brilliant idea.
 
+Sampath Rajapakse Yes I do ;) but practical use is practical use. Let's wait reviews. I prefer better low light, responsiveness and higher shutter speeds.
 
Looks good blows everything out of the water, especially once on a WP8
 
Think this is more of a publicity stunt than about making a decent phone.
 
Um, why? Much beyond 3 MP seems kinda redundant on a phone.
 
If you need to take a high quality photo then get a high quality camera...not a phone.
 
+Ramon Insua In audio, high sample frequencies are problem. In video video there are many photo diodes on the sensor and each photo-diode receives less light due it's size.
That means images are usually more noisy.
so more megapixels = smaller photo diodes = more noise
 
with 512 MB RAM + low resulation screen and one core processor :((
 
Yawn! WHO WANTS THAT????!!!!!!!!
 
+MILOS JANATA In Audio high sample frequencies are the norm. Even if you're uploading to itunes you are asked to upload 24bit96khz files that then get downsampled to what you hear on your ipod. You are still thinking of a 42 megapixel image. This is not the case. It's downsampled to 5mp. Only the best pixels are chosen. Noise is obliterated. Or so Nokia claims... I should think downsampling would be done by hardware and therefore shutter time would be shutter time of a 5mp image.
 
Thanks +Ramon Insua, that makes a whole bunch more sense than it serving up 42 mega pixel images.
 
I'll buy it but only if it has the side talking feature the N-Gage had.
 
WOW 41? thats wayyyy more than my sony!!!! although pixels aren't everything!!!
 
Damn That is a big as* camera! :o
 
+Sampath Rajapakse Absolutely, if noise is low, I will be happy.
+Ramon Insua i work in professional audio area and I can tell You as every other sound engineer that sampling frequencies are total absolute hype and nonsense.
Dynamic range and noise are ten times more important than sampling freq. And this is what I am talking about.

Megapixels won't give you better image, colors, lower noise or blue sky instead of burned white sky. I't actually does the opposite.

This is why Canon 1D has 21 megapixels. It grants it ability to take good professional pictures.
 
41MP is good but it would make the image huge, You would need a good sensor, :)
 
Lets be realistic here; how many people use their camera phone to take photos they want to print on the side of a bus? :P
 
Nokia still makes phones?
 
The image won't be huge because it spits out a 5MP photo
 
People need to read past the headline and get to the article (RTFA)
 
It's a 5MP camera that uses a 41MP lens... Should give you an incredibly detailed, 5MP photo
 
+James Pakele I know, I was just joking. Since they are marketing it as a 41MP camera, the first thing that came to my mind that would actually need such a high res images was when I was interning in an ad agency and they had the printout of a bus-wrap. They were trying to proof the resolution and they were trying to unroll it in the office which was smaller than a bus. I realize that in reality it's just to help reduce noise and produce more clear photos.
 
Wow is right, but why Symbian?
boo Jay
 
When's the Nokia 808 OverKill coming out?
 
+Sampath Rajapakse Maybe manufacturing process is not optimized yet. Perhaps it was pre-production model. I bashed them enough I think :)
 
Will I can see this needing bigger than a 16GB Micro SD card! hmm Medium Format Phone.. what next!
 
" Nokia has made this happen by combining Carl Zeiss optics and Nokia-developed pixel over-sampling technology." In other words it's NOT 41 megapixel but they fake it in software.
 
It seems that It doesn't actually have 41 mp camera. The title is misleading the consumers.
 
That would seem like a case of "wrong pixels chosen" instead of the best ones +MILOS JANATA . But the software isn't final apparently.
 
They don't 'fake it in software', they got around the problem of digital zoom by simply having a huge sensor. Thus means that even if you're set to use regular 5 megapixel, you can comfortably zoom in without losing detail. Obviously a full 41 megapixel image won't be practical.
 
...with terrible specs everywhere else! Talk about a niche phone. Total overkill.
 
Damn its about time someone put a huge ass cam on a awsome phone I'm so happy! Hell this may look better then real life when you look into it
 
what's best mobile right now in market. ? ?
 
Phones have come a long way since I owned my Startac :)
 
Best Mobile on the Market.. Dunno, but I LOVE my Galaxy Note!
 
Over done. Doesn't matter Nokia is going down and out.
 
Nokia has been around for a long time Im sure they wont put this thing out with problems that cant be fixes through firmware updates...but I also suspect the batterylife to suck....
 
what's the point in a 41 mp camera with a lens that size? surely its just massive file sizes and too hi res to do anything sensible with?
 
+Simon O'Rourke Read some of the comments, it's not designed to take 41 MP pictures, but to use the 41 MP camera to take better 5-ish MP pictures.
 
thats pointless but its still prtty sweet
 
Thats just a dumb thing. 41 mp is only needed if you are in space taking pictures of stupidly huge space things.
 
Lol. There's no such thing as a 41 MP lens. Pixels are a measure of size. The lens acts merely as the perspective of that size. Quality in photos comes from the sensor. So if you have a small, or low quality sensor, and a large amount of megapixels, you end up with a HUGE bad photo. Cell phones are NOT going to replace stand alone cameras and they should stop trying.
 
Some of us would like to be able to take decent pictures of our lives without having to carry around a DSLR. Cellphone cameras aren't replacing regular cameras, they're filling a different niche. How many people carried a camera around with them before they were put into cellphones?
 
Too bad it's on a Symbian device. That's like dropping a Vette block into a Neon...
 
High pixels don't imply high quality, it's the other way around. The upper limit on detail is limited by the number of pixels, but the number of pixels captured could be crap for several reasons. One is noise, another is focus, another is low light conditions in which longer exposure time adds blur and renders anything high resolution pointless. There are many other factors that are independent of mega-pixels, like the cutoffs of high and low light levels where brighter or darker data is lost, the speed of the picture taking, ease of control over manual adjustments.

For less expensive cameras, the mega-pixel number has tended to be a gimmick, where cameras that don't otherwise get a good reputation or where the manufacturer doesn't care about preserving their own reputation, will simply do anything in order to technically boast a bigger number, including claim an "effective" number of pixels based on something other than how many sensors there are. (It could be legitimate, but I'd bet it is more often not.)

I'd say the only worse gimmick than number of pixels is digital zoom, which (as far as I can tell) seems to amount to taking each pixel and making it larger, though I suppose a more current approach is to infer the data based on patterns in what the sensors can actually detect, which is probably not even as good as blowing the picture up in picasa. It is still boasting fabricated detail. Though I think theoretically you could get more resolution by taking two pictures in quick succession and combining them. I know this feature already exists for dealing with situations of mixed lighting levels, but I've never heard of it used to boost detail. Has anyone else?
 
+Jason Faulkner You actually do make a valid point. My pet peve is with companies trying to fool people with MP count. That's a game only SLR's can play. They ought to just improve quality, not size. But I do completely understand now, you're right. I'm a photographer, and therefor biased. I always carry around my huge camera (though I'm fine with a quick snap of my phone). And with all that said, the pics didn't look bad. Also, with the "regular" sensor, I'm sure the file sizes aren't THAT bad.
 
Wow! You would have no need for a regular digital camera at all.
 
The sample images are great (for an entry level dSLR) and outstanding for a phone cam. A little bit of C.A. in the corners at 200% in photoshop, but acceptable for A3 or perhaps even LARGER prints. If you crop a small bit on the largest image in the set available then it is certainly good 'enough' for most people. Bye-bye point and shoot cameras.
 
+Sampath Rajapakse +Brian Richman The samples I've seen are good for a camera phone, however all the ones I'm seeing are in the ISO 50-150 range. Most cameras can accomplish that easily enough as noise is hardly an issue at those levels.

I'd really be curious if you, or anyone else, has seen samples at higher ISO ranges, something like 1000+. I would expect the higher ranges is where the camera will fall flat on it's face. While the camera may be able to hold its own against several other camera phones out there, it's not going to eliminate the need for a good dedicated camera. Although that appears to be what Nokia is trying to say with their MP claims...which again makes it more of a marketing ploy and numbers game since the final image isn't even really 41MP.

The other thing that doesn't make any sense (unrelated to the camera) is that this phone is using Symbian. That's the platform they said they were dropping last year. So either they are backtracking that and plan on supporting Symbian (doubtful considering the shrinking marketshare), or you'll be left with a phone that's using an outdated OS out of the gate.
 
For those who are saying it isn't a 41MP picture, the image sizes are 7728x4354. Now --- while the sensor itself is not 41MP, so what? The resulting image dos have the required number of pixels... read the white paper on the Nokia web site.

By the way, it does NOT use a digital zoom in the classic sense, (again as per the white paper), so obviously those who say it is going to be crap are not looking at the images or reading the info. I am looking forward to using one myself...

In photoshop the one with the two climbers on the rock face looks like it will print out nicely to A3 size at 50% scaling, as it is still as good an image as I get from my Nikon D7000. Go figure...
 
+Sampath Rajapakse no, the high pixel only leads to higher resolution, it doesn't increase the quality of the picture. Clear crap, still just crap.
 
+Eric Hege The samples online are all shot in great conditions with high contrast light. That said, even for a cell phone pretending to be a camera, they are pretty good. Certainly up to an entry level dSLR ...

Are they better than my D7000? At 50% size on my 22" calibrated screen, they look like they might be, but going up to 100% and pixel peeping then no, not as good. But then once again, remember that this is a cell phone. Put this kind of sensor tech into a bigger camera body, with bigger (i.e Nikon FX) optics and you'd have a killer machine on your hands.
 
+Brian Richman, I don't think that a comparison with an entry level DSLR is valid, without comparing the two at lower light levels. I've seen several point and shoot cameras that perform as well as a DSLR at ISO 100, but quickly introduce noise as the ISO goes up. I would expect that to be the case here, as they only show "best case" scenarios with their images.

Placing this sort of tech into a bigger body may eliminate this, and I'm not arguing that at all. However, that's really against the scope of this article as we're discussing the camera as it applies to this phone, not the technology itself.

+Sampath Rajapakse, so it would appear that Nokia isn't dropping Symbian support. However, with a greatly diminished marketshare one would wonder how well it truly will be supported. Just because it's officially supported, doesn't mean that they really dedicate much in the way of actual resources. I'm skeptical of that, as right now it's really an Apple vs. Android world. Even the Windows Phone OS stands a better chance than Symbian, which is why Nokia was heading towards Windows.
 
+Eric Hege Yes. I agree. What is needed is a full set of samples shot in all conditions on both this phone and a dSLR/lens that we as individuals know to be able to compare and draw conclusions.

That said, for a cell phone that could cost just a couple of hundred Euro/Dollars/Beer-tokens/Whatever, as an entry level and even a mid level P&S replacement, it'll do just fine.
 
Sup, PR hype? "Pixel Oversampling"... Yawn. So basically, it's a 4mpix CCD, and the software goes, "hey, make each pixel 4,000% larger kthx." Then it tries to save it on that puny 512mb memory, and after two hours, it tells you you just ran out of space. THANKS PR HYPE! :D
 
Yes so needed right cause we all need to see every dot on some ones face that's not even in the picture lol
 
+Pete Perry Yes... I do admit I got carried away with "only the best pixels are chosen" and "noise gets obliterated". LOL
 
great, now you can see the chromatic aberrations more clear
 
Nokia has always had great cameras on their phones. The problem is the rest of the phone has always sucked.
 
Whoa! I can get some good quality skate videos with this. Only if it had 41GHz :D
 
Really, 41-Megapixel or 14-Megapixel ?
 
I see the next Saturday Night Live skit: We don't have 1 Megapixel, not 2 MP, not 3, 4, or 5 MP, but 410,000 megapixels.
 
Yawn. The human eye can really only see 25 megapixels. Factor in screen size, lighting, and what you're actually looking at, this is overkill.
 
no no no ~should say:Wow!A cell phone on a 41-Megapixel Camera!!
Translate
 
Ha. That seems like overkill. 
 
those making fun are dumbass. . .you'll get to know it when reviews fall out in market. ..!..
 
WOW! A 41-megapixel camera on a phone! and a shit lens so you may as well get a 1 MP with a good lens:/
 
As others have said, it would be interesting to test it out in various sub-optimal lighting conditions - testing the write speed would be useful as well (i.e. how often you can take photos at maximum resolution). If, as +Konstantin Stefanov says it combines the output from several adjacent RG&B CCD pixels to form one pixel on the image written to the memory card, then even at 6MP resolution it would probably produce images at that size of better quality than a native 6MP camera or even a 12MP camera in 6MP mode.

No doubt if / when more tech journalists get their hands on it and can take it away for a few days to play with, we'll get more comprehensive / balanced reviews.
 
41mp will look AMAZING uploaded to facebook! ... oh wait...
 
Too bad it won't hit the shelves in countries that are "ready for Windows Phone" aka too modern for Symbian.
 
This is just too much... Better buy a camara than a phone!!
 
How to show to the world how stupid you are: God job Nokia.
 
Most people don't seem to get the point of having 41 MP sensor in phone. In short it means:
1) better digital zooming (which sucks using <= 10 MP sensors)
2) less noise, especially in low light conditions (7 pixels are combined into one)
 
awesome! wish i cud afford it.....but still bzzy tryin to cope wid studies.....
nway....cool phone!
Translate
Add a comment...