No they aren't even close to a quality compact camera. You are either delusional or not knowledgeable on cameras.
Did I say quality? No, cheap DSLR. Plus, the Nokia shoots in camera RAW as well. Maybe you don't know Nokia... http://blog.gsmarena.com/nokia-lumi...inst-a-canon-60d-dslr-nokia-comes-out-on-top/ http://www.wpcentral.com/nokia-shows-perks-using-lumia-1020-over-dsrl http://wmpoweruser.com/nokia-lumia-1020-vs-canon-rebel-xs-dslr-video-review/ If you'd like more references I'm sure I could find more. The 41 MP sensor with Zeis optics and Pure View might not put your Canon out to pasture, but it can hold its own rather nicely.
Did I say DSLR? No, I said compact. I threw in a DSLR for yuks. This is just a comparison of sensors. The lens on a compact has an optical zoom and is much higher quality because of the space restrictions on a phone. I don't understand why this isn't common sense.
The 6D is not a cheap DSLR. If you looked at the source I referenced the 60 D. Big difference (almost $1200 difference). Also, looking at your reference, the 1020 can hold its own quite well against your compact camera. I'm not sure what you're arguing anymore? The s120 retails for almost $500, the 1020 is right around the same price point, with similar specs and is also a phone. Hmmm...
"1020 are at the entry level of some DSLRs". I quoted that. That was wrong. The 1020 isn't even close to a compact camera much less a DSLR. It doesn't hold its own quite well. It gets destroyed in every mark. I was being kind because the sensor of the 1020 is the strong point considering a good lens takes up space. I was also being kind by not using a RX100 as reference. You have now said "Yeah the camera isn't as good as even a compact but YOU GET A PHONE". OK great. A compact isn't close to a DSLR and a phone isn't close to a compact. Common sense for most people.
By your vary own source it as good as a compact camera! Also, at the score it received from DXO mark (which is where you got the data from) it also has the same score to Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ70 and the Canon Powershot S90 that was rated at a 46! Your not even looking at the data you're presenting (nor the data I presented) and you're making a comment. It's comical if it wasn't depressing.
You say it is better than a compact camera because the sensor performance (not total performance of the camera) is on par with a CCD sensor camera made almost 5 years ago in the Canon S90? That is your proof? So really your claim has changed from it is on par with a DSLR to it has a sensor that is as good as a 5 year old compact? You realize when the S90 came out camera phones couldn't even focus? When FOCUS was introduced that was a big deal. So to get this straight, you have dropped the DSLR comparison and moved to a 5 year old compact comparison correct? Why not just say it has a good camera for a phone?
Like I said, you didn't even look at my sources. I showed two different links comparing it to the Canon 60D and the Rebel XS. You chose not to look at them. I changed the focus to compact cameras because you didn't even address the 60D or the rebel. You threw out an $1800 camera assuming that was a cheap DSLR and moved forward. Also, I found this: http://www.dxomark.com/Mobiles/Noki...-Are-mobiles-comparable-to-compacts-and-DSLRs There are compacts and DSLR's that beat it, there is no doubt in my mind, but it is completely fair to put it in a category beating out some compacts and cheap DSLRs as well.
When I need an awesome camera, I use my DSLR. My mobile device camera is just sufficient for most basic needs. I love the Nokia camera but not enough to sacrifice the rest of the experience.
Do you get paid to spam microsoft products in every thread? You and a few other posters sure love microsofts d.
I'm tired of this. Everyone sees how shill you are. I have an old Canon 60d. If you want me to dust it off to compare it directly to your ****ing camera phone give me an email. that means the sensor isn't as good as a compact. The lens is OBVIOUSLY not as good.
It is somewhat important to shoot down the Nokia claims because although it is a marginally better camera than the iphone, it isn't to the level of a dedicated camera. So at the end of the day it is still a camera phone.
Yes smartphone cameras have made huge strides but they are not comparable to decent compacts much less higher end compacts and dSLRs. The sensors inside smartphones are TINY. You cant over come physics.
So...what's a great bang for the buck dsl or compact camera? I'd like something less than 200 and able to put in pockets
The 1020 sensor is pretty large for last gen compacts but new compacts have 1" sensors. They also stuffed the 1020 with a 42 megapixels to make up for lack of an optical zoom. That makes the image quality degrade.
GET THE FK OUT OF MY IPHONE THREAD! No one gives a sh** about Nokia! If it was that great then morons would buy it. 3% fking marketshare in the US. enough already.
