The 808 PureView utilizes pixel binning to output 8MP or 5MP resulting images, and it did that long prior to it became the default method of capturing pictures on mobile phones some 7 or 8 years later. Naturally, a full-resolution option is likewise provided, even if you need to work your way through the menus to get there. Focusing is also part of the package, though technically its just cropping the center portion of the sensing unit.

Introduction

Having the phone in our hands, and well mindful of the reputation it has in the comments section of the majority of photography-centric smartphone evaluations here, we figured a brief shootout was in order – think about it as The 808 PureView versus The Year 2021 Cameraphones.

Since we cant do a contrast between the Nokia and every smartphone thats come out in the past 6 months (for reasonable reasons), weve picked a model to represent the cutting-edge and its just natural for that to be our current Editors choice for finest cameraphone, the Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra.

The Mi 11 Ultra, on the other hand, is equipped with a 50MP 1/1.12- inch sensing unit on its primary camera, once again with 1.4 µm photosites. The lens in front if it has a 24mm focal length equivalent and an aperture of f/1.95.

This sensing unit does use a Quad Bayer filter range and outputs 4-to-1 binned images at around 12.5 MP. It also does an impressive job of short-range zooming in by cropping the center portion and demosaicking it in a different way for the job. The again, the Mi does likewise have a magnificent 5x telephoto. And a similarly remarkable ultrawide electronic camera. The Nokia has neither. But thats not what were here for.

The Xiaomi is especially appropriate for this head-to-head due to the fact that its the design that dismisses the 808 Pureview as the smart device with the biggest camera sensor (we d rather not count the Panasonic Lumix CM1 with its 1.0″ sensing unit, since we see it as more of an electronic camera with some phone performance than the other method around).

For a quick pointer, the Nokia has a 41MP 1/1.2- inch sensing unit with 1.4 µm pixels and a conventional Bayer color filter selection (instead of the ruling Quad Bayer designs). It was a multi-aspect sensor – indicating that it uses different portions of the imager for the different element ratios with the absolute corners staying outside of the image circle predicted by the lens and unused. The lens has an f/2.4 aperture and a field of view that matches that of a Galaxy S21, so a focal length comparable around 26mm. It lacks OIS, however.

We just recently took a short nostalgia trip with the Nokia 808 PureView after we stumbled upon a still fully functional unit nearly by mishap (not truly, we particularly headed out searching for one). We covered it in a video, going over a few of the firsts and bests it carried out in 2012 – here it is, if you missed it.

Were here to compare the big-sensor video camera of the 2012 Nokia 808 PureView versus the even-bigger-sensor primary electronic camera of 2021 Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra. We shot the Nokia in Creative mode to be able to access the 8MP 4:3 resolution and element, in addition to the full-res 38MP setting. The Xiaomi we kept in Photo mode for the 12.5 MP images (at both 1x and 2x zoom), switching to 50MP for full resolution samples.

Daylight image quality

The Xiaomi counters with superior tonal advancement at both extremes and more enthusiastic color performance without always poking your eyes out. And about that organic performance of great information, the Mi 11 Ultra is in fact a great example of things done right, providing a determined technique to honing that brings natural-looking branches and grass shoots. Oh, and noise is not a thing on the Mi.

Daytime samples, binned (8MP/12.5 MP): Nokia 808 PureView – Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

Daytime samples, binned (8MP/12.5 MP): Nokia 808 PureView – Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

Were finding the PureView default direct exposure a little too dark with shadows and lower midtones needing an increase. Dynamic variety is usually good, though in particularly challenging high-contrast scenes like the iPhone mural, the 808 cant quite cope. Color reproduction is accurate, but restrained in regards to saturation (thats in the default Normal mode, Vivid includes a bit more life, but its not a remarkable distinction).

The Xiaomi preserves some benefits in the high-resolution mode. The 808s images get noisier here, while the Ultras actually do not. That stated, the 2 phones have to do with on par when it concerns pixel-level detail.

In broad daytime, the Nokia 808 PureView catches okay 8MP images, even 8+ years later on. They do have excellent level of information and its rendered in an extremely natural manner in which the majority of contemporary phones cant manage. Even binned, these do have a fine grain to them – not disturbing sound, however a texture of grit where there isnt any.

That might be discussed by the Nokia sensing units routine Bayer color filter range which enables it to catch finer details than the Quad Bayer design of the Xiaomi, to which it replies with a handful more pixels and a decade of R&D eventually night things out. Were still in favor of the Mis direct exposure and tonal curve practices.

Daytime samples, full resolution (38MP/50MP): Nokia 808 PureView – Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

Daylight samples, zoom (2.5x-ish/ 2x): Nokia 808 PureView – Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

The Xiaomi hardly has an edge here in detail, though at first glimpse it does appear to be notably sharper – while the Nokias images are hazier, we cant indicate an information that the Mi fixes and the 808 doesnt. The Mis shots do have much better meaning and micro-contrast. In general, the Nokia does an excellent job of zooming in, therefore does the Mi 11 Ultra with its main cam, even without turning to its actual telephoto.

The Nokia maxes out at around 2.5 x zoom (60-ish mm equivalent) when in 8MP mode and we figured we d compare that versus the 2x mode on the Xiaomi even though its much shorter at just under 50mm equivalent, simply due to the fact that its simple to gain access to from the viewfinder. Plus, thanks to the difference in resolution, the topics have about the exact same size in the frame at these zoom levels.

Low-light image quality

Mind you, on the Nokia we experienced substantial flare from point lights which might be due to our systems age and the condition of its lenses, though we couldnt identify scratches on the instantly noticeable lens aspects or cover glass.

In low light, the Nokia can barely put up a battle. It has a hard time to expose anywhere near vibrantly adequate in dark scenes, while better-lit facades can have big locations of burnt out highlights around light sources. Desaturation is likewise prevalent.

The Xiaomi, on the other hand, provides outstanding vibrant range even in hard scenes and handles to expose for much darker scenes too, extracting detail where the Nokia catches just pure black. Color recreation is also better, with no loss of saturation to speak of.

As a sidenote unrelated to the contrast here, but quite related to the Mis color science, were seeing a notable improvement in the way the Mi 11 Ultra deals with warm light sources and theres no indication of the strong orange cast that we observed at review time.

Not that we d generally shoot in full-res mode in the evening, however we took a number of samples at 38MP/50MP for the sake of this contrast. While the Xiaomis processing cant quite do its thing at this resolution in regards to vibrant range, its still way ahead of the Nokia. The Ultras pictures are likewise sharper, much better comprehensive, and a lot cleaner.

Low-light samples, binned (8MP/12.5 MP): Nokia 808 PureView – Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

Low-light samples, complete resolution (38MP/50MP): Nokia 808 PureView – Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

Video quality

The Nokia is underequipped to properly contend with the Mi 11 Ultra when it comes to video recording The PureView tops out at 1080p/30fps catch, while the Xiaomi can go all the way to 8K/24fps, though 4K at 30fps is a much more practical shooting mode whichs what we utilized for this head-to-head. We compared the 2 phones both in daytime and during the night.

Zooming in, things are a lot like in full-resolution mode – the Xiaomi leads in quite much all locations consisting of vibrant variety, information and noise efficiency.

The Nokias vibrant variety is likewise not a match for what the Xiaomi can extract out of the scene leaving highlights on the vibrantly lit facades clipped to white, while the Mi 11 ultra has managed to maintain information there. The Nokias color performance is rather lifeless beside the punchier and more likeable Xiaomi video.

Theres only a lot information that the Nokia can catch in its 1080p resolution and its no place near the level of fine textures that the Xiaomi records. That said, as 1080p clips go, the Nokias are reasonably well detailed, even by todays standards.

Low-light samples, zoom (2.5x-ish/ 2x): Nokia 808 PureView – Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

Daytime video sample frame grabs: Nokia 808 PureView – Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

Thats real in our minds for the daylight still shots, though we can imagine there d be those that insist that the 808 takes photographically pure-er images, while the modern ways of the Xiaomi may be too … meaningful in regards to color, whatnot, contrast, or exposure. As for daylight video, the Nokias 1080p capture is fine, its just that 1080p isnt enough.

Were here to compare the big-sensor cam of the 2012 Nokia 808 PureView against the even-bigger-sensor main video camera of 2021 Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra. In broad daytime, the Nokia 808 PureView captures all right 8MP images, even 8+ years later on. The Xiaomi hardly has an edge here in detail, however at very first look it does appear to be significantly sharper – while the Nokias images are hazier, we cant point to a detail that the Mi deals with and the 808 doesnt. In general, the Nokia does an excellent task of zooming in, and so does the Mi 11 Ultra with its primary cam, even without resorting to its actual telephoto.

In low light, the Nokia cant expose anywhere near brightly adequate and captures basically a black frame with the occasional vehicle headlights showing up. Mind you, it wasnt yet entirely dark at the time of shooting these samples, as the navy skies in the Xiaomi clip program.

We practically believed we d just discard the videos and images and leave them with no commentary, however its most likely worth saying a couple of words about how things have actually progressed for many years. While we do think its obvious, we d still like to have in writing that the Xiaomi takes hands down the exceptional pictures and videos.

Last words

Here a couple of frame grabs from the above videos for quicker comparison, followed by the 1:1 crops for an even more instant illustration of the differences.

While the Xiaomis processing cant quite do its thing at this resolution in terms of vibrant range, its still way ahead of the Nokia.

Moving into the night, its beyond a shadow of a doubt that the 8+ years that split the two phones have actually brought huge improvements in low-light photography and video recording – both on a hardware level and in terms of software and processing. Nokia was actually ahead of its time with the 808 PureView cam.

Low-light video sample frame grabs: Nokia 808 PureView – Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra.