Facebook Twitter Flickr

A low light ode to Nokia (808 PureView and Lumia 1020 and 1520, compared to Galaxy S5)

To tell you the truth I’m not sure where to begin this post. I have in fact a few dozens of shots to share with you, taken in several settings with the Nokia 808 PureView, Nokia Lumia 1020, Nokia Lumia 1520 and Samsung Galaxy S5.

It’s the result of a brainwave I had early this morning: I really wanted to share some more low light shots before going on a short holiday, but doing so is pretty hard during daytime.

So I thought of a weird place in my basement. Logically, it’s a few meters below the ground, but there is a very small window just in case you need to get out (a “fox hole” it’s called here I think).

Anyway: that would provide me with what I needed: a very dark place and just a little bit of light. And after reading that Nokia’s handset division is about to become “Microsoft Mobiles” I thought of the subject to capture in that low light as well: a weird collection of old and more or less rare Nokia devices.

Here’s the original scene, captured with the Nokia 808 PureView with flash – so you’ll get an idea about what I’ve been up to before you see the low light results.

Nokia 808 PureView - original scene with flash 2

So that’s quite a remarkable bunch, itsn’t it? It doesn’t belong to me though, I borrowed all from a friend and what you see is far from complete even, but at least it gives me a colorful collage to capture in near darkness.

All shots are handheld. I made several shots with all four devices in all different settings and the best results were selected.

Where to start? The Nokia 808 PureView on ISO 50? Why not. Here’s a resized version of the 38MP result in 16:9 aspect ratio – the 808 PureView needed the full 2.7 seconds (!) to capture this result:

Nokia 808 PureView 16x9 38MP ISO 50

Detail in this shot is quite amazing when you look at the first 640x 360 crop of this post – this is from the 38MP original, with ISO 50 and no less than 2.7 seconds exposure time, handheld and no OIS…

Nokia 808 PureView 4x3 38MP ISO 50

Looks like my heart even stopped beating for 2.7 seconds just to make sure I didn’t move at all :-)

Now, let’s move up to ISO 100, the first choice you have when you’d like to change that on the Lumia’s and Galaxy S5.

Again, let’s begin with the Nokia 808 PureView, this time in 8MP – and demanding me not to move for 1,51 seconds.

Nokia 808 PureView 16x9 8MP ISO 100

 Care for another crop? Here you go – this is from the same 8MP PureView result:

Nokia 808 PureView 16x9 8MP ISO 100

This is quite amazing in my opinion. Let’s see how the Lumia 1020 does on ISO 100, in a surprising 2.31 seconds.

Nokia Lumia 1020 16x9 5MP ISO 100

And the crop. of course, this time from its 5MP result.

Nokia Lumia 1020 16x9 5MP ISO 100

Next, the Nokia Lumia 1520 on ISO 100, needing 1.67 seconds.

Nokia Lumia 1520 16x9 5MP ISO 100

And the crop from the Lumia 1520′s 5MP result on ISO 100 (1.67 second)

Nokia Lumia 1520 16x9 5MP ISO 100

Now let’s compare crops from the high-res results.

Remember I need to make an extra shot for the with the Nokia 808 PureView, but it’s what I promised, so here it is. Please keep in mind none of the devices profit from oversampling when put to maximum resolution.

Nokia 808 PureView first (34MP, ISO 100)

Nokia 808 PureView 16x9 34MP ISO 100

And the crop from the 34MP result of the Nokia Lumia 1020 (ISO 100)

Nokia Lumia 1020 16x9 34MP ISO 100 Pro__highres

And the crop from the 16MP shot from the Nokia Lumia 1520 (16MP, ISO 100)

Nokia Lumia 1520 16x9 16MP ISO 100 Pro__highres

It’s pretty clear that even without OIS, the Nokia 808 PureView is giving me the best result in this case. Not only is the color much more realistic, it’s even much sharper than both Lumia’s… How it that possible?

Either the 808 PureView simply proves to be better in these examples. Or I shouldn’t have updated my Lumia 1020 to the Windows Phone 8.1 Preview… But I’ve updated the Lumia 1520 to the same preview software as well – and that appears to give an even better result. Hmm…

So I’m not sure about why the Lumia 1020 appears to be “underperforming” (or so it seems to me) – maybe the fact that I accidently dropped it a few days ago? That wouldn’t have given me the great low light results I posted yesterday.

Well, whatever the reason may be, it’s simply the way it appears to be and I’m not going to keep it away from you. One other remark I could make is that in this case both Lumia’s got a bit brighter result than the 808 PureView, if you look at the left side of the shot for instance.

Samsung Galaxy S5
Let’s move on to what the Samsung Galaxy S5 can do. I’ve got some very interesting new information about it, which I discovered during an earlier comparison – I couldn’t publish that since I wasn’t aware of one specific setting of the S5, so I simply missed a few crucial shots. I have those now.

Hold on to your horses: here’s what you get if you manually set the Galaxy S5 to ISO 100. This is a resized version of the 16MP shot – note you’ll get the maximum resolution when you use the S5′s camera in the 16:9 aspect ratio.

Samsung Galaxy S5 16x9 16MP ISO 100

Well, the scene was dark, but not this dark I must admit. Then why is the shot this dark? 

After checking just about every shot I made with the Galaxy S5, I noticed that when set to manual, the maximum shutter time the Samsung Galaxy S5 offers, is 1/17th of a second. That is 0,059 seconds! Compare that to the shutter times I’ve mentioned above: up to 2.7 seconds. That’s a factor 45 (!) difference we’re looking at…

So no wonder, you won’t get much in your shot in a very dark scene. Consequently, you’d expect a lighter result when you set the ISO higher – which appears to be the case. Below you’ll see the results from the Galaxy S5 with ISO 200, 400 and 800.

Samsung Galaxy S5 16x9 16MP ISO 200 Samsung Galaxy S5 16x9 16MP ISO 400 Samsung Galaxy S5 16x9 16MP ISO 800

And finally in the last shot on ISO 800, you’ll finally see some more of the details, but it won’t come as a surprise to you that there’s way too much noise in it…

Samsung Galaxy S5 16x9 16MP ISO 800

Now is that all you can squeeze out of the Samsung Galaxy S5? Luckily, it isn’t – that would have been a tragedy.

There’s a button for it in the menu and it’s called “Picture Stabilization” as the Galaxy S5 puts it, to “take brighter and clearer pictures without using the flash in low light. Your device will automatically detect low light levels and adjust the camera accordingly. Hold you device steady while taking pictures in the dark“.

The result is a dramatic improvement as you can see below.

Samsung Galaxy S5 16x9 Picture Stabilization ON

How much better is clearly visible in the crop as well:

Samsung Galaxy S5 16x9 Picture Stabilization ON

For argument’s sake, let’s compare that to what I got from the Nokia Lumia 1520 (also on 16MP in this case)

Nokia Lumia 1520 16x9 16MP ISO 100 Pro__highres

I think the Nokia Lumia 1520 clearly does a better job (both in detail and contrast), but it’s a good thing the Galaxy S5 can at least come close with its 16MP result.

Now what ISO setting does the Galaxy S5 choose when you hit that Picture Stabilization button? And what about the shutter time? The lens is open much longer than the remarkable 1/17 second, but for how long exactly?

Well, Samsung doesn’t share that information. It’s simply not in the EXIF data, so I can’t tell you. Also, as soon as you choose Picture Stabilization, you can’t manually control the ISO settings anymore.

ISO 200
After this I have in fact 36 more shots to share – don’t worry, I won’t. I will however share a crop from the ISO 200 result I got from the Nokia Lumia 1020 in high resolution, which is a bit of a “revanche” – and much to my relief it shows my 1020 isn’t defective (now you can tell I write these posts while I’m in the process of comparing the shots and crops).

Nokia Lumia 1020 16X9 34MP ISO 200 Pro__highres

I could compare it with the ISO 200 shot I got from the 808 PureView, but that would be a bit lame since I simply didn’t as good a job in that case – it would look like I’m trying to prove it isn’t as good, whereas I’ve just shown how good it can be: it just depends on the hands of the one using it :-)

While I’m  at it, here’s the crop from the 5MP result I got from the Nokia Lumia 1020, ISO 1000 in 1/4 second.

Nokia Lumia 1020 16X9 5MP ISO 1000

When I let it choose by itself (so everything on automatic), the Lumia 1020 chose ISO 1250 by the way – the difference is marginal.

To conclude I’ll just share a resized 100% screenshot of that shot – 5MP PureView (originally shot in 4:3), ISO 1250.

Screenshot Nokia Lumia 1020 38MP ISO 1250 (auto)

I really hope you’ve enjoyed this extreme low light hommage to Nokia’s colorful handsets, including a comparison with how the Samsung Galaxy S5 captures them.

Most important conclusions as far as I’m concerned.
- OIS or no OIS, you can still f$ck up a shot on your Nokia Lumia 1020
- the Nokia 808 PureView’s camera still offers breathtaking quality, even when it’s about two years old by now.
- With a sensor of similar size, in dark situations the Nokia Lumia 1520 outperforms the Samsung Galaxy S5.
- Changing the ISO on the Galaxy S5 appears only to be effective in bright situations
- Samsung’s Galaxy S5 maximum shutter time is 1/17th of a second (0,056″) when put to manual
- Samsung’s Galaxy S5 performs much better in dark situations with “Picture Stabilization” on, but EXIF data will be hidden for some reason.

For my crops, I chose the center part of the shot with arguably the best light. It might not be the part you are most interested in, so once more, you will find the shots I selected on Flickr – all 52 of them. You’ll see I haven’t done an outstanding job in every shot, but like I wrote it’s all handheld and be sure I tried to keep as still as humanly possible. You’ll find all the shots in this dedicated album on Flickr.

This will be my last post for a while, going on holiday for some time with the family. Like I wrote yesterday, I hope to update you from there not just here at the Club, but also, and even more so, on TwitterFacebook and Instagram: please do follow me there.

Update: I’ve received some fierce criticism about this post and what I was trying to “prove”. So strong that I put the post offline to give it more thought. After that, I still think there’s quite some interesting information here,  concerning the Galaxy S5 for instance,  that I decided to put it back online again. I do urge you to read the reactions below however.

Some of the points against this post are certainly valid I think,  on the other hand I think there is not much wrong with what I did (low light shots with as low as possible ISO to reduce noise, yet still handheld – I call it a challenge as well).

You may think of it whatever you like, I’ve been very clear about the methods I used and didn’t try to hide any outcome – whether you like the outcome or not.

If you like what I’m doing here, please consider making a donation. There’s a button on the right hand side of this page, leading to PayPal. Any donation is welcome since this club doesn’t support itself. I’ll mention you as a sponsor here, so this is your way to be featured in the Club yourself :-)

Please join PureViewClub on TwitterFacebookFlickrGoogle+ and/or Instagram. 140320_Nokia_BT_728x90_MB

 Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Reddit Share on LinkedIn

48 Responses

  1. Mai

    I do not even know how I ended up here, but I thought this post was great.

    I do not know who you aree but definitely you’re going to a
    famous blogger if you are not already ;) Cheers!

    Here is my homepage Birmingham Attorney (Mai)

  2. Howdy, I believe your web site may be having internet browser compatibility problems.
    Whenever I take a look at your blog in Safari, it looks fine however, if
    opening in I.E., it has some overlapping issues.
    I merely wanted to provide you with a quick heads
    up! Aside from that, excellent site!

  3. steve

    Thanks for all your work Mark. Thats a lot of photo’s to upload.
    The 2 best Photo’s Imo are the 8mp 808 and 200 iso 1020. The s5 Is no match for either.

  4. Miffy

    I’ve personally had both (I sold the 808 for the 1020) and I found the 1020 to be inferior in every single way. I had to get rid of the 1020 though because Windows Phone is so bad I couldn’t take using that depressingly limited experience any longer. The crap colour reproduction of the 1020 and how long it took between shots are the main reasons I got rid though.

    I would love an 808 again but tbh it died when Nokia announced Symbian was dead and dropped support for it. Just not worth the money any more as a result and you might as well just get a dedicated camera for what that costs.

    For me, Nokia are dead now, they should have adopted Android and custom skinned it instead of Microsoft.

  5. Marc @PureViewClub

    Hi Mirco and MF, you may have noticed I put the post back online again. I gave it a lot of thought. Added an update about your criticism, which I understand. I’ve been quite critical about my own results in the post itself as well. Shared 52 shots on Flickr, too. I think all my readers are capable of making up their own minds. If you don’t like the reactions of some however, live with it. I learned how to in the past years, so I’m sure you can as well.

    • Ron

      I have no problem with this test but your conclusion is somewhat problematic.
      “it’s even much sharper than both Lumia’s” Yes, it is 1.51s on the 808 and 2.31s on the 1020 so it should be sharper even without OIS but if do not crop at all or you crop the left side of this is image or you can see It’s brighter and have more details.

      My conclusion from this image, the 808 gave a better result in the brighter area and the 1020 gave a better result in the darker area as expected from 2.31s VS 1.51s exposure time.

      • Marc @PureViewClub

        The strange thing is though: I’ve been doing exactly what many readers asked me to: make low light shots with different ISO settings. Guess I’m too much of a people pleaser sometimes. Yet, many readers are now complaining, or coming to their own conclusions. Everybody is free to do so, but no-one seems to care about my conclusions at the end, like I acknowledged the fact that I f$cked up the shot with the 1020 myself. The most interesting points about the S5, in my conclusions as well, seem to be completely overlooked. Oh well.

        • Ron

          You ask how it that possible? But if you think that you f$cked up the shot with the 1020 then you know the answer. Anyway, it is almost impossible to not f$cked up the shot with 2.31s exposure time but, surprisingly, you managed to get a very good result for a 2.31s exposure time so do not beat yourself.

          • Marc @PureViewClub

            No, I asked how it is possible people are mostly overlooking my own conclusions at the end :-)

    • MF

      You are one of my favourite bloggers and I thoroughly enjoy reading your posts in general.

      I have no issue with this article being posted, but if there is any serious technical/factual oversight, it needs to be clearly highlighted in the main article itself rather than just making reference to the comment section.

      There were several images from the 1020, but you had mistakenly picked an inferior one for the comparison. I understand it is an honest oversight, and it does not invalidate your entire article, but I would strongly suggest revising your comparison to use the correct sharp image to replace the blurry one. The general principle is always to pick the best samples for comparison.

      Now, I respect and appreciate your work, and especially your patience which is steady as your tripod-like hands! :-) But sometimes, despite your best and noblest intentions, a less-than-perfect review can sometimes lead to confusion and people don’t always read the comment section.

      Personally for me, the 1020′s OIS works well, and I experience less blur than with the 808. This has been proven from my own personal experience taking thousands of lowlight pictures with both phones. I have also had some really bad days with the 1020 as well, when nothing seems to work properly and many images come out blurry. Perhaps it just wasn’t my day, but those days are quite rare and most of the time, the 1020 takes much less blurry images than the 808. There is no question about that. So if you happened to have a bad day, it might not be a great idea to do a lowlight handheld test with more than 1 second exposure. It’s really not the camera’s fault. But readers may not know this, and assume that the 808 is more steady than the 1020 which is not true.

  6. mirco

    Frankly speaking, this comparison doesn’t make sense and should not have been published at all. No matter if you have OIS or not, it does not make sense to take picutres with exposure times > 1s handheld. The chance to blur the shot is about 100% and you simply don’t learn anything about the device’s capabilities. You just learn something about your own human OIS…

    • Marc @PureViewClub

      I wasn’t changing exposure times, I was trying to make low light shots with as low as possible ISO settings to reduce. That results in longer shutter times, no doubt, but I do think it shows what devices are capable of, even and especially handheld. Frankly I have no idea what you’re complaining about.

      • mirco

        I know that you weren’t changing/setting exposure times (it’s impossible on the 808 as we all know). However, you have forced the devices to use so long shutter speeds that a tripod is mandatory (at least in real life).

        Maybe I didn’t get what you wanted to show here (and I don’t want to sound harsh either), but I simply cannot see which capability you are probing here. For example, the ISO100 shot of the 1020 is blured while the ISO200 is not. We both know that it is not the “fault” of the ISO setting but it’s simply your “fault” as a human being (however, with such steady hands you seem to be very close to a robot ;) ).

        So, basically all I wanted to point out is, that I don’t see what one should learn from this comparison. If you want to test ISO vs. noise (or dynamic range), you may want to choose a static scene with enough light for the lowest ISO setting and take the pictures with ISO priority (just as you did here but avoiding those extreme exposure times). Then, you might want to use a tripod, if you aim to test the properties with long exposures in really dark conditions. In fact, there might be differences as some cameras perform better than others (this could also be a reason why the 808 was limited to 2.7s and the 1020 to 4s while other top end P&S cameras go up to 60s (Lumix LX3).

        This way, you would isolate the measure of interest instead of masking it with other effects. Maybe I should have explained myself in more detail already in the first post as I didn’t want to complain for the sake of complaining. Instead, I wanted to point at something which needs improvement.

        • MF

          I fully agree with you, mirco. If one suspects that a particular comparison might be flawed, in this case the 1020 was badly affected by motion blur, it is better not to present the results in an open forum. I know marc meant well, but there will be some jokers here who will twist the outcome in their favor. Already, there are some ignoramus here who immediately seized on this to proclaim that the 808 is king. These guys are not interested in the truth, they are just looking for a cheap ego boost, their self-worth apparently tied down to a mere object. Your comment made sense, but some people here apparently made comments without first consulting their grey matter.

      • mirco

        Let me add an example trying to show why I don’t believe that this comparison was fruitful.

        With the 1020, you took two shots in 16:9 and 4:3 each (I don’t know why you did this but that doesn’t matter). Here are the ISO100 versions:

        4:3 – https://www.flickr.com/photos/pureviewclub/13972838083/in/set-72157644170265482/

        16:9 – https://www.flickr.com/photos/pureviewclub/13972811683/in/set-72157644170265482

        For the 4:3 picture, the 1020 has chosen an exposure of 3.1s, while its 16:9 sibling was taken with 2.3s. The different exposure times are unavoidable using auto mode and without using a tripod (again, respect for your steady hands). Funnily, the 4:3/3.1s picture is almost free of handshake and on the same level as the 808 (maybe even better). However, you have chosen to show the blurry 16:9 version of the 1020. I guess that this happened by chance but you wrote: “It’s pretty clear that even without OIS, the Nokia 808 PureView is giving me the best result in this case.”
        So, my “complain” is that you draw conclusions from a test which doesn’t allow to draw such conclusions both by its design and by picking the right/wrong pictures.

        • Marc @PureViewClub

          Hmmm… I’m afraid you are right. You live, you learn. Not going to delete the post if you don’t mind though :-)

          • MF

            Marc – I think it would be most appropriate to post an errata on your article, as this is quite a serious mistake on your part which overturns the original conclusion and renders it invalid. I trust you know what would be the right thing to do, though :)

            • Marc @PureViewClub

              I would if I wouldn’t be on holiday. Maybe I will take the whole thing offline for now though.

  7. hahaha :)))nokia 808 PureView is the king of camera phones

  8. Mario

    One of my favourite Shots i took with the 808 at night.

    It would be interesting what Samsung does with it “image stabiliser”.
    They do inovative stuff like the real time hdr before you shot.

    For a fair comparision a tripod would be awesome. You just need such a gripmount thats good for all phones. http://www.amazon.de/Joby-JB01254-BWW-GripTight-Mount-Smartphone/dp/B009GHYLKS/ref=pd_sim_ce_3?ie=UTF8&refRID=10XQ1HR6PN6WWTY90T2Q

    • Marc @PureViewClub

      Nice shot, although the focus seems a bit odd to me. I’ll make more low light shots with the Galaxy S5 soon. To quote Stephen Elop once: “watch this space” :-)

      • AreOut

        lol please don’t go his way

      • Mario

        Thats because of the 2,7 sec exposure. The Person gets blurred under long exposure and no freez flash. But i like the outcome.

        • Marc @PureViewClub

          Ah you’re right, sorry I didn’t think of her possible slight movement myself.

  9. […] post. I wrote most of this last night replying to someone reacting on my previous post, my “low light ode to the Nokia 808“. And then I realized I had written a reaction that could easily be a seperate post, so here […]

  10. Paul

    Thanks for all the great comparisons. I thought the S5 was going to be horrible in comparison to the 1020 and 808 low light shots but its not. It’s definitely not good, but the images were still somewhat useable. I’m going to hold off until the Galaxy K Zoom comes out then I might pick up an S5 if it turns out to be chunky as a bar of soap like it was with the first generation. The prospect of having a 10x Optical zoom and OIS combined with the isocell sensor could provide some pretty great results and would likely improve the low light photos by a great deal since the shutter could stay open longer.

    • Marc @PureViewClub

      Clever thinking – looking forward to that one, too. Hope they’ll be able to loose the reputation of a “connected compact camera” the S4 Zoom had.

  11. Marc thanks for including 1520 as I ask one post earlier :)
    I am surprised how it performed!!! So 1520 is on WP8.1? Is photo quality any different? Do you have MS camera or Nokia camera?

    I am very surprised that 1520 needed 1.67 seconds as it was very close to 808 on ISO 100! In all of my tests I got much faster shutter speeds and lower ISO on 808 compared with 1520 – so can it really be WP8.1 making camera on 1520 better?

    • Marc @PureViewClub

      You know your wish is my command ;-)

      To really know if photo quality is any different, I’d need two devices. Moreover, I’m still working with a (near finished) prototype of the 1520 (hoping to receive an “official” version one day, but I guess that’ll be a Lumia 930 and I won’t be complaining at all).

      So I wouldn’t count on WP 8.1 yet to improve the camera quality of the 1520, really. I just don’t know. I do know however I have some issues with sharing via some of the usual social apps like Facebook (beta), that’s a temporary thing however (like everything is, in the end :-)

      • Ok! I will try to make comparison with 1520 on WP8 and WP8.1 when official costumer version will be available!

        Will take some photos before updating and after ;)
        Will have to wait now.

  12. bigs

    Another good low light comparison Marc. Interesting to see how the 3 handsets is able to handle low light while using a low ISO. The 1020 with optical stabilization should come out on top when doing longer exposures but in this case is it possible the ergonomics of the 808 allowed you to hold it more steady. I absolutely love how the 808 sits in ones hand as a phone handset, and the smaller more solid feeling formfactor may have assisted in keeping the phone from shaking during the shot.

  13. Junnior Reis

    Nokia 808 PureView Wins Again… Simple As That !!!

    P.S: “Not a Chance. Physics Wins. Physics Always Wins.”

    • Marc @PureViewClub

      Haha, sure – did you notice I deliberately didn’t share a shot from the 808 that was actually worse? So your mileage may vary. All the shots are on Flickr though, be sure to watch them all :-)

      • Junnior Reis

        My opinion does not change, 808 PureView has better optical assembly (lens without any distortion), bigger and better image sensor, better flash and mostly better post processing !

        Sorry, but whether you like it or no, more than 2 years 808 PureView is the king of cameraphones and will remain until the arrival of the next Nokia focusing on image !!!

  14. MF

    It is important to take note of a few important points when it comes to lowlight handheld photos:

    1. There will always be great variance in the result – it depends on each individual, some people can hold the camera more steadily than others. It also depends on your mood, your mental and physical condition. Like 3-pointers in basketball, you may be a sharpshooter but it is possible to miss every single shot when you are “out of form”.

    2. To reduce the element of luck, it is a good idea to take multiple shots with each camera, and to compare the best shots from each. Even so, there is always the significant possibility of “luck” (or lack of it, in the case of Marc’s 1020).

    3. Marc’s 1020 image suffered from quite severe blurring, and it improved a lot when higher ISO (and faster shutter) was used.

    4. Theoretically, the OIS should provide better results than without OIS. From my personal experience, I can take sharp pictures up to 1/8s with the 808, and 1/2-1/4s with the 1020. The benefits of OIS are very clear to me. Each individual experience should be different, and obviously Marc has very steady hands that can hold the 808 for so long without much blurring.

    5. I do suspect that Marc did not allow sufficient time for the 1020′s OIS to “settle down”. If there was severe motion, it is possible for the OIS system to continue acting for a short period of time even though the camera is now held still.

    Regardless the limitations mentioned above, I agree that lowlight comparisons should be handheld, for the simple reason that almost nobody takes pictures with smartphone on a tripod. I’m sure some of you do, but it is only an extremely tiny minority.

  15. mike

    Great photoshooting and Nokia collection Marc!!! I could only recognize devices from early 2000s and later! Wow!

    As for the results, I totally agree with your conclusions. Nokia 808 camera produced the best images, but it is due to your tripod-like steady hands!!! My low-light photos are almost always blurred without flash (I can’t be still for near 4 seconds in very dark conditions!).

    I expected much better results from lumia 1020 though. The images look like been moved during capture, is there any problem with the OIS system? I think you should take both the lumia 1020 and the 808 with you, until you find out if there is something wrong with the OIS..

    Until next time,

    have some nice time with your family Marc!!! Take care! :)

  16. Indika Prasanna

    Very interesting comparison! Really impressed with the photo quality of Nokia 808 PV, want to buy one. Does softlogic is selling this cameraphone? (at how much?).

    Where can I buy the Nokia 808 PV (trusted sources!)?