DxOMark Put the Lumia 1020 to the Test as a Dedicated Camera, See How it Performed


When DxOMark tests out the quality of mobile phone cameras, they usually classify and rank them as such. There’s a whole mobile section to the site where one can compare different smartphone cameras using a different scoring system.

The thing is, the Lumia 1020 is no typical smartphone. Nokia has touted it as a camera first, and it seems DxOMark was listening. When they put the Lumia 1020 through its paces, they tested it as a full-fledged camera. And it didn’t perform half bad.

After going through the battery of tests DxOMark uses, the phone came out 222 out of 242 cameras tested; and even though that might seem like a very low ranking, understand that this means a cell phone beat out 20 real cameras. Besides, if you read the conclusion, you’ll see that the testers were sufficiently impressed:

The fact the sensor performance of the Nokia 1020 is on a par with certain current compact cameras at low ISOs is particularly revealing; whatever your personal feelings are regarding the smartphone, it shows remarkable promise.


The camera boasts an overall sensor score of 41. Sure, that might not compete directly with SLRs, but it does manage to more than hold its own against compacts like the Panasonic FZ70 and Canon S130. And that says more about the threat smartphones pose to the compact camera market than many a sales statistic.

Check out the full review by clicking here.

(via Imaging Resource)

  • Mike

    You might as well stick a zoom lens on the darn thing. I mean it’s already fat on one end…

  • Brandon Chin

    The fat end is an optional, external battery/shutter release grip.

  • Procentje20

    It beat the D2H, which is a very decent camera… I’m impressed.

  • Genkakuzai

    It’s not a good looking phone, that much is certain.

  • Genkakuzai

    Quite certain any decent photographer would get better results with a D2H though. If nothing the AF and viewfinder is vastly superior.

  • OtterMatt

    I don’t really think we, as a race and culture, should be encouraging people to do “photography” with their smartphones. At least not until people realize that there are actual limitations to the size of the sensor and “MOAR PIXLES” is not the answer for everything.

  • Matt

    Any decent photographer could make art with a toy camera.

  • Matt

    Wow, just wow. Really? I can almost understand the more pixes is not everything argument, which by the way is one tool for making bayer sensors look better. But, really, not encouraging people to do photography with their smart phones? Me, I have to be honest and say there is a lot of good going on in the smart phone photography. A lot of talented people who would not have otherwise been able to do photography. On the other hand, with all the food photos I do see an argument against it.

  • pedro

    DxOMark? Who cares….

  • Gath Gealaich

    “moar pixels” is the answer to quality digital zoom (wherever optical zoom is infeasible) and overall video and picture quality, *if* correctly implemented. Of course, we’ve had our share of lousy imaging pipelines in the past, mostly related to throwing away useful information from all those pixels. There’s no replacement for more pixels, there *is* replacement for fewer pixels (proper sampling filters). (Granted, there is also no replacement for good effective fill factor, either, and for low signal-to-noise ratio due to having to process very small analog charges, and this is where old high-pixel-count sensors were lacking, at least those with small sizes. But the semiconductor industry is marching on.)