Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:: Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Name
Email
Subject
Message icon

Other options

Return to this topic
Don't use smileys

Verification:

Please leave this box empty:

Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by King

- September 10, 2019, 19:47:50

Haven't got a chance to test out the 9 pure view but honestly cameras on my previous Nokia 8 and 8.1 were total letdowns. Image quality are mediocre, slow auto-focus and most annoyingly, abysssmal camera start up time. It takes so long for the camera app to load and function when you need it, sometimes it even freezes. Honestly, Nokia's got to work more on software optimization before releasing a new products.

Posted by Abdu

- September 10, 2019, 17:58:02

I agree with you, this review is rubbish ...and practically anyone who sees the photos i am taking with my Nokia 9 are not only really impressed, they actually dont believe it was taken from my phone.

Posted by Pepito Jr Labador

- September 10, 2019, 02:14:49

I don't believe your review,this s my test about my nokia 9 pureview.

Posted by Redaktion

- September 09, 2019, 20:25:55

It is not something new that more cameras are not always better, but many of those into mobile photography had high expectations from the Nokia 9 PureView. Sadly, Nokia's flagship with five cameras on the back failed to impress and only scored 85 points overall in DxOMark's test — 88 for still photography and 80 for video shooting.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/DxOMark-The-Nokia-9-PureView-fails-to-impress.434585.0.html