Thanks for the link. Interesting results when they compared the Nokia Lumia 1020 to the LG G4, surprising actually that the 1020 can do quite badly in most of the comparison producing images with less clarity and more noise next to the sharper and clearer images of the LG G4. Not too sure if the reviewer deliberately rigged the results or something. I cannot imagine the downsampled images to be blurry and lack in clarity when compared to the G4 with smaller sensor, especially in low to very low light conditions. Having said that the LG G4 does have very respectable and good image quality in all shooting conditions, even in low light.

Similarly, I would buy the Lumix CM1 if it was RM2000. Max maybe RM2500. I cannot imagine spending more than that for a phone, although it may come with an outstanding camera which rivals top compacts such as the Sony RX100 III. At a price of close to RM4k may be a bit rich, though I think some die-hard fans won't have problems forking out the money for a piece of novelty, a capable Android smartphone with a camera that is very close to the Sony RX100 III's performance (it beats all other small compacts such as Fuji X20 and Lumix LX7 in clarity and sharpness).

my 808 is only used for my 2nd number...i dont even use the web on it cos its so irritating...mostly for calls/sms/whatsapp...
even then, the symbian whatsapp has lag and sometimes takes awhile to receive messages.

and well, when i said concert...it was obviously after 8pm...so yea low light.

speaking about the 1020, it has a slightly smaller sensor than 808, yet the 1020 takes better low light shots.
so not everything is really about sensor size.

anyway, some reading here - http://allaboutwindowsphone.com/features/i..._Lumia_9301.php

as for the CM1.
i consider it a novelty device at the price of rm4k.
if it was rm2k+, i may consider getting one...cos as a phone its really nothing great...and i still read issues on its camera algorithms and also its lens quality.
anyway, if got rm4k to burn...better just get sony rx100 mk4...
and some more reading
http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/08/panasoni...e-a-smartphone/

Thanks for the link. Interesting results when they compared the Nokia Lumia 1020 to the LG G4, surprising actually that the 1020 can do quite badly in most of the comparison producing images with less clarity and more noise next to the sharper and clearer images of the LG G4. Not too sure if the reviewer deliberately rigged the results or something. I cannot imagine the downsampled images to be blurry and lack in clarity when compared to the G4 with smaller sensor, especially in low to very low light conditions. Having said that the LG G4 does have very respectable and good image quality in all shooting conditions, even in low light.

Similarly, I would buy the Lumix CM1 if it was RM2000. Max maybe RM2500. I cannot imagine spending more than that for a phone, although it may come with an outstanding camera which rivals top compacts such as the Sony RX100 III. At a price of close to RM4k may be a bit rich, though I think some die-hard fans won't have problems forking out the money for a piece of novelty, a capable Android smartphone with a camera that is very close to the Sony RX100 III's performance (it beats all other small compacts such as Fuji X20 and Lumix LX7 in clarity and sharpness).

Different camera processing. Lumia 1020 and Pureview 808 both compresses images down to 8MP with some pixels binninb/combination processing. Both are also notoriously softer than Android counterpart which sharpen their images too much (yeah, yeah, I do prefer the over sharpened S6E for certain situation). However, I dare say if you took the picture the right way, 1020 and 808 will most definitely retain better details. Seen too much comparison at pureviewclub which also suggest the same Seem like the updated recent comparison showed G4 is slightly better even though it overblown the sky etc. 808 more natural colors, 1020 more saturated. Admittedly, these two phone really not for everyone. I only had few which Im really satisfied when taking people shot. It look like a bit out of focus (it is actually soft) when you were used to the over sharpen pictures from your average android phone.

nah, definitely not rigged as like i mentioned i already seen something similar with 808 vs G4.
again, sensor size is just one part.
the G4 wins by a combination of better processing, better focusing, faster lens hence lower iso (tho not by much i guess), and better algorithm also in selecting shutter speeds.
the 808 also of cos has no real OIS.

Interesting that the Gizmodo review pitted the CM1 with the Sony RX100 Mark IV and the remark that the CM1 is "slightly inferior than the RX100 Mk IV. Perhaps the CM1's quality is closer to the RX100 MkIII than one can imagine.

I have to disagree with the author's remark in the last paragraph though in that the specs of the iPhone6 will last longer than the CM1, and that the CM1 will be considered as a shitty phone in 1 year's time. As long as the speed of the phone can keep up, it will easily last 3 to 4 years unless the evolution of smartphones can offer a significant improvement in the processing speed. The camera in the CM1 would have reached a plateau (in a smartphone). Having closed the gap with the best compacts such as the RX100 Mk3/4, there isn't any need to further improve on the camera's capabilities, for a smartphone.

With a DxOMark Mobile score of 87 the Sony Xperia Z5 is the new number one in the DxOMark smartphone rankings, placing itself in front of the Samsung Galaxy S6 and the LG G4.

Sony Xperia phones are not well-known for good photo quality when compared to the premium ones. Will need to see the sample photos and the comparison with the really top of the crop models such as the Panasonic CM1.

That depends how you define premium. Premium phones are typically iPhones, Samsung S/Note series, etc.
Panasonic CM1 is not really a premium phone, more like a niche product in a very small targeted segment of the market 

I was referring to premium smartphones with premium cameras. Not premium smartphones with crappy cameras.

I want CM1 to be the best smartphone camera too but it has more cons and it scores lower than z5 premium.

Not to mention that CM1 is less premium too.

http://connect.dpreview.com/post/675899477...-review?page=10

Not sure how the CM1 is inferior to the Sony Xperia X5, but I usually don't judge the quality based on points but objective evaluation based on results. In the link that you have provided above, have you looked at page 8 and 9, Studio Image Quality Comparison in Bright Light and Low Light. I have just taken a look at the Low Light results, and the CM1 pretty much trumps the competition at low ISO, producing clearer and sharper images than even the Nokia Pureview 808.

It is only at higher ISO the CM1 looks grainy, but then the images are taken at ISO3200 (DPReview only have ISO125 and ISO3200 for the CM1). They do not test the other cameras at high ISO as they will do badly once above ISO800. They only test the Nokia Pureview 808 up to ISO640, Nokia Lumia 1020 up to ISO800.

Personally I think the biggest disadvantage of the CM1 is the price, not the quality of the camera.

http://www.dxomark.com/Mobiles/Sony-Xperia...-scores-to-date

There are pages of review link on the top page in case of you miss it

I want CM1 to be the best smartphone camera too but it has more cons and it scores lower than z5 premium.

Not to mention that CM1 is less premium too.

http://connect.dpreview.com/post/675899477...-review?page=10

I've had a look at the link. I don't know how reliable DXomark is but based on the points, I highly doubt the quality of the review which is point-based. The points are not entirely focused on image quality but other features such as autofocus speed which the Sony Xperia Z5 does better than most phones, scoring a high point.

But when it comes to overall image quality of photos, the Nokia Pureview 808 and Lumia 1020 should sit at the top of the pack, not at the bottom. The fact that the smartphones with smaller sensors, especially the iPhone6 doing better than the Nokia Pureview 808 already showed the lack of quality or credibility of the Dxomark objective evaluation of the photographic performance of these smartphones, in my view.

Don't know how well you understood the DXO's review but they are a photo centric website first and foremost dealing with real cameras and not a mobile phone centric website that deals with common mobile phone functions. If you look at the graphs in the detailed report, they measure exposure and contrast, colour, texture, noise and artifacts for both photo and video. So in my opinion, they are credible. Size of image sensor is not everything. Image processor also plays a lot of role nowadays.

I've had a look at the link. I don't know how reliable DXomark is but based on the points, I highly doubt the quality of the review which is point-based. The points are not entirely focused on image quality but other features such as autofocus speed which the Sony Xperia Z5 does better than most phones, scoring a high point.

But when it comes to overall image quality of photos, the Nokia Pureview 808 and Lumia 1020 should sit at the top of the pack, not at the bottom. The fact that the smartphones with smaller sensors, especially the iPhone6 doing better than the Nokia Pureview 808 already showed the lack of quality or credibility of the Dxomark objective evaluation of the photographic performance of these smartphones, in my view.