Nokia E6 versus Samsung S5 quick camera test

Updated: September 22, 2014

Several days back, one of my work colleagues bought himself a brand new S5 device. He came around to show it off, and then, he referred to my fine stainless steel clad E6 as an ancient piece of human excrement. Then, I told him, this old brick has far better camera quality than any contemporary smartphone. He loled. We did a test.

Anyhow, let me show you how the ancient, 2011-era phone created by Nokia, the company that has always led, still leads, and will always lead in the field of ergonomics and user experience by nine parsecs above everyone else, totally pwns a brand new, top of the line smartphone in a camera test. Pointless but utterly fun. Follow me.


We took some pictures. Flash off, default settings, side by side comparison in GIMP, no picture manipulation whatsoever. The images were taken by the same person, in exactly the same conditions, ergo no bias and whatnot. For technical details, please refer to the actual user manuals. What matters is 2011 versus 2014. Now, judge. Click to enlarge.

Nokia vs Samsung

The images are not 100% identical, but they are near as it makes no difference. After all, we shot this casually, by hand, whatever was handy in a colleague's messy cubicle. But it emphasizes the usage model quite nicely. What I'd like you to focus on is the sharpness of captured details, the color balance, the color spectrum, and all that. On the left, my E6.

Yes, Nokia wins. Oh, I made a similar competition with another dude with his S3 device, but then you can imagine the results. Can't show them here on account of what we tried to photograph, but you get the idea. BTW, on the S5 front, I'm not the only one who feels this way!

More pwning

Remember my Samsung S4 review? Well, yes, it's a decent phone, and it has its uses. It's also big and shiny and pretty and all. But nothing beats Nokia. It will always be having the finest looking devices, the friendliest devices, the most practical ones. I shall repeat what I've already done a couple of times in the past.

Comparison with other phones

My Nokia E6 has a full keyboard plus touch, anywhere between five to ten days of battery life, something no modern phone can ever dream of, a camera that beats competition, a sturdy body that does not dent or scratch easily even after heavy use, a built-in offline navigation, all for free, and an offline desktop sync and backup. There you go. Draw your own conclusions.

More reading

Let me open your eyes like the best eye drops:

Why Nokia and Linux failed, so far

My first encounter with an Android phone

Samsung Note tablet, first review and six months later

Offline navigation for Android


All right, here's a bunch of conclusions for those who need me to summarize this exercise. Nokia pwns. Nokia is the bestest. The fact it's not selling billions like the competition means nothing. Mercedes will always be better than Toyota, numbers notwithstanding.

The same thing here. The old Nokia E6 may only have an 8mp camera, but it has a very good field of depth separation and other technical lingo that I'm not even sure about. High quality is high quality. Let that be a lesson to you, cocky users, who feel like toting your precious new bricks of plastic and metal before hardcore Nokia veterans. Winning.

Oh, yes. I am fully aware there are tons of other differences. Mp count, low-light level conditions, video, filters, effects, and many other things. You're right. But that's not the point. The point is, a dude snapped a picture, and compared it to another device, and what you see if what you get. No hidden agenda, no whining. A noob just got pwned, that's all. And we're done. Still winning.