>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
Sony Ericsson / Sony >
General
> se d750i ( 2.0 mp )vs nokia 6680 ( 1.3 mp )
Bookmark topic
i was talking generally about the pix quality. for my eyes the difference is not that much, thought 2mp is better.
--
Posted: 2005-10-27 00:20:54
Edit :
Quote
Dynamic range (density of a colors) is far better on SE pics
--
Posted: 2005-10-27 00:31:57
Edit :
Quote
indeed, the nokia ones are "darker" and i bit "colourless".
--
Posted: 2005-10-27 00:38:15
Edit :
Quote
Nokia seems has blueish cast on their color saturation.
It is true then, from many reviews i red, that "Carl Zeiss Tessar" at N90 is just a maketing jargon and not reflecting the true Carl Zeiss lenses quality found in many Cyber Shot cameras.
What makes me wondering, who is manufaturing lenses for SE? Are they making it themselves or by giving it to Sony?
--
Posted: 2005-10-27 04:37:50
Edit :
Quote
that would be interesting to know, indeed. guess its sony behind the cams.
--
Posted: 2005-10-27 04:49:26
Edit :
Quote
#BobaFett
The difference between 1.3mpixels and 2mpixels isnt that big, and really isnt that important either. The quality of the lenses and the imagingsoftware used are much more important than a slight difference in number of pixels. I agree the pics you have posted doesnt show a hughe difference, but beleive me the K750 cam is way better overall. It has much better and more precise colordefinition and better sharpness.
But it wont show as hughe difference in every picture you take, because its still only mobilecams, with limitations like short focalrange etc. To really see the difference you need to take more pictures in conditions more suited for the limitations of mobile cams. And more suited for each cams optimum conditions.
Try taking some portrait pictures of people under good outdoors conditions with both cams, focusing on peoples heads within a few meters range, and you will see a big difference in skin tone and detail. Also remember good photos is not just about the cam, but just as much, or more, about the photographer. Getting the best out of a cam is about knowing the cams abilitys and as photographer knowing and seeing when angles, lighting etc. are correct. A good cam doesnt automatically mean you allways get good pictures, you can take poor pictures with any cam, no matter how good it is. And the K750 wont allways and every time show a big difference, it depends on the conditions.
A simple random point and click comparison, usually wont show the big differences. Because conditions then are most likely randomly good or bad for either of the cams.
To really show the difference you need to find the edge of their capabilities, getting the best from each camera, and you need to take plenty pictures. Its at those times when the really good pictures come out that you see the difference.
[ This Message was edited by: numb on 2005-10-27 04:18 ]
--
Posted: 2005-10-27 05:05:52
Edit :
Quote
I can see a big difference... k750 is sharper, has more colors in it. and i don't think you can say that that's the only difference, coz as far as i'm concern i can say that the nokia was taken with a phone. but with the 750, it is more like taken with a CCD digicam
cheers!
--
Posted: 2005-10-27 05:20:43
Edit :
Quote
or maybe try to have it developed.... and you can see a HUGE difference... they maybe the same in a thumbnail view =)
--
Posted: 2005-10-27 05:24:09
Edit :
Quote
yes, but still the small resized pictures here dont really bring out the differences.
I could post pictures from K750 that would simply have been impossible for the 6680 to produce, thats where you see the real difference.
a few examples:
--
Posted: 2005-10-27 05:27:07
Edit :
Quote
that's what i'm talking about!
nice pics!
--
Posted: 2005-10-27 05:32:06
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
