>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
Sony Ericsson / Sony >
General
> Comparing W800 and W900 camera pics
Bookmark topic
definitely, although you and I have an "invested" interest in the W800/K750 - ie: we bought them and need to get our money's worth
But like you I prefer the clarity and colour of my current cam. And damn W900 has NO LENSE COVER, how thoughtless.
--
Posted: 2006-01-10 01:14:19
Edit :
Quote
I have to say that after having the lens cover, i would like to continue with this option, from the looks of things
seem to be moving away from this. Probably due to less moving parts and a reduction in manufaturing cost.
I have to say though that if i was changing my contract now i may have gone down the 3g route and gone for a w900 as I feel it's overall performance picture wise is still very acceptable.
--
Posted: 2006-01-10 01:31:13
Edit :
Quote
I'm tempted buy the W810 when it comes out, but the W900 is still a little large for my liking, and I REALLY like the candybar format - no other form factor appeals to me.
--
Posted: 2006-01-10 01:42:06
Edit :
Quote
so thus the spot photometry feature of the w900 let the product down?
no beneficial issues with the spot photometry?
but i guess the w900 is better with regards to videos.
--
Posted: 2006-01-10 02:31:23
Edit :
Quote
Looks like an old model outbest a new one here, on camera issue-sharpness.
This message was posted from a K700i
--
Posted: 2006-01-10 03:10:56
Edit :
Quote
Nice kristianm. From the pics: w800 got much better colors but also a lot more noice.
--
Posted: 2006-01-10 03:11:13
Edit :
Quote
I'll try to post more pics (outdoor) next week. I don't have the W900 right now; my sister already got it from me last night (she was excited to see and use it).
Edit:
Quote:
On 2006-01-10 01:00:04, marlonski wrote:
@max, I'm sure your right with regards to the aperture. As for the low light conditions, I do agree that the w900 out performs the w800 although I have to say that colour and clarity is more important to me, I'm considering the mxe-60 which I hope will solve any low light conditions.
It would be interesting to see the two compared with the mxe-60. Based on overall performance I think I would put my money on the w800
Ah yes. I'll do that. I have an MXE-60.
[ This Message was edited by: kristianm on 2006-01-10 03:16 ]
--
Posted: 2006-01-10 04:02:23
Edit :
Quote
The w800 does have a much more mature firmware, and it's the firmware than affects camera differences in this case, as both phones have the same camera hardware don't they?
Seeing as the w900i is only a month old, expect things to improve.
Just as an example, although the w800 finally had mp4 ID tag support added to the music player, the w900i's walkman player sitll doesn't read the tags yet.
Give things a few firmware revisions to get where they should be at. Buying a product, you don't expect to have to wait for updates to add things you expect anyway tho.
Oh and about spot geometry, it has it's uses, especially when there's a bright background behind the subject - stops the bright background causing the subject to appear too dark.
--
Posted: 2006-01-10 07:37:34
Edit :
Quote
mysh, re idtags for mp4, do you know if latest K750 firmware also support these?
--
Posted: 2006-01-10 08:10:23
Edit :
Quote
Quote:
On 2006-01-10 07:37:34, mysh wrote:
The w800 does have a much more mature firmware, and it's the firmware than affects camera differences in this case, as both phones have the same camera hardware don't they?
Seeing as the w900i is only a month old, expect things to improve.
Basically you are right, but having seen many cameraphones and firmwareupdates, experience tells me you wont see very big differences or major qualityimprovements in cameraquality from firmware updates. Mobilecams are pretty basic, and the quality they deliver are mostly based on the choise of hardware, rather than on the firmware. Atleast when we talk production firmwares, and not alpha or beta firmware.
Production firmwares (atleast from S//E), even if they are the first ones, are allready optimised for cam quality more or less as much as possible, after that theres only litle you can do in firmware. Firmware in W800/K750 may be more mature overall, but the cameradriver has actually only been updated two times, the first time to the poorer by mistake and the second time back to original quality, so not much development there. And this is common practice, look at the many firmwares for K700, just about nothing has changed in regards to camera which software has also only been updated a few times, with litle to none visible differences.
Naturally I would of cource expect the camquality of W900 to be on par with W800 (since its the same hardware), plus the added possibilites of manuel settings (but this only improves where the user knows how to use them right), but dont expect to see any major qualityimprovements later on, and dont expect it to be in all conditions. As there are litle you can adjust through firmware for these simple mobile cams, it becomes a compromise, and we may see that for the W900 emphasis is on less noise in low light conditions, at slight expense of quality in perfect conditions, where the opposite may be true for the W800/K750. It cannot be optimised perfectly for all conditions, and it may be a deliberate choise/descision based on marketstudyes, or it may just be because its the first firmware. It may be that the next revision is changed to make the cam act the same way as the W800/K750, with the added manuel possibilities. It propably depends on the customers reaction to the current descision with optimisation emphasis on better performance in low light versus the W800/K750 optimisation emphasis on best performance in perfect conditions.
A loooong story, basically just to say, dont expect hughe differences in cameraquality through future firmwareupdates, cause there will only be minor, allthough for some those may make all the difference
[ This Message was edited by: numb on 2006-01-10 07:41 ]
--
Posted: 2006-01-10 08:32:38
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
