Sony Ericsson / Sony : Symbian phones : Post your pictures (and videos) taken with your G900/G700
>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
Sony Ericsson / Sony >
Symbian phones
> Post your pictures (and videos) taken with your G900/G700
Bookmark topic
I think it's the fault of the lens. Same problem with the i-mobile 902. With the crappy lens (made by Sony actually as the whole camera module is produced by them) you don't see any noticeable loss of detail when scaling down photos from 5 MP to 3 MP.
I read somewhere that 3 MP is the limit with the small millimeter-sized lenses used in camphones. They will never achieve good photo quality until they fit the camphones with larger lenses.
Here's one example: I borrowed
this well known shot (an excellent photo by DarkMagician) from the Photos gallery and then shrunk it to 3 MP (2048x1536) and then enlarged it again to 5 MP and applied a bit of sharpening. Below is a crop of that treated photo and a crop of the original. Anyway care to guess which one is which?
--
Posted: 2008-05-27 20:39:34
Edit :
Quote
k800 has much bigger lens. You have to remember that G900 is not a Cybershot phone. Although I doubt C902 will be much better either...
[ This Message was edited by: Saka on 2008-05-27 20:18 ]
--
Posted: 2008-05-27 21:17:00
Edit :
Quote
K800 bigger lens? How much bigger? Do you know the actual size?
--
Posted: 2008-05-27 21:19:08
Edit :
Quote
@Abu
I would say that the upper pic is the modified one.
--
Posted: 2008-05-27 21:47:38
Edit :
Quote
Sure?
--
Posted: 2008-05-27 22:14:06
Edit :
Quote
I'm not an expert, but yes, I noticed that the sharpness goes over the entire pic and I do not believe that the lens of a phone cam can provide such a depth of field (or whatever it is called).
And it doesn't look natural either, I mean the sharpness.
If the camera was focused on the beak, distant parts like the eyes should look smoother (as it is the case on the second pic).
But I could be wrong
--
Posted: 2008-05-27 22:29:00
Edit :
Quote
deleted
[ This Message was edited by: waja2000 on 2008-05-28 03:06 ]
--
Posted: 2008-05-28 03:48:40
Edit :
Quote
@myth,
The lower one is the modified. I used PaintShop Pro to resize (using Weighted Average) to 2048x1536 and then enlarge to 2592x1944 again (using Bicubic with 75 percent sharpness) and then applied some more sharpness to simulate how the K850 is overdoing this in camera. As you can see, the end result is pretty much the same. At least close enough for you to pick the wrong one
And that is my point: the lens is too small to allow the full potential of the 5 MP sensor. And this is why scaled down G900 photos do not look that much better than those from the K800.
I will do the same later today with one of the N95 photos. I don't think the Zeiss lens will make much difference.
--
Posted: 2008-05-28 05:34:51
Edit :
Quote
On 2008-05-28 05:34:51, AbuBasim wrote:
The lower one is the modified. I used PaintShop Pro to resize (using Weighted Average) to 2048x1536 and then enlarge to 2592x1944 again (using Bicubic with 75 percent sharpness) and then applied some more sharpness to simulate how the K850 is overdoing this in camera. As you can see, the end result is pretty much the same. At least close enough for you to pick the wrong one
I
heard that N95 has a 3.2MP sensor and pics are upsampled from 3.2MP to 5MP. So can't it be the prove that K850 is doing the same thing? you resize pic to actual size(3.2MP) and then enlarge it the same way K850 will do, and the result is close enough. it's possible, isn't it?
I will do the same later today with one of the N95 photos.
That would be good.
--
Posted: 2008-05-28 11:43:15
Edit :
Quote
@Abu
Hmm, well..
But the second pic really looks more natural and realistic.
--
Posted: 2008-05-28 12:12:42
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
