>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
Sony Ericsson / Sony >
General
> Pic quality 6630 vs S700
Bookmark topic
mario2002, the CMOS sensors used by high-end dslr cameras have nothing to do with the crappy, cheap CMOS used bu most camera-phones and cheap digital cameras...or are you sying that nokia is getting those enormous dslr CMOS sensors in their cameras??? Thatīs a joke
Expensive non-slr digital cameras, like Sony F828, Canon G6, Nikon 8800, etc still use CCD sensors
So, in other means S700īs CCD sensor trashes any actual blokia camera
[ This Message was edited by: Arez on 2004-12-07 00:20 ]
--
Posted: 2004-12-07 01:15:05
Edit :
Quote
Arez, you are right buddy.I obviously don't expect a hi-grade cmos in a cellphone.But neither do I expect a hi-grade ccd ! As I mention in my last post, in my opinion the sensor is not the only deciding factor in picture quality (as some of you seem to 'believe').Actually the focusing mechanisme is 'non existent' in a cellphone and this is deciding about half of the pic quality.Also the lens is obvious importance and in a cellphone is 'inadequate' to say the least ! The sensor and software are important things to as well as the man behind the camera.Now I can carry on and on like this, but I think I've name my point.Greetings from S.A. Mario,
This message was posted from a Nokia 7650
--
Posted: 2004-12-07 05:10:00
Edit :
Quote
Youīre right, iīm also a bit of photo freak, and i know well the importance of the people behind the camera - i won a prize with a photo form a modest Sony P30 1,3mp
But from a technological/technic point of view, S700īs camera is superior, hence in the hands of a good photographer it will produce better images than if he had that nokia, itīs as simple as that
--
Posted: 2004-12-07 10:39:12
Edit :
Quote
mario2002,
I will prove you that
Arez is correct.
S700i is actually superior the Nokia 6630.
I will post some posts in here to let you know when my photo comparison is done.
--
Posted: 2004-12-07 11:04:50
Edit :
Quote
could you also post the time it took to take each shot ie was it just point and click 1 sec or was there set up time as in playing around with the settings to get the best possible image.also can you post the setting you used on the camera that would help novices get the best from the equipment
[ This Message was edited by: slattery69 on 2004-12-07 15:30 ]
--
Posted: 2004-12-07 16:00:44
Edit :
Quote
Huh I am still waiting buddy ! Or are the results not what you want them to be ? ? ?
This message was posted from a Nokia 7650
--
Posted: 2005-01-13 13:08:05
Edit :
Quote
Dragonfly_TP Posts: > 500
there are not many cellphones on the market that have a ccd sensor. Current models are the S700i (1.3mp), Sharp GX30(1mp), Sharp V902sh(2mp) and Nokia 6630 (1.23mp)
sharp has best quality, no questions here.
The 6630 and S700 are very close, but S700i pictures are blurred at the edges. The 6630 takes pictures much faster. I base this on pictures I've seen here and on the net. If someone disagrees, come with proof. I only have a 6630 here and no S700i so I can post pics taken with the 6630, but can't compaire with same pics under same conditions taken with the S700i
--
Posted: 2005-01-13 14:53:55
Edit :
Quote
I totally agree, out of the two, the 6630 has better pic quality which is surprising, yet definitely true, I have also played with both of them and I think it is better on screen, (as in looking around), as well as when the pics are taken.
--
Posted: 2005-01-13 14:55:54
Edit :
Quote
In order to do a proper compare, we need someone who knows how to take pictures, and can take a picture under the same conditions of the same thing, with both phones.
I would like to see which of them takes the best pic when you really take your time with the settings, white balance etc - and which one is better for that 'quick snap' (think 6630 is).
But, then again... only a person who has access to both handsets, can do this.
--
Posted: 2005-01-13 15:29:20
Edit :
Quote
I have taken photos with a S700i, and a 6630. Actually i did this when i was testing whcih phone to buy, and if the 6630 would actually tempt me back into the Nokia fold (after having left Nokia, due to a disasterous experience with Customer support with the 6210).
I am an amature photographer, and have used manual SLR's (manual focus/metering/shutterspeed), as well as many Digital Cams (I favour the Nikon Coolpix range). SO I am very well versed in manual photography.
Sorry I do not have the original pics, as I was testing whilst with the salesman.
I will give my opinions on both phones in different situations. Rememebr these are opinions. YMMV.
First things first, on the phones screen, the S700i screen is far superior in contrast than the Nokia, this gives a sharper image which is good in "phone mode". However the Nokia's screen, which is softer, and has less contrast can sometimes make a photo look better, and "real". At the time i compared the pics to a Nikon Coolpix 2100.
POINT AND SHOOT - GOOD SUNLIGHT
------
In my opinion, the Nokia does give some slightly warmer colours (bit too warm), but with slight bluriness. The S700 gives very sharp images, but is slightly darker, but that can be compensated using Exposure Compensation (this is a fault i find with many Sony Digicams, and since the S700 has the guts of a Sony Cybershot, I am not surprised)
All in all the S700i pics are MUCH better for print, wheras the Nokia is better for display.
Overall, the S700 does win in this test in terms of accuracy, but not by such a big margin as many claim.
MANUAL SHOOT - GOOD SUNLIGHT
-------
This is where the s700 really shines. The nokia has basic adjustments, but you cannot easily see the difference. On the S700 though, with spot metering and exposure control, the difference is truely remarkable. Colours are bright, and the picture is sharp, which is fantastic when you consider the camera is fixed focus.
However, neither of the phones allow you to change where the "spot" is, like most digital camera's do.
INDOOR GOOD LIGHT - POINT AND SHOOT
-------------
Both produce fairly good shots indoors, provided there is ample light. The SE is slightly "noisy" though, but not very noticable. The nokia is slightly blurred, and had the odd occasional "lines" on the pic. I would like to know what this camera woudl be like IF it had a proper flash. You also have to hold the camera a little more "still". However, the S700i does create photos pretty close.
INDOOR GOOD LIGHT - MANUAL.
------
WHen you use the white balence feature correctly, the colours are so much better on the S700. Increasing the Exposure setting will increase the brightness at the expense of shutter speed, and some noise.
INDOOR - Medium to Poor light.
-----
In this case the Nokia does better than the S700i. Its night mode doesnt cause the extremely high noise that is apparent in the S700. The Light doesnt really help THAT much, and sometimes creates too much of a "spot".
In conclusion to this:
Nokia gave a more visible picture in lower light.
S700 better performance in good lighting. even better when manual controls are used.
S700 gave more accurate colours.
Nokia looked a litte better "on phone screen".
S700 has a slight inexplicable bluriness on the very edges of the image. (bad lens?)
Nokia occasionally shown lines running
But neither phone could match the Nikon 2100, a 2.1Megapixel camera. Admittedly, i know how to get the most out of that camera, but the ability to focus, set metering, and variable shutter speed, neither phone could match it, although the S700 does come very close when used in good light. With the Nikon costing only Ģ80 I wouldnt say either phone would replace even a cheap low end camera. however, ithe S700 is definately good enough for taking the on the spur moment pics, where content is more important than the quality.
--
Posted: 2005-01-13 18:35:46
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
