News Forum Phone database

> New Topic
> Reply
< Esato Forum Index > Sony Ericsson / Sony > General > post pictures taken with your: sony ericsson K850 Bookmark topic

hold on, don't expect too much, this is only CMOS 1/2.8" sensor

--
Posted: 2008-01-12 11:32:56
Edit : Quote


If you complain about jpeg compression with the K850 you have seen nothing! the jpeg compression on the N95 is monstruous! it's like 30-40%
--
Posted: 2008-01-12 11:36:12
Edit : Quote


Shouldn't all 5 Mega Pixel Cameras perform very similar? If 5 Mega Pixel only tells the number of pixels on the sensor and does not reflect the performance of the sensor at all, I think there should be a new standard to weight the camera quality...

Is the camera processor too slow to cope with the low compression rate?! If the sensor is capable of doing better, why shouldn't there a setting for Maximum Quality. At the end of the day, if the photo with Maximum Quality is very large, people will choose a lower quality setting while this will still fulfill those who demand good quality photo...
--
Posted: 2008-01-12 11:48:37
Edit : Quote


"well, I'm a DSLR user so my expectation is high, but I'm disappointed with the so called 5 Mega Pixel. I think somehow they manage to fake a lower pixel sensor by masking the pixels with artifacts caused by the high compression rate..."

First of all, stop complaining !!
What did you expect when you bought the K850 ? That it would replace your 400D ??
The K850 is just a improvement of the K800/K810, a simpel party camera...
If you are an DSLR user you know that even the performance of a cheaper ordenary digital camera is quite bad, so what do you expect from the K850?

Im supprised that they sell any other cameras at all now when the K850 is out on the market ( if you see my irony )

It´s a camera phone ppl !! Get a life !

--
Posted: 2008-01-12 12:02:50
Edit : Quote




I think this isn't effect of high compression rate. in the EXIF data i can see that ISO is set to 320! for such a tiny sensor even ISO125 is too much.
read my post and AbuBasim's reply to it.


and i think you should resize that pic and link to the full size.
--
Posted: 2008-01-12 12:38:38
Edit : Quote


I'm not comparing it to my DSLR at all... How about if I compare it to my 5 years old Canon S45, a 4 Mega Pixel Camera. If a photo taken by this Canon score 8, K850i only scores 2 due to the compression artifacts!!

All I am asking is why the compression rate so high?!! It should not be a hardware issue and this is why I am asking!! I do understand the glass/size of sensor is not as good as many digital camera, but these are not the reason to caused the compression artifacts!! Why can't SE just reduce the compression rate?
--
Posted: 2008-01-12 12:43:12
Edit : Quote




Thanks for the explaination. Appreciated it a lot!!
--
Posted: 2008-01-12 12:48:26
Edit : Quote



It's a genuine Sony 5MP IMX020 CMOS sensor in the K850i. The problem with this type of sensor is the sensitivity. It's about a third of the sensitivity in a CCD sensor of similar size (compare Sony's 5 MP ICX495 CCD sensor specs here with the specs of the K850i's sensor here , and while you're at it compare also with the IMX018 sensor used in the K790/K800/K810 phones here and notice the higher sensitivity in the IMX018 sensor due to the larger pixel size). Poor sensitivity means more noise.

Having said that, no one with their brains still intact would be buying a CMOS camera phone and expect dSLR-quality shots from it. Most camera phones are more than adequate if you're satisfied with 4x6 prints from the photos.

_________________
Snuck! It's ointment time! -- Mad Jack the Pirate


[ This Message was edited by: AbuBasim on 2008-01-12 12:16 ]
--
Posted: 2008-01-12 12:49:40
Edit : Quote


ccsharry
man, why you're trying to compare cameraphone with digital camera?

K850: CMOS 1/2.8"
Canon S45: CCD 1/1.8"

Canon has overall better and bigger sensor. 4MP instead of 5MP - pixel size on sensor is bigger which equals better quality. Canon also has much better Digital Signal Processor

any more comments are necessary?

BTW. if you must know, your picture has this quality: 94% (chroma) and 91% (luma). if this is bad compression then i don't understand you at all

_________________
W800 CID36 R1BD001 (driver 6.7.1u), awaiting for K800
raider.4shared.com
flickr.com/photos/raiderek

[ This Message was edited by: Raiderski on 2008-01-12 12:34 ]
--
Posted: 2008-01-12 13:30:58
Edit : Quote


AbuBasim

Thanks for the thorough explaination!! Now I understand the reasons behind...

So, the number of pixel would not tell the quality of a camera fully...


Raiderski

Well, I did not understand the sensitivity of the sensor until AbuBasim explained above. But if you are an average customer, wouldn't you expect them to compare both 5MP cameras?! As concluded from above, may be there should be a new standard to compare the quality of cameras instead of the number of pixels...

Btw, how did you calculate the chroma and luma percentage?


Thanks for the replies!!
--
Posted: 2008-01-12 13:55:50
Edit : Quote

---

New Topic   Reply

Forum Index