>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
Sony Ericsson / Sony >
General
> C901 vs C902 camera quality
Bookmark topic
I'd be interested to see your pics, @mode.
@abubasim
IMO the W902 pic is worse there and that's not only because of the lighting, I think. But I might be wrong there. But however, maybe my experience is wrong or my W902 sample was faulty, no big point imo.
--
Posted: 2009-09-01 22:46:51
Edit :
Quote
...
[ This Message was edited by: titus1 on 2009-09-02 01:04 ]
--
Posted: 2009-09-02 02:02:56
Edit :
Quote
Hey...wait...what we call this topic? C901 vs C902? Or W902 vs C902? Lets back to our topic guyz.
--
Posted: 2009-09-02 06:27:30
Edit :
Quote
Since no one could produce comparison shots C901 vs C902 (even the OP, just him posting an opinion, in a pact with plankgatan I presume) I figured C901 vs W902 would be the same. But we have differing opinions whether this is correct.
--
Posted: 2009-09-02 07:33:27
Edit :
Quote
the thing i noticed directly when i tried c901, was it had a bit problems to get the whitebalance correct. (c902 adjust itself easier).....quite often the pics got quite bleached, (clouds, sky, etc, got really pale). it handle red colour better though.
i think c902 strongest side is its accurateness, such as focus, whitebalance, etc.
as you see in this test c902 have
similar colour saturation as Nikon D80, (which tells quite much about C902 awesome
accurateness)
http://www.esato.com/board/viewtopic.php?topic=186881
also C902 beat N95-1 in accurateness (focus, whitebalance).............see test here
http://www.esato.com/board/viewtopic.php?topic=185486
overall i would say.......C902 have a better camera then C901. (when i compared macro i clearly saw the different in
colour-quality)...........(otherwise i would had C901 long long time ago)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[ This Message was edited by: plankgatan on 2009-09-03 09:23 ]
--
Posted: 2009-09-03 09:18:28
Edit :
Quote
I rest my case
http://www.flickr.com/photos/30016190@N05/sets/72157619671471546/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/30016190@N05/sets/72157621163820522/
c901 is MUCH better allrounder. Plank must have got some really bad phone to test out
I felt my c901 beat the c902 hands down. Much greater % of good pics and much more accurate focus and exposures.
Almost no pic got useless of the hundreds i took with it.
--
Posted: 2009-09-03 10:21:46
Edit :
Quote
no offence. but when you look inside the photo section on c901 macro pictures they often looks pretty unreal, (weird colours, nearly cartoonish look)....(really).
and to be honest. i
never seen some macro by c901 with this quality
(neither in form of colours or accurateness)
http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/viewphotos.php?pid=20160
[ This Message was edited by: plankgatan on 2009-09-03 09:37 ]
--
Posted: 2009-09-03 10:24:13
Edit :
Quote
On 2009-09-03 09:18:28, plankgatan wrote:
i think c902 strongest side is its accurateness, such as focus, whitebalance, etc.
as you see in this test c902 have
similar colour saturation as Nikon D80, (which tells quite much about C902 awesome
accurateness)
http://www.esato.com/board/viewtopic.php?topic=186881
Big difference between D80 and C902. D80 much better color. C902 white balance more yellowish.
No offence but we all know all too well how much you love your C902 but comparing it with a Nikon DSLR is a bit too much. Why not throw in some full size crops to make it more of a challenge?
--
Posted: 2009-09-03 11:23:38
Edit :
Quote
are you sure you didn't use mod camdriver in your C902?
--
Posted: 2009-09-03 12:16:54
Edit :
Quote
--
Posted: 2009-09-03 12:31:27
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
