>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
Sony Ericsson / Sony >
General
> Post a picture (or video) taken with your w900i
Bookmark topic
great macro there... that spot photometry feature is a good one...
--
Posted: 2005-12-09 18:37:27
Edit :
Quote
Alfa Romeo 159
--
Posted: 2005-12-10 00:22:01
Edit :
Quote
WoW!!
I understand that the w900 is going to be one of sonyerissons top models. Saying top model gives it a deeper role and really dissapoints most here, compare it with alot of other top models, its poor. Even D600... it has that spreadsheet feature, allowing the user to work microsoft excel, word and another one.
At the end of the day, d600 could have 3mp and i would still choose the w900 becasue of its interface.
P.S there is no way that the w900 has the same quality pics as a w800/k750. Impressed, don't think i have come across a distorted pic with lot's of grain.
--
Posted: 2005-12-10 20:15:55
Edit :
Quote
Thats propably because people only post their best shots.
Secondly there hasnt been that many pics posted to really deside anything about quality compared to K750/W800, especially since noone in this thread has made a direct comparison, and finally, these are not the original raw shots, and could very well have been run through a noiseremover or have other enhancements done to them.
So lets not jump to any revolutionairy conclusions based on 5-6 non original pictures.
The tests Ive seen where the W900 and K750 cam are directly compared show minimal to none differences, as it should since its the same cameramodule, but with differences in firmware giving more choises for optimising settings
--
Posted: 2005-12-10 20:58:17
Edit :
Quote
numb: ive owned the k750 and w900i and shot a lot with both and I can tell you hands down the pictures look BETTER out of the w900i. That might be firmware or it might be hardware, but I am telling you without any doubt it's true. I know that's not good science or "proof" but for those who trust my word, please rest assured it's true.
Now this may change with new firmware (for both phones) but as it stands now, the latest k750 versions and the w900i, the w900i is taking better pictures for whatever reason, especially when it comes to noise in the picture.
--
Posted: 2005-12-10 23:17:35
Edit :
Quote
#Bakayo
im not doubting that is your experience, and it may possibly have been optimized to have less noise in low light conditions through firmware
But never the less
Compare the photos in this test between the W900 and the K750
http://www.mobile-review.com/review/sonyericsson-w900-en.shtml
and you will see very litle difference.
I had the W900 for half a day for testing, and had the same conclusion when testing directly against my K750, very small differences.
The new firmware give more options with spot photometry and being able to turn off autofocus. This itself gives more possibilities to optimise for better pics. And yes low light noise may be a litle improved because of firmware. But there are no revolutionairy differences, and you certainly cant make assumptions that its much better based on 5-6 non raw pictures, where for instance the pic of the Alfa obviously and clearly has been through a noiseremover.
I can show off lots of incredible photos from my K750 that are just as good as those shown in this thread. So if you want to honestly show how good the W900 pictures are, then post the original raw unedited pictures instead and let us judge based on those.
I think its remarkle how few pictures are actually being posted in this thread. If its really much better than K750, then fire away, post the pictures to back it up. The full size raw unedited pictures and leave the datestamp on cause that shows very clearly if the picture has been edited or not.
--
Posted: 2005-12-11 12:54:30
Edit :
Quote
I've been sick with food poisoning, but intend to do some proper comparison photography with the K750i/W800i and the W900i for our magazine review.
I have however taken a variety of pictures, in similar situations to where I usually used my W800i, and can confirm the W900i takes far superior photos in low light. You can't obviously remove noise, but this can be filtered if needbe at a later date. What you can't 'fix' is the blue streak lines that afflict the K750 and W800 (at least up to R1N that our models run). It leads me to believe that there are some hardware differences on the W900, either with the sensor itself or elsewhere. Take a photo in low light, and you get solid blacks - with no streaks or artefacts. The difference is immeasurable!
Believe me, that makes ALL the difference! Spot photometry also works wonders, and allowed me to take some wonderful photographs on a recent holiday to Brugge (sadly where I ate some dodgy food).
The jury is still out on whether the W900i is much better than the W800i though!
--
Posted: 2005-12-11 14:00:06
Edit :
Quote
Quote:
On 2005-12-11 14:00:06, jmcomms wrote:
I've been sick with food poisoning, but intend to do some proper comparison photography with the K750i/W800i and the W900i for our magazine review.
I have however taken a variety of pictures, in similar situations to where I usually used my W800i, and can confirm the W900i takes far superior photos in low light. You can't obviously remove noise, but this can be filtered if needbe at a later date. What you can't 'fix' is the blue streak lines that afflict the K750 and W800 (at least up to R1N that our models run). It leads me to believe that there are some hardware differences on the W900, either with the sensor itself or elsewhere. Take a photo in low light, and you get solid blacks - with no streaks or artefacts. The difference is immeasurable!
Believe me, that makes ALL the difference! Spot photometry also works wonders, and allowed me to take some wonderful photographs on a
recent holiday to Brugge (sadly where I ate some dodgy food).
The jury is still out on whether the W900i is much better than the W800i though!
I hope this was not at "Carpe Diem" on Wijngaardstraat. Because that's my daughter's tea-room.
--
Posted: 2005-12-11 15:19:40
Edit :
Quote
this is my friend KK & his wife YoYo...the photo is taken by my W900i (midnight 11 Dec)..
We had a gathering in a place of GuangDoug of China... red wine, some snack.... very enjoy la..
http://www.esato.com/board/img.php?id=42725
http://www.esato.com/board/img.php?id=42726[ This Message was edited by: isiahma on 2005-12-13 07:20 ]
--
Posted: 2005-12-13 08:16:46
Edit :
Quote
umm..... the pics quality looks like the same to my SE K750i pics quality..
i have hundreds of my K750i pics that can compete them. you just need steady hands...
the white balance doesn't really do much for me either... it's still yellowish. Sony Ericsson loves yellow.
i was hoping that W900 cam would have better white balance...
the videos is good but isn't that good anyway.. Samsung D600 records better videos at maximum bitrate 900kbps or higher! in larger resolution, too.. and it's MP4 not 3GP....
even my 1MP Samsung E530 records averagely at 750kbps.. at MP4.
Quote:Video is reasonably ok, but not that impressive, and to be honest dissapointing to me.
Bitrate is to low for a 320x240 video, it should be atleast
500-600kbit/s, even just to match bits pr. pixel the 200kbit/s of the K750 at 176x144 resolution, but is only 200kbit/s in this video (though Ive seen it go up to 400kbit/s in other videos). With more rapid movement of the camera lots of blocks and artifacts will occur at that bitrate and that resolution.
Audio still use the extremely poor AMR codec at 8000hz/12kbit/s like K700/K750, it sounds terrible, it should be AAC codec at 11025hz/64kbit/s to give reasonably good sound.
All the newer samsungs for instance records 352x288 at 650kbit/s video with 11025hz/64kbit/s AAC audio, much better quality even if fps is less at 20fps. W900 cant even play files of this combined datarate of 714 kbit/s without stuttering if it will even play them at all.
To me its rather dissapointing that the W900 doesnt do better than this, especially considering what others like samsungs that were released before the W900 can do, and considering the W900 has an nvidia accellerator. Its not that big improvement over the K750. Only an increase in resolution and fps. No real increase in videobitrate and no change in sound.
only 3GP and sound is still AMR.. disappointing, huh?
i prefer the AAC sound in those Nokia 2MPs and Samsung D600..
_________________
The proud owner of K750i, S700i, and Z600.
[ This Message was edited by: Amras on 2005-12-15 21:05 ]
--
Posted: 2005-12-15 21:57:22
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
