>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
General discussions >
General
> sony ericsson phone to compete with N95?
Bookmark topic
bodum,bobafett, i agree with you guys
also agree with gps, gprs thing...
now back to topic. a phone to compete with n95? p1
--
Posted: 2007-05-12 20:39:22
Edit :
Quote
unfortunatey a phone that is not available for some months cannot compete with a phone that has been available for the last month except spec-wise on paper, but there's not much value in that if you can't go out and get one of them... and who knows what other phones the P1 will have to compete against by the time we get our hands on it? N95i? N96? something else?
I'm sure you get my point
--
Posted: 2007-05-12 20:46:32
Edit :
Quote
The N95 has superior detail, but at 1:1 the cheap cmos "water colour" affect is really obvious. The K800 picture doesn't have as much detail at 1:1, but the picture looks more realistic and not like a water colour.
From this, I would say the SE 5MP when it comes out will be far superior to the N95. This example of the N95 pictures actually helps prove the point that SE cameras are better quality overall than Nokia.
If Nokia would stop farting around with CZ lenses and concentrated on improving their cmos censors they would have a hope of equalling SE in camera quality.
--
Posted: 2007-05-13 01:11:13
Edit :
Quote
max_wedge:
If Nokia would stop farting around with CZ lenses and concentrated on improving their cmos censors they would have a hope of equalling SE in camera quality.
At full resolution, K800 looks blur, lots of picture noise and is yellow-tinted. N95 photo dont have this defect. I am not sure what you meant by water-color effect. But if you look at K800 photo, it just looks flat like a painting whereas N95 photo has depth.
--
Posted: 2007-05-13 01:50:24
Edit :
Quote
IMO the k800i photo looks more natural in colour, and the n95's just looks too 'blue' and the pixels looks extrapolated.
--
Posted: 2007-05-13 02:05:57
Edit :
Quote
On 2007-05-13 01:50:24, mib1800 wrote:
max_wedge:
If Nokia would stop farting around with CZ lenses and concentrated on improving their cmos censors they would have a hope of equalling SE in camera quality.
At full resolution, K800 looks blur, lots of picture noise and is yellow-tinted. N95 photo dont have this defect. I am not sure what you meant by water-color effect. But if you look at K800 photo, it just looks flat like a painting whereas N95 photo has depth.
K800 has lots of noise thanks for it's lesser JPEG compression. noise can't be so much of an issue once you have photoshopped it. you can always improve the quality of the photos whereas N95 can't do because N95 pictures are processed so much that certain fine details gets lost and noise are obliterated. so you can see noise is not an issue with N95. same thing that N73 did over K800 so people says N73 pictures are better. the worst case scenario is that you cannot revert the already processed images to actually see the detail you wanted. K800 can do that. color reproduction is also nokia's trademark; meaning they boost the saturation so that images may look better to the eye of a novice photographer than K800 does. but here is my point K800 just show us what we see in reality better. for example capture a "washed out" red colored T-shirt with both mobile phones, N95 will show you want you wanted to see, striking RED colors not a washed out one you see in reality, K800 images will show you what the reality shows you even though you may not like the real color.
--
Posted: 2007-05-13 02:25:54
Edit :
Quote
@razec:
First of all, most people dont photoshopped their photos. So if K800 quality requires you do that to make it good, then that's just lousy photo to start with. (Look at any photo taken by a digicam at full resolution, it is smooth like N95 and not coarse like K800)
And if you say the yellowish dirty look of K800 is "natural" then most people would prefered not to have their photos look like that. That's why in mobile-review.com survey - 50% people says N73 photos are the best followed by 30% for N93 and finally only 20% for K800.
--
Posted: 2007-05-13 04:05:35
Edit :
Quote
On 2007-05-13 01:50:24, mib1800 wrote:
max_wedge:
If Nokia would stop farting around with CZ lenses and concentrated on improving their cmos censors they would have a hope of equalling SE in camera quality.
At full resolution, K800 looks blur, lots of picture noise and is yellow-tinted. N95 photo dont have this defect. I am not sure what you meant by water-color effect. But if you look at K800 photo, it just looks flat like a painting whereas N95 photo has depth.
If you can't see what I mean you are not looking hard enough. The reason there is no noise in the N95 picture is the high compression used. The high compression also introduces the blurriness that is evident as a "watercolour" effect.
Notice in the image below, the detail of the gentleman's jacket lapels is greater in the K800 image than that of the N95. also notice the tree trunk detail is blurred in the N95 picture where the K800 picture has more detail. Also, on the N95 notice the line around some areas for example the middle foot of the parkbench. This is another compression artifact absent in the K800 images.
K800 on the left, N95 on the right:
Close up:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/221/495968411_b24969c640_o.jpg
Actual sizes:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/207/495968413_489e178b6b_o.jpg
In all these cases the K800 images has more detail, realistic colour and more noise. Noise is easy to clean up, lack of detail is impossible to restore.
Even given the extra noise in the K800 photo, printed examples at 8x10 will be sharper and clearer and the noise will be filtered out by the resampling process (as the image is scaled down to fit an 8x10 printout), where as the N95 will remain lacking in detail.
I'll take the K800 thank you
_________________
File System Tweaks for the K750
K750 Tricks[ This Message was edited by: max_wedge on 2007-05-13 11:26 ]
--
Posted: 2007-05-13 12:22:17
Edit :
Quote
i severely doubt people take photos and then stare at them for hours trying to find out what their camera missed and what it took. K800 is better, but is it better enough to prefer it over N95? No. I am not going to prefer K800 because a certain guy's jacket looks better. Seriously, these kind of things should be looked upon when choosing a dedicated digital camera.
And secondly, what N95 loses on stills, it snatches it back with its VGA res. video.
So if its 50 for video and 50 for camera, K800 gets 45 in stills and 10/50 in videos so it gets 55/100 overall
N95 gets 35 in stills and 40 in video which makes it 75/100.
--
Posted: 2007-05-13 12:37:19
Edit :
Quote
jus thought i'd add that theres no point sayin that they use a cheap CMOS...
theres hardly no difference between CMOS and CCD anymore like there used to be...
Fuji and Cannon use CMOS sensors on their highest spec cameras so would this still make them inferior or cheap???
And on the note of N95 vs K800i... Wait another year for the N95 camera firmware to mature and then compare...
J.
--
Posted: 2007-05-13 12:44:53
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
(just check the firmware which they stated in the review)