>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
Sony Ericsson / Sony >
General
> Nokia 6220 Vs Sony Ericsson C902
Bookmark topic
I prefer the C902
--
Posted: 2008-05-20 03:42:56
Edit :
Quote
On 2008-05-19 20:41:00, dualist wrote:
These pics were obviously taken with a pre-release firmware and are bound to be poor. New firmware will inevitably improve the camera quality, as it always does with SE phones - there's no debating that.
The bitching in this thread is meaningless - if you recall, the quality of the photos in the K800i pre-release firmware was equally bad. We just need to be patient for a few months' for SE to perfect their camera drivers.
The only real topic worthy of discussion is why SE can't get their software right before launching new handsets, rather than their current model of releasing shabby firmware and effectively using their customer to beta-test the bugs out of it.
[ This Message was edited by: dualist on 2008-05-19 19:42 ]
I'm commenting on the
BOLD one: Yes, it's worked for 3.2 MP camera and below, and
NOT for 5MP. K850 proves otherwise.
--
Posted: 2008-05-20 04:35:50
Edit :
Quote
I prefer the C902
then you sir certainly need to correct your vision.
it's funny how people say that the C902 didn't come out yet, so that explains the quality of the pictures. but people don't seem to notice that the 6220 classic ALSO has not been released yet.
[ This Message was edited by: driftmania on 2008-05-20 03:37 ]
--
Posted: 2008-05-20 04:37:05
Edit :
Quote
On 2008-05-20 04:37:05, driftmania wrote:
I prefer the C902
then you sir certainly need to correct your vision.
it's funny how people say that the C902 didn't come out yet, so that explains the quality of the pictures. but people don't seem to notice that the 6220 classic ALSO has not been released yet.
[ This Message was edited by: driftmania on 2008-05-20 03:37 ]
@Mr driftmania, he didn't say that he prefer C902 by judging the camera quality - perhaps he prefers it as a whole over the 6220
so don't put the words into his mouth
Tbvh I am really pissed with SE's 5mp quality so much but that doesn't make me feel like going back to the dark side
there are still things that differentiates SE and Nokia - user experience. nokia may be the best in terms of camera and so on but having used to SE and finding it well fitting to me doesn't make nokia better in my eyes, and people outside this internet forum, i mean the normal people on the street finds a phone which suits them well - in fact most of my friends who owns N95 and N82 here doesn't know that N82 is the best imaging phone for this year and the best thing is that they don't use the camera that much
_________________
"Our Greatest glory is not in never failing - but in rising everytime we fall"
Are you good at drawing? If yes,then show us your talent! post your artworks
here[ This Message was edited by: razec on 2008-05-20 04:34 ]
--
Posted: 2008-05-20 05:33:12
Edit :
Quote
ok the c902 produces very bad photos (going by these images), so im 'assuming'
have used a smaller/low quality unit as a result of the phone being 10mm thin.
The 6220classic is 15mm, so im also assuming the nokia has a larger/better quality (obviously judging from these pictures) unit
5mm is a lot in a phone, and im sure a better unit would have been used if the c902 were 15mm.
But its not, its 10mm, and now we have this shabby photo quality.
Life goes on...
ps. before anyone calls me a fanboy, im not defending
im just saying that this MAY be the cause of the poor image quality. I'd be saying the same if the results were the other way around.
_________________
May the
be with you!
[ This Message was edited by: >500 on 2008-05-20 04:52 ]
--
Posted: 2008-05-20 05:50:16
Edit :
Quote
Fair enough,then why don't i see 17mm k850 beat 17mm N82.6220c is supposed to be eual to N82 in terms of cam.
6220c is a brilliant mid range phone,i cant see how c902 is going to challenge it feature-wise or value-wise.
--
Posted: 2008-05-20 06:41:05
Edit :
Quote
its not like 6220 has a great cam.. its just c902 cam is sucks to the max
--
Posted: 2008-05-20 06:55:00
Edit :
Quote
On 2008-05-20 05:50:16, >500 wrote:
The 6220classic is 15mm, so im also assuming the nokia has a larger/better quality (obviously judging from these pictures) unit
5mm is a lot in a phone, and im sure a better unit would have been used if the c902 were 15mm.
But its not, its 10mm, and now we have this shabby photo quality.
Life goes on...
You got it all wrong.
Bad picture is not due to thinness. It is just due to SE wants to maximise profit by including a cheap & crap sensor/lens in the C902 just like they did in all their recent and future phones
--
Posted: 2008-05-20 07:26:45
Edit :
Quote
On 2008-05-19 14:26:55, Pop Lover wrote:
NOKIA 6220 & SONYERICSSON C902
1st Pic is for 6220 the 2nd for C902
My 2.0Mp V640i can match that!
I don't trust these supposed pre-released claims especially as that website is down prventing me from checking the EXIF data... how about uploading those shots to the Esato picture gallery and posting the link here? If they're real of course.
--
Posted: 2008-05-20 07:37:30
Edit :
Quote
On 2008-05-20 07:26:45, mib1800 wrote:
... It is just due to SE wants to maximise profit by including a cheap & crap sensor/lens in the C902 just like they did in all their recent and future phones
How do you know this? It just sounds like cinicism to me. Maybe SE cannot use the same sensors as Nokia due to an exclisive deal just like Nokia have with Carl Zeiss lenses. Maybe Nokia who sell 4 times as many phones as SE can swing a better bulk purchase price? Who knows? But making cinical generalisations dressed as expert commentary is NOT helpful to the discussion.
--
Posted: 2008-05-20 08:13:11
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
