>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
Sony Ericsson / Sony >
Symbian phones
> P900 v's CyberShot U v's CyberShot P120
Bookmark topic
Bored waiting on someone so decided to do an experiment with my old and new toys.
1st set of three reall shows how crap the camera in the P900 is with fluorescent light - yuk yellow (settings indoor) CyberShot U slightly spoiled with flash but P120 is the daddy with 5.1MegaPix good for video
aghh guess filesize is too big to upload (1.9Mb)
One of 3 corridors on EVERY floor of the MGM grand
I'll work on my P120 pics does anyone know the max upload filesize?
--
Posted: 2004-08-13 11:53:04
Edit :
Quote
Can your cybershot make phone calls?
Can your cybershot act like a PDA?
What about size? weight?
Have you heard of apples and oranges?
Just like the P900 camera is crap... isnt this posting crap in a smartphone forum? I think as a smartphone, Cybershot is crap
--
Posted: 2004-08-13 13:15:19
Edit :
Quote
@a_p... You could take that point of view but my intention was to show how good the pic could be with the next Pxxxx phone. The Cybershot U lens & board etc could easily be incorporated in the next generation (or even current IMO). I take more pics with my phone than camera as that's what I carry most of the time.
--
Posted: 2004-08-13 13:43:38
Edit :
Quote
@a_p
I agree with you 1000000000000% this is a stupid thread. Apples and oranges. How about megapixels verses a normal non-megapixel camera?
Please kill this thread before it grows.
--
Posted: 2004-08-13 14:13:35
Edit :
Quote
AFAIK, with the current camera technology... even the smallest of the cybershots will be almost the size of the phone and mostly heavier. Except for the battery, there is no common part. Where is the rest of the phone / PDA machinery going to fit?
As someone else suggested out in a thread (which I agree to)... that megapixels are not a deciding factor to quality. A standalone megapixel camera mostly produces far better results than a 1 MP phone camera... purely due to a better (costly) CCD and dedicated circuitry. So, at least in near future, I dont see camera phones coming any near to even the entry level digicams.
I can see the point about how things can evolve from here... and we may have better stuff in the phone that we carry around every where... but the title of the thread was nowhere near to suggesting that (in fact it looked like a blatant comparison, and bashing calling P900 crap)
Even with things to come, I'm sure there isnt very good quality coming along in phone cameras in near future. Keeping expectations like these is often the cause of "Did the new XYZ piss you off" threads when reality bites.
--
Posted: 2004-08-13 14:17:59
Edit :
Quote
I agree this it the daftist thread I have seen for a while. As for the quality of an image, the main deciding factor in the quality of an image taken on a digital device is the quality of the lense. About 90% of the resultant image depends on this. If you look at the processing chips of current digital still cameras, they are all very similar across a broad price range. However its the lense which is attached which plays the important deciding factor - its is this which you are paying for. This also applies to moving image devices.
[ This Message was edited by: syntax on 2004-08-13 17:46 ]
--
Posted: 2004-08-13 18:43:25
Edit :
Quote
and as we go better, the price and weight of the lens assembly increases
--
Posted: 2004-08-14 15:21:20
Edit :
Quote
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
--
Posted: 2004-08-14 17:57:35
Edit :
Quote
Scottish people are supposed to be clever man, dont let the side down.
--
Posted: 2004-08-14 18:08:20
Edit :
Quote
im trying but my brain hurts
--
Posted: 2004-08-14 18:18:13
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
