Posted by Raiderski
hold on, don't expect too much, this is only CMOS 1/2.8" sensor
Posted by vegetaleb
If you complain about jpeg compression with the K850 you have seen nothing! the jpeg compression on the N95 is monstruous! it's like 30-40%
Posted by ccsharry
Shouldn't all 5 Mega Pixel Cameras perform very similar? If 5 Mega Pixel only tells the number of pixels on the sensor and does not reflect the performance of the sensor at all, I think there should be a new standard to weight the camera quality...
Is the camera processor too slow to cope with the low compression rate?! If the sensor is capable of doing better, why shouldn't there a setting for Maximum Quality. At the end of the day, if the photo with Maximum Quality is very large, people will choose a lower quality setting while this will still fulfill those who demand good quality photo...
Posted by Fredricx
"well, I'm a DSLR user so my expectation is high, but I'm disappointed with the so called 5 Mega Pixel. I think somehow they manage to fake a lower pixel sensor by masking the pixels with artifacts caused by the high compression rate..."
First of all, stop complaining !!
What did you expect when you bought the K850 ? That it would replace your 400D ??
The K850 is just a improvement of the K800/K810, a simpel party camera...
If you are an DSLR user you know that even the performance of a cheaper ordenary digital camera is quite bad, so what do you expect from the K850?
Im supprised that they sell any other cameras at all now when the K850 is out on the market ( if you see my irony )
It΄s a camera phone ppl !! Get a life !
Posted by sadeghi85
On 2008-01-12 10:59:16, ccsharry wrote:
Don't you think the compression artifact is really bad? You never see clear sharp image since the artifact is everywhere... well, I'm a DSLR user so my expectation is high, but I'm disappointed with the so called 5 Mega Pixel. I think somehow they manage to fake a lower pixel sensor by masking the pixels with artifacts caused by the high compression rate...
I think this isn't effect of high compression rate. in the EXIF data i can see that ISO is set to 320! for such a tiny sensor even ISO125 is too much.
read my post and AbuBasim's reply to it.
and i think you should resize that pic and link to the full size.
Posted by ccsharry
I'm not comparing it to my DSLR at all... How about if I compare it to my 5 years old Canon S45, a 4 Mega Pixel Camera. If a photo taken by this Canon score 8, K850i only scores 2 due to the compression artifacts!!
All I am asking is why the compression rate so high?!! It should not be a hardware issue and this is why I am asking!! I do understand the glass/size of sensor is not as good as many digital camera, but these are not the reason to caused the compression artifacts!! Why can't SE just reduce the compression rate?
Posted by ccsharry
On 2008-01-12 12:38:38, sadeghi85 wrote:
On 2008-01-12 10:59:16, ccsharry wrote:
Don't you think the compression artifact is really bad? You never see clear sharp image since the artifact is everywhere... well, I'm a DSLR user so my expectation is high, but I'm disappointed with the so called 5 Mega Pixel. I think somehow they manage to fake a lower pixel sensor by masking the pixels with artifacts caused by the high compression rate...
I think this isn't effect of high compression rate. in the EXIF data i can see that ISO is set to 320! for such a tiny sensor even ISO125 is too much.
read my post and AbuBasim's reply to it.
and i think you should resize that pic and link to the full size.
Thanks for the explaination. Appreciated it a lot!!
Posted by AbuBasim
On 2008-01-12 10:59:16, ccsharry wrote:
Don't you think the compression artifact is really bad? You never see clear sharp image since the artifact is everywhere... well, I'm a DSLR user so my expectation is high, but I'm disappointed with the so called 5 Mega Pixel. I think somehow they manage to fake a lower pixel sensor by masking the pixels with artifacts caused by the high compression rate... [snip!]
It's a genuine Sony 5MP IMX020 CMOS sensor in the K850i. The problem with this type of sensor is the sensitivity. It's about a third of the sensitivity in a CCD sensor of similar size (compare Sony's 5 MP ICX495 CCD sensor specs here with the specs of the K850i's sensor here , and while you're at it compare also with the IMX018 sensor used in the K790/K800/K810 phones here and notice the higher sensitivity in the IMX018 sensor due to the larger pixel size). Poor sensitivity means more noise.
Having said that, no one with their brains still intact would be buying a CMOS camera phone and expect dSLR-quality shots from it. Most camera phones are more than adequate if you're satisfied with 4x6 prints from the photos.
_________________
Snuck! It's ointment time! -- Mad Jack the Pirate
[ This Message was edited by: AbuBasim on 2008-01-12 12:16 ]
Posted by Raiderski
ccsharry
man, why you're trying to compare cameraphone with digital camera?
K850: CMOS 1/2.8"
Canon S45: CCD 1/1.8"
Canon has overall better and bigger sensor. 4MP instead of 5MP - pixel size on sensor is bigger which equals better quality. Canon also has much better Digital Signal Processor
any more comments are necessary?
BTW. if you must know, your picture has this quality: 94% (chroma) and 91% (luma). if this is bad compression then i don't understand you at all
_________________
W800 CID36 R1BD001 (driver 6.7.1u), awaiting for K800
raider.4shared.com
flickr.com/photos/raiderek
[ This Message was edited by: Raiderski on 2008-01-12 12:34 ]
Posted by ccsharry
AbuBasim
Thanks for the thorough explaination!! Now I understand the reasons behind...
So, the number of pixel would not tell the quality of a camera fully...
Raiderski
Well, I did not understand the sensitivity of the sensor until AbuBasim explained above. But if you are an average customer, wouldn't you expect them to compare both 5MP cameras?! As concluded from above, may be there should be a new standard to compare the quality of cameras instead of the number of pixels...
Btw, how did you calculate the chroma and luma percentage?
Thanks for the replies!!
Posted by Raiderski
ccsharry
yeah, all this hunting for more and more MP is funny (first quantity then quality) but i don't care about this. after all 5MP is better than 3MP in cameraphones
i don't need superb quality, i always have my 2MP cameraphone with me and quick access to make shots - that's enough
use any EXIF reader for this kind of informations. i'm using JpegSnoop
Posted by ccsharry
Raiderski
Indeed, a lower pixel camera could have better quality!! Somehow I still find my 5 yrs old Canon S45 very competitive comparing to the newest cameras in the market. of course i'm talking about the pure image quality.
I owned both the w800i and k800i. They are great phones!! But may be K850i couldn't surprise me as much and I am disappointed somehow...
The image quality of K850i is brilliant considering how small it is! It's definitely extremely convenient. It has already replaced my discrete mp3 player and camera!!
Posted by number1
it's simple why the k850i takes such horrible pics
read here http://www.6mpixel.org/en/
then scroll down to the sensor sizes so the k850i has a 1/2,8″
this site recommends maxuim 2.7mp for a 1/2,5″ sensor size, so thats about a maxuim of 3mp for a 1/2,8″, anything over that results in grainy horrible pics like the k850i it's not compression it's cramming to many megapixels in to such a small cheap sensor.
[ This Message was edited by: number1 on 2008-01-12 14:45 ]
Posted by fullforce
I thought this was at thread for/about posting pics from K850?....
I don't get this one- it says "liter" on the bottle..yes and then what? Does that mean it can only contain liter and not, for instance, pints, gallons etc??
Oh look somebody have dropped their gigantic menthos! Maybe it belongs to the green giant?
[ This Message was edited by: fullforce on 2008-01-12 15:35 ]
Posted by DarKMaGiCiaN
On 2008-01-12 15:43:26, number1 wrote:
it's simple why the k850i takes such horrible pics
read here http://www.6mpixel.org/en/
then scroll down to the sensor sizes so the k850i has a 1/2,8″
this site recommends maxuim 2.7mp for a 1/2,5″ sensor size, so thats about a maxuim of 3mp for a 1/2,8″, anything over that results in grainy horrible pics like the k850i it's not compression it's cramming to many megapixels in to such a small cheap sensor.
[ This Message was edited by: number1 on 2008-01-12 14:45 ]
I thought that was the reason untill I used my frinds sony digital camera
it is 4MP and has 2.8 sensor !!!!!! good pic quality
Posted by number1
of corse it does it's digital camera, it propely has a very expensive ccd sensor and not a cheap crappy cmos 1.
Posted by -PERFECT-
By pperfectt, shot with K850i at 2008-01-12
[ This Message was edited by: -PERFECT- on 2008-01-12 17:30 ]
[ This Message was edited by: -PERFECT- on 2008-01-12 17:32 ]
[ This Message was edited by: -PERFECT- on 2008-01-12 18:06 ]
[ This Message was edited by: -PERFECT- on 2008-01-12 18:15 ]
Posted by tai020381
Guys guys, stop quarrelling and make peace...... Give you guys a brief summmary on where k850i stands compared with other cameraphones (Viewty, N82) I think you should be very glad that you bought the k850i!!~`
http://www.sogi.com.tw/park/content.asp?a_id=6891
Scroll down to see pages 2 and 3 for comparison of the 3 phones...
Overall I think the k850i did pretty well and I think this comparison is just ^^
Posted by EddieAdams
On 2008-01-12 12:43:12, ccsharry wrote:
I'm not comparing it to my DSLR at all... How about if I compare it to my 5 years old Canon S45, a 4 Mega Pixel Camera. If a photo taken by this Canon score 8, K850i only scores 2 due to the compression artifacts!!
Yes, but can your Canon S45 make a phone call?
Posted by AbuBasim
On 2008-01-12 18:11:52, EddieAdams wrote:
Yes, but can your Canon S45 make a phone call?
Buy the Canon Digital Rebel XCP and you'll have the best of both worlds...
Posted by number1
something else i've noticed with the pics in this thread, the sky in none of the pictures is ever nice pure blue, it's some purpley blue colour, for the k850i users who have forgotten what a blue sky looks like
http://i222.photobucket.com/a[....]d234/sniper100590/DSC00022.jpg
taken with k800i, the sky is blue not a funny shade of blue, just blue like it should be, for a £300 phone i would expect it to get the colour of the sky correct.
Posted by larry 68
Can someone please advise how to get sharper pics than these from a k850i, they are horrible and Im holding the phone as still as I can, what am I doing wrong ?
Also can anyone tell me how to zoom so that things look their true distance , I've tried zooming a couple of clicks before a shot and also tried only zooming after taking a shot but they all look poor.
All taken in document mode most without flash EV 0.3 OR 0.7
Posted by fullforce
@you who, in this thread, can't stop complaining about how bad the K850 is:
Yes well the K850 sucks we all hear you.
Now take your wining about K850 to the proper threads, for instance: "N95 VS K850" , "what would make K850 better", "hints and tips for the K850", "K850 firmware overview" or other photo discussion threads and so on.
This is a a thread that you use to post your pics from your K850!! There are plenty of other threads to trashs the K850 in. Keep this thread clean!
(I'm not 100% satisfied with my K850 but i use this thread to POST PICS, as it should be.)
[ This Message was edited by: fullforce on 2008-01-12 20:30 ]
Posted by fullforce
On 2008-01-12 21:06:31, larry 68 wrote:
Can someone please advise how to get sharper pics than these from a k850i, they are horrible and Im holding the phone as still as I can, what am I doing wrong ?
Also can anyone tell me how to zoom so that things look their true distance , I've tried zooming a couple of clicks before a shot and also tried only zooming after taking a shot but they all look poor.
All taken in document mode most without flash EV 0.3 OR 0.7
Fiddle with the settings! Try to take close ups with macro instead of document mode and see whare that gets you. Trial by error!
The shot with the leaf has a fairly good focus/sharpness on that one leaf! And, as you said: keep the cam very still. Make sura that you have enought light! Maybe you should have consider using the flash on a couple of your pics here( for instance the one of the phone) AND, if you use flash on closeups or in aclose proximity, use ISO 100! Try and tru again! And the zoom is only digital so it's a kind of poor "fake zoom" It calculats how the shot probably would look if you where closer and that doesn't give a good result. And if you zom in on a pic after it's been taken you will prety soon gett grainyness since you then go into a pic's details, if you get me.
[ This Message was edited by: fullforce on 2008-01-12 20:20 ]
[ This Message was edited by: fullforce on 2008-01-12 20:22 ]
Posted by plankgatan
once again..........(outdoor, sunny)...use document + daylight, awesome, just awesome
Posted by larry 68
@plankgatan I live in England we wont see SUNNY for at least another 7 months Lol, and they where taken with document and daylight setting except the one with the lodges which was document cloudy.
Posted by hgautam
@larry
Try taking outdoor pics with normal exposure... Some of your pics were too bright...
I just edited one of your pics
Posted by Hamidi
Ello people... tho i AM new here, im not new to the K850i
i'll start by attaching some old pics
Posted by *Jojo*
@hamidi- Nice shots !
Posted by se_dude
use photofix guys..just takes a second....the pics are way bttr then..
Posted by tai020381
Hi Hamidi, I see that you've came over from mobile-review~~~ Greetings, and continue to post nice photos here ^^
Some greetings for the upcoming of the year of the rat:
Document mode, EV-0.7, Flash and stabiliser OFF, 037 firmware.
http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/8639/dsc01394tu1.jpg
Auto, EV 0, Flash & Stabiliser OFF
http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/973/dsc01395hf8.jpg
Macro mode using Auto. A little underexposed here, but it is the colour of that day which I took this pic.
http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/8356/dsc01362ch8.jpg
Taken through car window. Auto, Flash and stabiliser OFF. Here is s blue sky colour if you want, number 1... >.<
http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/6650/dsc01361hv4.jpg
[ This Message was edited by: tai020381 on 2008-01-13 05:00 ]
Posted by milanpcx
landscape mode
beach/snow mode
macro mode
my car - auto mode
[ This Message was edited by: milanpcx on 2008-01-13 08:12 ]
[ This Message was edited by: milanpcx on 2008-01-13 08:15 ]
[ This Message was edited by: milanpcx on 2008-01-13 08:45 ]
Posted by firdauz
ISO 100
Auto
Posted by davidsic
Congrats for all your pictures
My mom's phone
Posted by se_dude
Posted by Hamidi
On 2008-01-13 05:56:58, tai020381 wrote:
Hi Hamidi, I see that you've came over from mobile-review~~~ Greetings, and continue to post nice photos here ^^
Yup dats rite my friend... ive also noticed a few other member of mobile-review forum ere too
Heres some more old pix
:hMd:
Posted by Hamidi
Spyker Spyder
Posted by ryanchg
yet few more random shots
Posted by vojta66
Posted by davidsic
Very nice pics Hamidi
Posted by milan91
Nice pics from Hamidi??? WTF??
This pics are horrible... k750i take better pics...
Posted by plankgatan
On 2008-01-14 01:05:38, milan91 wrote:
Nice pics from Hamidi??? WTF??
This pics are horrible... k750i take better pics...
he he.....cool it down......it takes little time to learn k850, (hell, even k810 took some time to get "perfect" pictures)...k750 is realy simple to take good outdoor-pictures with, BUT BUT ive seen many k850-outdoor pics lately, who blow k750 away BigTime
and yes...before you learn k850, it easy to get bleached colors, etc, etc......
and yes, when you learned it, it looks something like this
(found them in a french mobile forum)
[ This Message was edited by: plankgatan on 2008-01-14 01:09 ]
Posted by milan91
yes its simple to take pictures with k750i but pictures are better...
Ok there is much settings, but nobody use that settings...
Yes k850i is better but this pics :S some pics are so good, but some horrible.
Posted by brewcaster
click em for more stuff:
Full Disclosure - I use Picasa to auto-adjust everything. I think that is acceptable for ANY photographer to do. You might be surprised at how much editing pro's do to their photos.
Posted by plankgatan
@Milan....njjjaaaaa... there i misagree
once you KNOW which settings you going to use, you use them, and then your outdoor pics gets realy good.....
i have 2 settings i use
indoor (no flash).....auto or document
outdoor (no flash)....auto or document
--------------------------------------------------
ps...there is of course some "photographer-rules", (right light, etc)...if you cant them, your pictures will look like shit even with a system camera...he he he
--------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------
hello. Brewcaster..you got that portrait nicely sharp..
I
K850, 
W810 & 
T29
------------------------------------
____________________________________
(t610, t630, k700, k750, k800, k810)
[ This Message was edited by: plankgatan on 2008-01-14 01:27 ]
Posted by milan91
plankgatan, ok
And i have my own settings for my pictures, i tested all settings and find best
But many users only take picture with all auto... There is and iso, and ev, and wb, and lot of settings...
Posted by forka2k
Some snow pics:
Posted by *Jojo*
On 2008-01-13 22:42:32, vojta66 wrote:
@vojta - What's the difference between these TWO-shots
What settings were used mate
Posted by forka2k
From my archive - movie shooting in the city center:
Posted by DarKMaGiCiaN
we have a great weather nowadays ^_^
and this is the first time I put My K850i in real test to see how good is it
I took the pics and I uploaded the pics to my laptop
and the result was .......................
see some of random pics ( not the best in the collection )
[ This Message was edited by: DarKMaGiCiaN on 2008-01-14 08:14 ]