Posted by WhyBe
On 2008-04-26 14:13:42, max_wedge wrote:
sounds promising
That something newer and better would come out? Go figure... Never would've guessed
[ This Message was edited by: WhyBe on 2008-04-26 19:15 ]
Posted by max_wedge
no, I meant promising as it may mean tv out support and significantly better hardware.
I'm not an idiot, I'm quite aware that new versions of things are "usually" better, though I can't see much reason to drop an N95 in favour of an N96...
Posted by WhyBe
What's the benefit of a TVout? Is it used to play video files on a TV screen, sort of like a portable media player?
Also, there are several new phones coming to the market that have TV capability. Does this mean they simply have a TV tuner built in or is there some new media standard that's been developed that is used to stream the TV data?
[ This Message was edited by: WhyBe on 2008-04-27 07:05 ]
[ This Message was edited by: WhyBe on 2008-04-27 18:39 ]
Posted by Yakkaimono
TV-Out means you can connect your device through a cinch, scart or s-video to your TV and playback your media files on it.
It's the same function like that of a camcorder which you can connect to the TV to watch your videos that you've made.
Posted by max_wedge
On 2008-04-27 08:03:40, WhyBe wrote:
There are several new phones coming to the market that have TV capability. Does this mean they simply have a TV tuner built in or is their some new media standard that's been developed that is used to stream the TV data?
there are several new TV techs coming out. DTV free to air programming aimed at mobile phones is coming (and phones with compatible free-to-air receivers), also there are some handsets with DTV receivers for the current free to air DTV broadcasts.
Pay TV on mobiles is usually delivered via gprs (data), but in deals with operators where you subscribe to a channel and the gprs useage is covered in the monthly subscription payment.
This method simply uses the built in browser to stream video to your handset over a gprs connection.
The most likely technology to prevail imho is the gprs streaming method, especially as subscription prices come down. There are some practical issues (both technical and economic) that may prevent DTV free to air take off. Firstly manufacturers may be finding DTV receivers hard to miniturise. Also Operators are probably pressuring manufacturers to disgard DTV development in favour of improved network speeds for HDTV delivery over mobile internet. Operators are value adding and one of the extra values you get with a provider now is TV. If a provider can offer HDTV they will have an advantage so operators are vying for the first in line position to deliver HDTV. Obviously they want to deliver it over their own networks (not create new HDTV broadcast networks) so I think it's possible that Pay HDTV will win out over free to air DTV.
HOWEVER, if I'm wrong, and I hope I am, the free to air industry and advertisers will lobby more effectively than operators expect and gain a foothold in the DTV delivery market. They could do this by making deals with manufacturers to provide handsets with DTV receivers to be sold as "DTV" ready devices. If enough of the public take up these handsets in order to watch free tv with ads (which we all do at home anyway, why not on a mobile sometimes too?), the phenomenon may spread.
Posted by WhyBe
I think I would prefer the data streaming method. I don't want to go back to cell phones with antennas sticking out of the top, nor do I want to watch commercials. Free air TV is prone to bad reception.
Posted by max_wedge
I think the data streaming method will always be available, even if free to air mobile broadcasts become common
Posted by brorzan
I got to play with the X1 today. It was a working example, but it was just an ordinary Windows Mobile version inside. I guess they are still working pretty hard to get all the Sony Ericsson software in it.
The build quality was really good. It felt a lot smaller in the hand then it looks in all the pictures. The keyboard was easy to use, and I was told it will have צהו for the swedish market.
I think this will be the replacement after my P1i, but I will have to try a full working version to be sure.
Posted by i-am-andrew
I've got a question if someone who's used the X1 can answer please, apologies if it's already been asked/answered - I read the first 15 pages and the last 3 and decided just to ask:
Can you open the the phone and then sit it on the desk and type on it or is the screen part heavy enough to make it topple backwards?
Posted by karlosperu
wuaoooo
http://www.bengalboy.com/modu[....]m=8&post_id=6588#forumpost6588
VIDEO RECORD X1 en vga 640x480 de resolucion.
http://video.google.com/video[....]cid=-4967213615327634717&hl=en
MOUSE OPTICO
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=147188614586516623&hl=en
Pics from XPERIA X1
_________________
[ This Message was edited by: giancito on 2008-04-28 21:53 ]
Posted by QVGA
WOW are those seriously taken from a phone??
Posted by karlosperu
according to the Web seems that if you are.
These photos are very acceptable
Posted by bavlondon2
Video link is dead can you repost?
The last pic looks decent but the 1st 2 have a layer of green over it. Doesnt it?
Posted by karlosperu
video
http://video.google.com/video[....]cid=-4967213615327634717&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=147188614586516623&hl=en
_________________
[ This Message was edited by: giancito on 2008-04-28 21:58 ]
Posted by G-Izzat
I'm actually quite impressed with the pictures taken using the X1.
Posted by karlosperu
Certainly the photos are very good, and if they also have a yellowish tone but generally good quality
_________________
[ This Message was edited by: giancito on 2008-04-29 00:39 ]
Posted by metcard
On 2008-04-28 13:39:02, brorzan wrote:
I hope the final version of the black X1 is 100% black including the keyboard area.
Regardless, it's a damn sexy phone.
Posted by aksd
Actually speaking those pics are crap from a technical point of view. Theres hardly any detailing in those pics, the processing basically has first over sharpened the image and then used heavy noise removal resulting in a sharp but pasty image. If you look at the background leaves you can se absolutely no detail on them, due to the over processing the image hasa sort of un real feel.
Posted by WhyBe
Why not get a real camera if you're going to analyze pictures so closely?
There are many things that go into making a camera or picture great, a cell phone simply isn't going to fit all of those technologies into such a small form-factor.
Many flaws in pictures are attributable to the photographer and conditions, not the camera itself.
[ This Message was edited by: WhyBe on 2008-04-29 04:57 ]
Posted by @ftyk
@max_wedge,
yes newer ideally should mean better but i guess this term has lost it's meaning for mobile manufacturers.
the 9500/9300 were far more better phones than the toy that nokia made & named it e90.
i had my p910i for over 2 years but got rid of my p990i in 6 months.
i guess newer now means not better, but buggier.
Posted by iksplusipsilon
I agree with aksd !
the photos look good because of the bike
, but there are small sharpening artifacts and lot of detail is lost in the background ...
Posted by Indrawan
@theos
The pictures that you saw are taken by macro mode.
Posted by rontysee
Hey, thanx for the pics. But, pls can u provide all the pics and video in original size and quality on rapidshare
[ This Message was edited by: rontysee on 2008-04-29 07:39 ]
Posted by iksplusipsilon
@Indrawan ok, but I was reffering to loss of detail due to nise reduction/sharpening ( leaves, brick wall ) , and not general out-of-focus blur ...
This message was posted from a WAP device
Posted by chombos1
these are not full size pics...... it means that a program is used to resize the pics
and a resized pic means less detail.
and from the looks of it... it may have been the MS paint.
in this case NOTHING can be said regarding the details.. (why? save a jpeg with paint to know).
but even with the bad jpeg compression.... the pics and the camera module looks promising.
Posted by goldenface
Fantastic pictures - very impressive.
Posted by SE-Naz
The phone looks promising...
Decent pics... from a PROTO...
Cheers
ENJOY
Posted by Dups!
@metcard
agree with you 110%, that silver keypad on the black version is terrible- REALLY SUCKS!
Other than that it looks promising.
Posted by aksd
On 2008-04-29 05:55:38, WhyBe wrote:
Why not get a real camera if you're going to analyze pictures so closely?
There are many things that go into making a camera or picture great, a cell phone simply isn't going to fit all of those technologies into such a small form-factor.
Many flaws in pictures are attributable to the photographer and conditions, not the camera itself.
[ This Message was edited by: WhyBe on 2008-04-29 04:57 ]
I do have a camera, I actually do free lance wild life photography, so that was just my opinion, we dont want false info on this site do we now? The fact remains that the processing is crap, wheather its resized or not, resizing would actually make the picture appear to have a bit more detail near the leaves, if you view a crop it would in reality look worse, unless bengal boy has run the pic through a noise removal software such as Noiseware. The P1i takes better detailed pics imo, and the pastyness of the pic is not user related but hardware related, anybody with even a basic knowledge on photography can see that.
I'm not saying the final will be crap, but these pics are
_________________
Regards,
Akshay
[ This Message was edited by: aksd on 2008-04-29 13:12 ]
Posted by WhyBe
"...and the pastyness of the pic is not user related but hardware related, anybody with even a basic knowledge on photography can see that..."
Looks like an improperly set white-balance by the photographer to me...
[ This Message was edited by: WhyBe on 2008-04-29 13:35 ]
Posted by aksd
In pastyness I mean lack of detail, not related to white balance at all. White balance is not an issue, any photographer knows that, can be edited even on the comp if need be, detail cannot be regained once lost.
_________________
Regards,
Akshay
[ This Message was edited by: aksd on 2008-04-29 13:38 ]
Posted by WhyBe
On 2008-04-29 14:34:52, aksd wrote:
In pastyness I mean lack of detail, not related to white balance at all
Lack of detail could be an unsteady hand, high exposure, slow shutter speed due to lack of proper light or any combination of the above.
My point is, I don't see anything that points out "crappy camera". I see "unskilled photographer."
[ This Message was edited by: WhyBe on 2008-04-29 13:39 ]
Posted by aksd
Listen, unsteady hand would result in a completly dull image, you can see sharpness but no detailing, that is because the detail HAS not been captured, is that so hard to understand? If he shook they would be no shrpness altogether, my points are with respect to the outdoor pics of the bike, look at them, especially the tire one, theres no detailing on the wall or on the tire, look at the grass in the first one, the bike is sharp but the grass is just a green blob, or the grey wall, you can see the detailing on it. Its not a module problem theres are shabby processing algortihms by SE, which will be improved in the final version no doubt. If you really cant see this, I dont think you should be judging pics anytime in the near future, or maybe a crash course in photography should help
Posted by Coquito
Great Pictures!!! The camera will be as good as the phone
Posted by WhyBe
On 2008-04-29 14:58:01, aksd wrote:
...Its not a module problem theres are shabby processing algortihms by SE, which will be improved in the final version no doubt. If you really cant see this, I dont think you should be judging pics anytime in the near future, or maybe a crash course in photography should help
Why couldn't the original photo have been taken in insufficient light? Therefore leading to all the flaws that are seen:
*Poor white balance
*Noise reduction (due to artificial exposure boosting) and subsequent sharpening
IOW these pics could have been taken around sunset.
[ This Message was edited by: WhyBe on 2008-04-29 14:49 ]
Posted by aksd
If that were the case you would either have a slightly blurred image due to the slow shutter speed of night mode, or noise in the darker areas. Even with agressive noise reduction as cellphone sensor cannot remove all the noise from an image in low light, but the lack of noise maybe due to a resized image as well. Also even if it were in low light its extremely doubtful that the camera will auto increase sharpness.
You can also see signs of a smaller sensor, look at the headlight on the first pic, its completely burnt out, this is the case with the TyTn2 as well, I hope it is'nt the same unit which under performs. I can show you similar pics taken with the TyTn2 and trust me its not the photographer
if you look at this link http://www.bengalboy.com/modu[....]m=8&post_id=6588#forumpost6588
you can see what kind of lowlight photos the phone takes, the shake of course is due to user error in all the low light pics.
I agree with your point that if there was sunlight on the bike you might have seen a bit more detailing, but looking at the image a bit more light would have ruined the bike seeing how the cam over exposes, also the detailing level would'nt magically increase to acceptable quality. the K790 took better pics than this, more detailing even in lower light conditions.
Posted by single_luis
therefore have every reason, that the K790 takes best picture is a fact ... is also a person there are many who treat their mobile camera has good take it in a place where there is enough lighting and details for departing fenomela! it is true;)
Posted by WhyBe
On 2008-04-29 16:13:04, aksd wrote:
If that were the case you would either have a slightly blurred image due to the slow shutter speed of night mode, or noise in the darker areas. Even with agressive noise reduction as cellphone sensor cannot remove all the noise from an image in low light, but the lack of noise maybe due to a resized image as well. Also even if it were in low light its extremely doubtful that the camera will auto increase sharpness.
You can also see signs of a smaller sensor, look at the headlight on the first pic, its completely burnt out, this is the case with the TyTn2 as well, I hope it is'nt the same unit which under performs. I can show you similar pics taken with the TyTn2 and trust me its not the photographer
if you look at this link http://www.bengalboy.com/modu[....]m=8&post_id=6588#forumpost6588
you can see what kind of lowlight photos the phone takes, the shake of course is due to user error in all the low light pics.
I agree with your point that if there was sunlight on the bike you might have seen a bit more detailing, but looking at the image a bit more light would have ruined the bike seeing how the cam over exposes, also the detailing level would'nt magically increase to acceptable quality. the K790 took better pics than this, more detailing even in lower light conditions.
So you're saying, the X1 camera gives results that are on par with other cellphone cameras?
Posted by aksd
I'm saying it gives results on par with the TyTn2(white balance and colour reproduction of the TyTn2 is better though but that will be fixed, but the sensor performance is similar, as is the sharpening and noise reduction), but not close to SE's offerings, even the P1i, which uses a smaller sensor than the K790.
Posted by max_wedge
I agree, however it's still a lot better than HTC cameras have been up to now.
Doesn't look like it's an SE cam though, that's a disappointment.
Posted by chombos1
@aksd
those pics are clearly resized with MS PAINT; anyone can spot that (you can check that yourself... just save the pictures in jpeg format to see the results........ there is no difference; meaning that it has been resized with that before).
and if you are experienced in photography... then you should know what happens to a picture when resized and over compressed with paint.
so all of your comments regarding the lack of details on the pics may not be correct............. just because of the paint over compression algorythm.
Posted by aksd
The aretefacts "may" be due to the resize, not the lack of detailing. Such a lack of detail cannot be attributed to resizing in Paint, I mean its really so strange you cant see the under performing sensor, the burnt out areas on the silver of the bike, that cant happen with a resize.
Regarding how much I know about photography, we'll I'm a free lance photographer, not that I need to proove it to you or anyone for a matter of fact, but for the sake of credibility, some of my work http://flickr.com/photos/akshaydashrath/ ,all resized from 10Mpx, cant see loss of detail in any of the pics
On 2008-04-30 06:50:53, max_wedge wrote:
I agree, however it's still a lot better than HTC cameras have been up to now.
Doesn't look like it's an SE cam though, that's a disappointment.
Max the senor performance looks similar to the TyTn2 which is a huge dissapointment for me, I never use the TyTn2 for pics becuase to get a decent one I need to under expose by 2 stops and theres a lag in clicking to the picture taking, more so than there was with the W800, hope the X1 does'nt suffer from the same problems.
[ This Message was edited by: aksd on 2008-04-30 06:15 ]
[ This Message was edited by: aksd on 2008-04-30 06:16 ]
Posted by chombos1
@aksd
i'm not new to the image processing and photography.
and i was not questioning your photography skills freind.
i think you are getting me wrong on the subject.
example of my meaning.:
Posted by aksd
Thats exactly what I said, the artefacts are possibly the resize, but not the loss of detailing of the leaves or grass, even if there was such a great deal of loss in detail you'd see remanants of the detailing, not as soft as its now. THats why in an earlier post I said it looks like either the cam is using too much noise supression and removing details then further sharpening the edges or Bengal Boy has run it trhough Noise ware or a similar software.
For reference I've taken a pic with the TyTn II, one is a 100% crop the other a resize crop, both in paint, you can see the same pastyness of the image, lack of detail in the leaves, the leaves look like a blob of green rather than leaves.
Resized
100% crop
As you can see the lack in detailing is present even in the 100% crop.
Note: These images are from the HTC TyTn2 and NOT from the X1, I've posted it as a comparison to the lack in detailing on the X1.
EXIF of the above image
_________________
Regards,
Akshay
[ This Message was edited by: aksd on 2008-04-30 07:06 ]
Posted by chombos1
yes... those pics from tytn lacks details.
but this case is less visible on the X1 samples..... yet the X1 samples are not FULL of details...noise reduction maybe a little high on those images... but they are better than the HTC's. wait until we see an original X1 sample right from the cam.... and in full size.!
Posted by Bengalboy
You guys crack me up! Instead of just asking the man with the phone, you speculate, hypothasize, and generally ramble about questions you have that could be easily answered to your satisfaction.
1. All settings are on "Auto" including "white balance" which is how I do all my tests. Certainly the settings are there to be tweaked by the photo bug who wants the best photo for a certain condition, but, I test all phones as if the user just is going to use it with factory defaults and with the device determining what the best shot is.
2. The photos are taken about an hour before sunset and also with full cloud cover, just before a thunderstorm rolled in. I will be posting photos in bright sunlight later in the review, but, those were photos taken to get started with the review and honestly, given the conditions, excellent quality from a camera phone CMOS sensor.
3. The photos have not been resized by "Paint" "Photo Shop" or any other photo editiing software other than my photo hosting site's on compression application for displaying in VGA format. However, all photos are uploaded in their original resolution and can be viewed from Pbase by just clicking on "Oringinal" in the bottom of the photo. Here is my Chopper in its original 3.2 meg resolution. Go view every single one of them from Pbase in their original size if you so desire.
4. This is not a Nikon D3, its a camera phone with a CMOS sensor and the optics and software are for a prototype which has a Beta ROM of .74. The device is along way from release and I'm sure that by the time its officially released the quality for a 3.2 Megapixel cam will be more than acceptable.
As I continue the review on my site more photos and video taken under better conditions with the X1 will be shown as will the settings and cam information.
While you guys may enjoy arguing your points about what you speculate and surmise was going on, the true genius among you would have simply asked the man with the phone.
[ This Message was edited by: Bengalboy on 2008-04-30 16:04 ]
Posted by aksd
Nice to hear from you Bengal Boy, and yes we should have asked you, would have been a whole lot simpler,
, we never said it should replicate DSLR performance but at least on par with current SE offerings, which it does'nt look like it is, proto software or not, the sensor and lens does seem smaller than the 790 as is the focal length.
If you remember with the TyTn II people said the cam would improve in the final product, it never did
, hope the X1 does'nt go the same way.
Posted by Bengalboy
This is a joint venture with HTC doing the device and SE doing the Software. Basically, SE is using HTC's drivers, etc... for the MicroSoft OS, however, software and possibly the optics/sensor for the X1 will be SE's. Don't know yet, very, very early prototype devices and hardware, keys, software, etc.... will change before commercial release.
Again, this was about a poor of a day "light wise" to shoot a subject with any kind of camera and a couple of the photos were user error on my part for not switching back from macro to "auto" for the auto focus. I would hold off the critique's until you can see some photos taken in good light to compare with the other camera phones.
I do realize though that half the fun of these forums is the banter and argument about the upcoming stuff....... just having alittle fun with you guys myself! Hope you don't mind?
Posted by aksd
The worrysome part is the HTC bit(I heard theres a bit more to it, SE is also using HTC's license for WM as well as the Qualcomm processor, I have a feeling post May 6th we wont feel that SE X1 is al that hot
), after owning the TyTn2 with its pitiful camera, thats why I posted the comparison pics, as the pics have similar detailing, in its current form I dont think direct light would make all that much difference, in my opinion you'd actually see more burnt out images, but I'm sure you dont need me telling you this .
Without the arguments, forums would be a boring place would'nt they
.
I dont think anybody would mind, its all in good humour. BTW, really like your reviews, they're different
, wondered how come you went off the radar for a while without any new protos/reviews(sorry too OT ) etc.[ This Message was edited by: aksd on 2008-04-30 16:35 ]
Posted by Bengalboy
Had to work to pay for them... haha... here are a couple upcoming SE phones for you to look at.... one extremely thin Nano sized phone.... very cheap to..
Generally, if its not something I would carry in my pocket I don't review it, and, nothings really came along in the past year till the X1 and the upcoming HTC 7510. Did a review on the HTC Shift and thats been pretty much it..... for the last year except fun stuff.