Posted by crossmatched
In Gsmarena, it is stated:
...Image quality (of Elm) is very good, easily ranking among the top 5-megapixel cameraphones on the market. The photos have pleasing colors and good contrast with the noise levels well under control. The amount of resolved detail is excellent, comparable to the best in the class – Sony Ericsson C901 and the Nokia 6700 classic...
Basing on that review, and on the pics posted in the Elm thread, i decided to get myself an Elm.
And i have it now with me!
My Elm is a replacement for my Kita (Yari) which i had for only two weeks.
I badly missed the excellent picture quality output of my c901 (which i gave away to my sister)
but i also liked the newer interface that runs SE phone from Yari till hazel. (plus the DVD like recording)
So to satisfy my longing for a good camera phone, i bought myself an Elm because i saw from the sample pics here that Elm is just like C901 sans the xenon flash. I also thought that the bigger aperture of Elm will work in its favor when scenes without xenon flash would be needed. (looks like i was wrong anyway..
)
Here are sample pics of c901 and elm camera performance.
2 shots in low light conditions and 1 in a well lighted room.
note: first pic i posted is always of c901
*dimly lit sala
*little light from a window illuminating a vase
*bedsheet
Do you happen to have an access to a c901? And an Elm too?
If you do, let us compare these very good and capable shooters that
has recently produced 
Mabuhay!
[ This Message was edited by: crossmatched on 2010-04-25 16:36 ]
Posted by volume100
I have a C901 but last pic from Elm actually looks better. More detail, better sharpness.
Even low light pics are high quality but too dark.
Posted by Bonovox
Ain't that strange the Elm has better sharpness even with poor flash
Posted by boy.in.PINK
nice comparison mate! This is pretty interesting. And yeah, those reviews and photo samples are also tempting me to buy one soon. They're far more affordable than the C901.
Offtopics:
*How much did you bought that (in PHP)?
*Can it have free internet browsing?
Posted by mriley
Can we have daylight comparisons?
@toph
I think C901 and Elm are near the same price
~ £150
Posted by boy.in.PINK
@Matt
they are similar! But then, the Elm has advanced features for 150 pounds than a C901.
Posted by Svithiod
The choice is easy for me, since the Elm/Hazel duo has Wi-Fi; but some features on the C901 are definitely interesting: the xenon flash, image & video stabiliser and BestPic. But then that is what one would expect on a camera phone, a Cyber-shot. But when compared, that's more or less all the extra features the C901 has.
Posted by HxH
ELM look better detail even it darker
Quality must give it to ELM but extra featured like xenon-flash (if needed) still C901
hard choice~
Posted by eduardo0789
On 2010-04-24 22:37:58, HxH wrote:
ELM look better detail even it darker
Quality must give it to ELM but extra featured like xenon-flash (if needed) still C901
hard choice~
Yep, hard choice
Posted by Injek
Woaw!
Do you think the external flash that SE had for the k750 series will work with the elm?
Can anybody test it ?
It would be so cool then, I'd buy an elm + buy a flash for night, and use wifi etc during the day !
Posted by mriley
Most likely it wont work with A2 phones like the Elm.
@crossmatched
We need some daylight shots, get the C901 back from your sister and do some more comparisons
Posted by gardax
On 2010-04-25 10:52:59, mriley wrote:
Most likely it wont work with A2 phones like the Elm.
@crossmatched
We need some daylight shots, get the C901 back from your sister and do some more comparisons
agreed, we need some daylight shot.
and, that horizontal lines in elm?
is it always appear in lowlight shot?
Posted by Raiderski
They are also in daylight shots, less visible but are.
Posted by crossmatched
daylight pics coming soon!
it is sunday evening now and what i can provide you guys are well lighted indoor pics. will try to post in a little while.
daylight pics to be posted tomorrow
edit:
As there are no interesting subjects in our sala, i decided to post these pics. These are photos displayed through my LCD screen. Color reproduction can be compared from these shots.
*February 2008 Cam Shootout winner - This was my entry back then. this is a photo captured by Sony Ericsson Sakura. Photo shows an open heart surgery. again, first photo posted is of c901. next is elm's.
note the difference of the reproduced yellow color in the band of the surgical instrument
*March 2008 Photo shootout entry: again taken by Sakura
*May 2008 entry. Pics taken by the great and lovely T650 (one of my fave camphones along with k750 and c901)
Which do you think produces warmer colors?
Sharper pics?
[ This Message was edited by: crossmatched on 2010-04-25 17:13 ]
Posted by gayannr
In the last picture ELM produces much natural Sky
Posted by crossmatched
daylight shot: coffee shop in my workplace
c901
elm
note the grass
red color test: color of the door in real life is like the can of a coke
c901
elm
note the band of orange and bluish color that runs through the door (near the central padlock)
macro shot:
c901
elm
[ This Message was edited by: crossmatched on 2010-04-26 20:30 ]
Posted by Raiderski
Awful haze on C901 pics, clean it
Posted by domipost
Elm is much better in the first and the last one imo, but the second one is verry painful
Posted by volume100
That C901 unit has some focus problems, it's been mentioned before somewhere. Could you try using Raiderski camdriver and manual focus?
Posted by code28h4p
@crossmatched
Which firmware are you using now on your C901?
Please always clean the lens before you take a picture like as raiders told before
Posted by eduardo0789
My C901 in daylight are great. Never washed out. Also for signs we can use the "document" mode that gives you excellent shots of texts and signs
Posted by K_Michael
Photos GSMarena.
С901
http://s003.radikal.ru/i201/1004/d5/1bbf6f8e99e9.jpg
Elm
http://s54.radikal.ru/i144/1004/82/1d34492b0963.jpg
[ This Message was edited by: K_Michael on 2010-04-27 07:56 ]
Posted by code28h4p
just give a quote to gsmarena's, The picture didn't at same time and light condition.
Posted by K_Michael
On 2010-04-27 07:55:51, code28h4p wrote:
just give a quote to gsmarena's, The picture didn't at same time and light condition.
Agreed. But you can still compare the sharpness and detail
Posted by code28h4p
yup...but there's with a \"beta version\" firmware. And it could fix by mod camdriver.
Posted by K_Michael
On 2010-04-27 08:02:48, code28h4p wrote:
yup...but there's with a "beta version" firmware. And it could fix by mod camdriver.
No no no! I took photos of examples where there was already the final version of the firmware.
Posted by K_Michael
[ This Message was edited by: K_Michael on 2010-04-27 07:55 ]
Posted by mode
I won't say which is better as such a thing is subjective but I prefer Elm, not so much because of the photos displayed here but holistically speaking unlike the Elm, I never felt much of the C901's wow factor when it first came out. In fact,
haven't made me feel this way about their cam for a long time until now. This ultimately makes the difference for me.
Posted by Raiderski
I was using C901 set to Elm like settings and I wasn't satisfied, WOW factor didn't work on me.
I never liked too soft edges from original C901 driver but very sharp edges from Elm were even worse, however it's the only way to create effect of good sharpness after quite strong noise reduction. Pictures from C901 with improved sharpness without any harm done to the edges looks delicious
Second thing is autoexposure, Elm tends to overexpose in strong light while C901 tends to underexpose, both can be corrected with EV but typical user can see overexposure very well on the display while underexposure is harder to detect, especially in sunlight. Underexposed pics are pale and ugly.
Last thing is contrast, Elm cuts off small part at the bottom of histogram which makes dark areas of the picture even more darker. It's not that hard to find out why low-light pictures by Crossmatched from Elm were darker than this from C901. Less visible details in dark areas is the cost of WOW factor in daylight.
Posted by crossmatched
two new sets of pics..
first set demonstrates how c901 and elm "saw" the color violet or purple - a color that many camphones struggle hard to reproduce faithfully.
this second shows the difference between how the two camphones see green
Cybershots are usually spot on in reproducing the violet/purple color. and c901 demonstrates it very well in the first pic.
elm is not far behind though. (my ex w900, w810 captures violet color and turns it into blue..)
second pic shows a truer to life color green reproduced by Elm.
Posted by djuro
Aside megapixels, do you think that Elm photos are better than the ones made with C905? I have very good deal here for C905...
Posted by plankgatan
c901 and Elm worse side is definitely lowlight...........C905 (and some other older cam-phones) smash this two cams into pieces in lowlight............
otherwise they produce good pics............................. have a nice ( & sunny) day everybody
[ This Message was edited by: plankgatan on 2010-04-27 14:06 ]
Posted by Raiderski
ROTFL
You have no idea what are you talking about buddy. Weak low-light from C901... buahahahaha
Posted by eduardo0789
On 2010-04-27 15:55:04, Raiderski wrote:
ROTFL
You have no idea what are you talking about buddy. Weak low-light from C901... buahahahaha
In some cases my c901 doesn't take perfect pictures... but overall it's good cameraphone
Posted by mriley
IMHO the ZN5 would probably destroy them both
Posted by code28h4p
Maybe you wrong mriley, the phone, I mean the best phone ever which could crush them all was C902. Believe Me...It's true
Posted by Raiderski
eduardo
Because C901 isn't a perfect cameraphone, such thing doesn't exist. C901 doesn't forgive mistakes, in my case I had to reject some habits from K800. Maybe I can help with some tips & tricks, just let me know.
Posted by mriley
Maybe you wrong mriley, the phone, I mean the best phone ever which could crush them all was C902
hmmm.....
@raider
Could you share tips & tricks here? Maybe there is something that can improve pictures from your experience
Posted by eduardo0789
On 2010-04-27 20:49:20, Raiderski wrote:
eduardo
Because C901 isn't a perfect cameraphone, such thing doesn't exist. C901 doesn't forgive mistakes, in my case I had to reject some habits from K800. Maybe I can help with some tips & tricks, just let me know.
Well, I was just saying. I'd like to get better pictures in low-light. I know some people put patches and flash their phones but that's too complicated for me
In low-light sometimes I get good pictures but sometimes they're no way good. I don't know if I have to change the focus or what
Posted by mode
@Raider
Thanks for the technical insight, you explained it intelligibly as always. But you mistook my wow factor for something technical. Wow factors are not technical, you either feel it or you don't, modded or not
Posted by pinkcheeks
i love this forum!
seeing the test shots made me decide on getting a C901! (i was thinking of getting a pink W705 coz of its style and wifi too lol) but being much of a camfreak, i'll choose C901!
Posted by boy.in.PINK
| Quote: |
|
Is that on Greenbelt? Maybe we can meet? 
Anyway, those sample photos made people hard to decide which one is a must buy.
IMHO,
Connectivity = Elm
Xenon flash = C901
Anyway, can you guys compare pictures taken from Elm to the ones taken from N**** N82? Thanks!
Posted by crossmatched
the power of Xenon:
elm looked like an elf (against the giant c901) in low light photography
i know its unfair to compare a Xenon flash bearing camphone with a Led flash based one, but just the same i posted that for comparison purposes.
the Elm box on top of an aquarium
there goes the band of orange and blue line strip seen in the man's face and the noise cancellation logo
the c901 photo has a file size of 1.3mb. elm pic is 374kb in size. such a small file size for a 5mp photo.
am eagerly waiting for a firmware update that will correct the orange/blue banding and perhaps may increase the sensitivity of the camera in low light
[ This Message was edited by: crossmatched on 2010-04-29 13:35 ]
Posted by eduardo0789
@crossmatched
Thanks for the pics. That's another reason why I don't wanna change my c901. Very few phones have Xenon Flash.
Posted by crossmatched
True mate!
Xenon Flash is a rarity in phones.
has started it with k800 and has maintained the most number of Xenon flash bearing camphone in its portfolio
am waiting for the next Cybershot reincarnation of c901
but for now, i am contented with my Elm
Posted by eduardo0789
On 2010-04-29 16:38:24, crossmatched wrote:
True mate!
Xenon Flash is a rarity in phones.
has started it with k800 and has maintained the most number of Xenon flash bearing camphone in its portfolio
am waiting for the next Cybershot reincarnation of c901
but for now, i am contented with my Elm
I agree. I like my c901. The only 2 things I'd like to change it would be:
Wi-Fi
Better User Interface (I'd rather Symbian)
8 MP (This last one is not a priority)
Posted by boy.in.PINK
After comparing and seeing the difference on those excellent shooters, I'm decided to get an Elm in the far future.
Even if it doesn't equipped with Xenon, Elm's low light shots isn't that noisy. It's even sharpier.
Anyway, I'm not after the sophisticated digital photography the C901 offers. I'm just after mobile phone photography.
Posted by titus1
I could do without the Xenon flash but not without Wi-fi. I need to be connected.
Posted by eduardo0789
I will still keep my c901. I'm still waiting so Nokia decides to launch a phone with Wi-Fi and 5 MP Xenon Flash with Symbian and no touchscreen... That's my dream
Posted by goldcrow
On 2010-05-01 19:53:27, eduardo0789 wrote:
I will still keep my c901. I'm still waiting so Nokia decides to launch a phone with Wi-Fi and 5 MP Xenon Flash with Symbian and no touchscreen... That's my dream
Nokia already released this a few years ago, the N82. Too bad the keypad and the design ruined everything.