| Author |
Comparing W800 and W900 camera pics |
S4k1s
Joined: Mar 09, 2005
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden
PM |
Nice kristianm. From the pics: w800 got much better colors but also a lot more noice. | |
|
kristianm
Joined: Aug 12, 2005
Posts: 490
PM, WWW
|
I'll try to post more pics (outdoor) next week. I don't have the W900 right now; my sister already got it from me last night (she was excited to see and use it).
Edit:
Quote:
|
On 2006-01-10 01:00:04, marlonski wrote:
@max, I'm sure your right with regards to the aperture. As for the low light conditions, I do agree that the w900 out performs the w800 although I have to say that colour and clarity is more important to me, I'm considering the mxe-60 which I hope will solve any low light conditions.
It would be interesting to see the two compared with the mxe-60. Based on overall performance I think I would put my money on the w800 
|
|
Ah yes. I'll do that. I have an MXE-60. 
[ This Message was edited by: kristianm on 2006-01-10 03:16 ] |
mysh
Joined: Dec 04, 2005
Posts: 176
PM |
The w800 does have a much more mature firmware, and it's the firmware than affects camera differences in this case, as both phones have the same camera hardware don't they?
Seeing as the w900i is only a month old, expect things to improve.
Just as an example, although the w800 finally had mp4 ID tag support added to the music player, the w900i's walkman player sitll doesn't read the tags yet.
Give things a few firmware revisions to get where they should be at. Buying a product, you don't expect to have to wait for updates to add things you expect anyway tho.
Oh and about spot geometry, it has it's uses, especially when there's a bright background behind the subject - stops the bright background causing the subject to appear too dark. |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
mysh, re idtags for mp4, do you know if latest K750 firmware also support these?
|
numb
Joined: Feb 07, 2005
Posts: > 500
PM |
Quote:
|
On 2006-01-10 07:37:34, mysh wrote:
The w800 does have a much more mature firmware, and it's the firmware than affects camera differences in this case, as both phones have the same camera hardware don't they?
Seeing as the w900i is only a month old, expect things to improve.
|
|
Basically you are right, but having seen many cameraphones and firmwareupdates, experience tells me you wont see very big differences or major qualityimprovements in cameraquality from firmware updates. Mobilecams are pretty basic, and the quality they deliver are mostly based on the choise of hardware, rather than on the firmware. Atleast when we talk production firmwares, and not alpha or beta firmware.
Production firmwares (atleast from S//E), even if they are the first ones, are allready optimised for cam quality more or less as much as possible, after that theres only litle you can do in firmware. Firmware in W800/K750 may be more mature overall, but the cameradriver has actually only been updated two times, the first time to the poorer by mistake and the second time back to original quality, so not much development there. And this is common practice, look at the many firmwares for K700, just about nothing has changed in regards to camera which software has also only been updated a few times, with litle to none visible differences.
Naturally I would of cource expect the camquality of W900 to be on par with W800 (since its the same hardware), plus the added possibilites of manuel settings (but this only improves where the user knows how to use them right), but dont expect to see any major qualityimprovements later on, and dont expect it to be in all conditions. As there are litle you can adjust through firmware for these simple mobile cams, it becomes a compromise, and we may see that for the W900 emphasis is on less noise in low light conditions, at slight expense of quality in perfect conditions, where the opposite may be true for the W800/K750. It cannot be optimised perfectly for all conditions, and it may be a deliberate choise/descision based on marketstudyes, or it may just be because its the first firmware. It may be that the next revision is changed to make the cam act the same way as the W800/K750, with the added manuel possibilities. It propably depends on the customers reaction to the current descision with optimisation emphasis on better performance in low light versus the W800/K750 optimisation emphasis on best performance in perfect conditions.
A loooong story, basically just to say, dont expect hughe differences in cameraquality through future firmwareupdates, cause there will only be minor, allthough for some those may make all the difference
[ This Message was edited by: numb on 2006-01-10 07:41 ] |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
good point Numb. Afterall the hardware is a limiting factor - no amount of firmware tweaking is going to improve the camera's inherent abilities.
|
mysh
Joined: Dec 04, 2005
Posts: 176
PM |
Oh i wasn't implying there would be massive improvements from firmware tweaks, i just meant as it's the same camera hardware, the colour quality differences -could- feasibly be corrected in a firmware update. I'm not too fussed about the colour saturation, it can be adjusted in photoshop later. I'm actually much more annoyed by the lack of mp4 id tag support!
|
kristianm
Joined: Aug 12, 2005
Posts: 490
PM, WWW
|
There's a new W900 review on mobique.com and it has a short comparative review of W900 vs W800:
http://www.mobique.com/sonyericsson/w900/page5.php
The most significant difference I found was with the sharpness of images. With the W900, the greater number of shots turned out slightly blurred – probably unnoticeable when looked at on its own, but not so when compared with the same shot taken with the W800. However, the not-so-sharp shots of the W900, in most cases, managed to offer a more colourful picture than those by the W800 in comparison. |
numb
Joined: Feb 07, 2005
Posts: > 500
PM |
Quote:
|
On 2006-01-10 10:20:06, mysh wrote:
Oh i wasn't implying there would be massive improvements from firmware tweaks, i just meant as it's the same camera hardware, the colour quality differences -could- feasibly be corrected in a firmware update. I'm not too fussed about the colour saturation, it can be adjusted in photoshop later. I'm actually much more annoyed by the lack of mp4 id tag support!
|
|
I fully agree, and surely the mp4 ID tag support should come also in a future update, seing that it now has in K750/W800 latest firmware.
|
marlonski
Joined: Oct 16, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: UK
PM |
Quote:
|
On 2006-01-10 04:02:23, kristianm wrote:
I'll try to post more pics (outdoor) next week. I don't have the W900 right now; my sister already got it from me last night (she was excited to see and use it).
Edit:
Quote:
|
On 2006-01-10 01:00:04, marlonski wrote:
@max, I'm sure your right with regards to the aperture. As for the low light conditions, I do agree that the w900 out performs the w800 although I have to say that colour and clarity is more important to me, I'm considering the mxe-60 which I hope will solve any low light conditions.
It would be interesting to see the two compared with the mxe-60. Based on overall performance I think I would put my money on the w800
|
|
Ah yes. I'll do that. I have an MXE-60.
[ This Message was edited by: kristianm on 2006-01-10 03:16 ]
|
|
Will be interesting to see the comparisons made with the MXE-60 
_________________
 =
[ This Message was edited by: marlonski on 2006-01-11 22:55 ] |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
Yes, very.
|
kristianm
Joined: Aug 12, 2005
Posts: 490
PM, WWW
|
First post updated with newer pictures (outdoor / MXE-60).
[ This Message was edited by: kristianm on 2006-01-16 05:35 ] |
marlonski
Joined: Oct 16, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: UK
PM |
Quote:
|
On 2006-01-16 04:31:01, kristianm wrote:
First post updated with newer pictures (outdoor / MXE-60).
[ This Message was edited by: kristianm on 2006-01-16 05:35 ]
|
|
Thanks mate
|
Twix
Joined: Oct 31, 2005
Posts: 95
From: London
PM |
Iv compared both pictures using dual screen and there hardly a difference between them, they are VERY similar pictures with not allot between both. Don’t buy a W900 if you think it’s got a better camera than a k750 or w800.
 |
mysh
Joined: Dec 04, 2005
Posts: 176
PM |
The w900i apparently has a better macro mode than the k750i? I read that in a review posted on the mobile-review forums, i don't have both phones to compare it personally tho.
The w900i does have spot photometry though, which if you ever used an s700i you'll know to be quite handy at times, especially when people have their back to the sun, or if there's a bright lamp next to someone. I was so please to see that camera feature back after the k50i dropped it. No idea why i called it spot geometry earlier in this thread, too many beers maybe.
Also if you're quite clever with the spot photometry feature and photoshop, you can create some VERY nice high dynamic range photos, by taking 2 photos with the spot photometry targetting the brightest and then darkest object in the scene you're photographing, and then combining the two photos into one image. Try it next time you're going for that sunset picture, you can capture everything from the dark silouette details to the blinding glare of the sun itself. | |
|
Access the forum with a mobile phone via esato.mobi
|
Posted: 2006-01-10 03:11
