| Author |
post pictures taken with your: sony ericsson K850 |
kjao
Joined: Apr 24, 2007
Posts: 200
PM |
fantastic shot of the toadstool |
|
|
cmikilp
Joined: Jun 05, 2005
Posts: 123
From: Sweden
PM |
 |
ericemel
Joined: Oct 15, 2007
Posts: 17
PM |
On 2007-10-16 12:08:02, ghostfreak wrote:
I love that picture ericemel - what were your camera settings for it?
All auto except macro setting. Approx 10cm away
|
indup
Joined: Sep 13, 2007
Posts: 243
PM |
[ This Message was edited by: indup on 2007-10-16 12:58 ] |
goldenface
Joined: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Liverpool City Centre
PM |
On 2007-10-16 11:48:14, ericemel wrote:
Great snap! Did you use the Auto-settings for this?
|
masseur
Joined: Jan 03, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Sydney, London
PM |
@goldenface... (don't just look at the pretty pictures  )
On 2007-10-16 13:05:49, ericemel wrote:
On 2007-10-16 12:08:02, ghostfreak wrote:
I love that picture ericemel - what were your camera settings for it?
All auto except macro setting. Approx 10cm away
_________________
Unless I'm very much mistaken...
reviews: i-mate V800 K700
[ This Message was edited by: masseur on 2007-10-16 13:06 ] |
goldenface
Joined: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Liverpool City Centre
PM |
@masseur
Thats exactly what I was doing. I can actually read, and tie my own shoe-laces. 
|
ghostfreak
Joined: Mar 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: N. Ireland, UK
PM, WWW
|
So you're not just a Golden Face then 
http://www.ghostrx.net
T300 > T610 > K700i > K750i > K800i > K850i > W910i > K850i (after flash with R1FA035) > C905 (broken earpiece as of 23/01/09) > BB 9000 > BB Bold 9700 > SE Experia X10 Mini Pro |
tai020381
Joined: Dec 07, 2004
Posts: > 500
PM |
Auto mode
http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/7451/dsc00199wj2.jpg
http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/7225/dsc00201cl5.jpg
http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/491/dsc00203cx5.jpg
[ This Message was edited by: tai020381 on 2007-10-16 14:33 ] |
tai020381
Joined: Dec 07, 2004
Posts: > 500
PM |
Yes, k850 does has the overexposure thing just like the k800. Still, this is currently the only picture I've taken which has overexposed. Reason still unknown. Perhaps some professionals here can guide?
http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/3517/dsc00197qv1.jpg
http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/5803/dsc00198zu7.jpg
The first picture taken full auto, second picture taken with EV set to -0.7. Just take note when you see the picture looking whitish before you take a snap. Readjust the exposure before you take!! |
mongoose3800
Joined: Nov 29, 2005
Posts: 416
From: Australia
PM |
I'm sorry, but I'm not one bit impressed with one shot I have seen from the K850. Sure, when shrunk down the photos look O.K. but so do photo's from any cheap low res camera. At full res K850 shots look very grainy. Even worse if you zoom in a little. At least it doesn't seem to suffer problems with anti-aliasing as badly as the K800. Every shot I've seen from the K850 look terrible at full res. What's the point of 5mp if the images look crap when viewed at full res. With more MP I expect better image quality at full res and the ability to zoom in to some degree. This clearly isn't the case. I know, some of you don't care about that - probably only because your justifying to yourself the purchase of the phone. But others do care about what images look like at full res. SE are actually claiming this phone will perform like a dedicated Digicam. What a load of rubbish. You would expect photos taken in full daylight to be pretty clear but even they appear grainy and over processed. Obviously there is only so much you can expect from a tiny Lens. I definately wont be making the same mistake of "ugrading" to a K850. I learnt my lesson with the K800 - it still bugs me to this day. |
aledemo
Joined: Apr 27, 2006
Posts: 6
PM |
hi,scuse me for the disturb..
can i ask to the luky man that have the k850 if he can take 2 or 3 photo with the flash?
please...
the power of the flash is the same of the k800?
i can take a picture whit the flash from 2 or 3 meters of the subject?
thank you |
NightBlade
Joined: Jul 29, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Nessebar, Bulgaria
PM |
@mongoose:
The point of more megapixels is to have more detail when the picture is viewed at a lower resolutions. |
Raaab
Joined: Nov 08, 2004
Posts: 172
PM |
more megapixels does not increase the quality of a taken picture.
It just makes the image larger.
EDIT: Actually thats a crap description.
A pixel is a pixel. The defining point of quality is PPI, or pixels per inch. The more you shrink a picture, the higher the PPI, and the higher the resulting resolution/quality of the image.
With more recorded pixels (higher megapixel), you can shrink the image far less, and maintain a high PPI.
_________________
raaab (+1,-0)
[ This Message was edited by: Raaab on 2007-10-16 16:08 ] |
indup
Joined: Sep 13, 2007
Posts: 243
PM |
|
|
|
Posted: 2007-10-16 12:14
