| Author |
C902 vs K800i, camer quality/user experience |
10123
Joined: May 29, 2008
Posts: > 500
PM |
I was able to use a K800 at the weekend and i took some photos in the best photography conditons, sunlight.
Photos:
Flowers-C902 easily outpeforms the K800, the flowers are quite blurry on the K800 and the colour arent as strong.
C902
K800
Plant food-C902 again outperforms the K800, the sharpness is overwhelming compared the k800 which suffers from soft edges and lacks enough sharpness, the colours are darker on the C902 which isnt always a good thing, but the colours are more washed out on the K800i. However comparing both shots on the C902 phone, the washed out colours appear more appealing.
C902
K800
Swing-Again the C902 wins, the quality of colour reproduction is far greater on the C902 and are the same in real life, while the K800i colours are darker making the shot very unapealing. Suprisingly the swing itself on both the k800 & c902 are exactly the same, minus less colur on the K800.
C902
K800
C902
Some more shots, the close up of the tools show that the c902 weakness is in darker conditons where sharpness and colour reproduction.
C902
K800
C902
K800
c902
K800
User experience
The interface in the c902 is obvioulsy better than that of the K800 but the K800 interface is far faster though. The camera shutter is far better on the K800 as it is smoother to slide, while the c902 is a lot harder and jolts slighlty. Suprisingly many for the 1st time have diffeculties opening the c902 cover. The c902 has touch buttons which are very annoying because if your taking photos you can easily touch one of the buttons by acident which changes a setting without realisng. Overall i prefer the K800 because of the better camera shutter and faster interface and because the touch buttons are very annoying, especially when taking videos.
| |
|
tranced
Joined: Jan 19, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: Santo Domingo, wonDeRland
PM |
K800 vs C902 pictures please
worth a look 
|
plankgatan
Joined: May 20, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden fur alle
PM |
i got similar result when i tested k800 and c902,
http://www.esato.com/board/viewtopic.php?topic=174224&start=90
the different i felt most was that c902 had a bit sharper pictures..... however, i think k800/k810 cam is great, c902 is just a bit greater
ex.
k800
c902
[ This Message was edited by: plankgatan on 2009-04-20 14:02 ] |
Raiderski
Joined: Jul 03, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: Poland, Hell, Mountains
PM, WWW
|
k800 which suffers from soft edges and lacks enough sharpness
the question is: why?
why pictures from my K800 are sharp and pictures here are not? why contrast and colors are washed out? I don't know any other reason that dirty glass under the camera cover. was it clean? for sure it was in C902
dirty vs. clean
|
plankgatan
Joined: May 20, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden fur alle
PM |
i doubt both k800 (mine and his) had smudge on the lens during this photos . the k800 is of course older then my c902 (small scratches and stuff), but the lens was in pretty good shape.
i understand your point though
(if i guess) its about that c902 adjust to different light-conditions a bit easier, i remember that this photos i took, was in half-sunny/cloudy weather. i just felt c902 was faster to find proper focus, (zip-zip, done)
k800
c902
[ This Message was edited by: plankgatan on 2009-04-20 13:42 ] |
nikolat
Joined: Apr 08, 2008
Posts: 187
From: Serbia
PM, WWW
|
It could be because the C902 has a 5.0MPX camera (in comparison to the K800's 3.2MPX), but the pictures taken with the K800 just seem way too blurry. |
Raiderski
Joined: Jul 03, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: Poland, Hell, Mountains
PM, WWW
|
sure they are
|
number1
Joined: Sep 12, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: UK,kent,Sittingbourne
PM |
On 2009-04-20 15:20:38, nikolat wrote:
It could be because the C902 has a 5.0MPX camera (in comparison to the K800's 3.2MPX), but the pictures taken with the K800 just seem way too blurry.
LOL you have no idea LOL ,
I had a K800 sometimes it would do the misty thing, sometimes not it's to do the whitebalance on the K800, not as good as the whitebalance on the newer C510,C702,C902. |
geza079
Joined: Nov 14, 2008
Posts: 81
From: Serbia
PM |
C510, C702 and C902 all have dark daylight pictures, just like my K510i. Details are more visible with K810i then C702. |
plankgatan
Joined: May 20, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden fur alle
PM |
dark daylight pics ???
think c902 have clear, vibrant colours at daylight, (i do agree that k800/k810 is better then c702)
|
Raiderski
Joined: Jul 03, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: Poland, Hell, Mountains
PM, WWW
|
- both cameras were clean (!)
- firmwares: K800 R8BF003 (camdriver Raider v6.6.4) and C902 R3EA038 (camdriver original)
- after camera start I waited a few seconds for auto WB stabilization before each shot
- settings: auto WB and macro mode if necessary
- light conditions: no, we won't be playing in colourful flowers in beautiful sunlight... indoor and cloudy daylight
- K800 image quality was low, each shot lost some % in jpeg compression and files are much below 900kb. firmware update switched it to low and I didn't noticed this, sorry my fault
at first I'm trying to find differences in light metering. no suprises, white object is underexposed on both pics in the same way
K800 http://www.4shared.com/file/143892438/1f89fb8e/DSC00002.html
C902 http://www.4shared.com/file/143894055/1500d7b5/DSC00087.html
let me try to catch something bigger. focus infinity set, ready, go!
hmmm, is something wrong with sharpness in C902? phone was placed on stable ground during shot, it couldn't be shaked. maybe dirt on glass? checked, negative - it's clean. maybe my eyes are addicted to very sharp K800 pics and I cannot accept anything softer which is also good? if yes then sorry
K800 http://www.4shared.com/file/143892586/1a076575/DSC00005.html
C902 http://www.4shared.com/file/143894412/e8012fce/DSC00090.html
K800 http://www.4shared.com/file/143893075/bae18d8e/DSC00010.html
C902 http://www.4shared.com/file/143895535/fd2dd5bd/DSC00094.html
I don't understand what happened here in C902 shots. where are colours?! this is very inconvenient for me because it looks like post-processed but it's not. how to explain? I don't know but if I have to be honest both sucks - C902 pic is underexposed while K800 pic is overexposed by high ISO 640
K800 http://www.4shared.com/file/143892749/2589e386/DSC00008.html
C902 http://www.4shared.com/file/143894818/1ce3fb4/DSC00092.html
K800 http://www.4shared.com/file/143887944/5b186bb3/DSC00010.html
C902 http://www.4shared.com/file/143889435/8b592982/DSC00075.html
LED in action and piece of cake for xenon
K800 http://www.4shared.com/file/143892916/c2df2758/DSC00009.html
C902 http://www.4shared.com/file/143895202/4d2b0558/DSC00093.html
macro. I expected more from auto WB in C902, much more! colors are like a dead body - cold!
K800 http://www.4shared.com/file/143893231/da6458fd/DSC00011.html
C902 http://www.4shared.com/file/143895870/e1f37765/DSC00095.html
K800 http://www.4shared.com/file/143893501/f4061dbb/DSC00013.html
C902 http://www.4shared.com/file/143896545/a0d9ec94/DSC00097.html
K800 http://www.4shared.com/file/143893679/b7dabd17/DSC00014.html
C902 http://www.4shared.com/file/143892211/50ee5d1a/DSC00098.html
K800 http://www.4shared.com/file/143888426/b3f72e1c/DSC00015.html
C902 http://www.4shared.com/file/143890546/1cbbe2f2/DSC00080.html
K800 http://www.4shared.com/file/143888639/39d7d6a2/DSC00018.html
C902 http://www.4shared.com/file/143890882/bfbbfab4/DSC00083.html
one more, colors on both sucks, K800 is too warm and C902 is too cold. only lower ISO rescued C902 shot
K800 http://www.4shared.com/file/143888088/a9a9434d/DSC00011.html
C902 http://www.4shared.com/file/143889776/747a0365/DSC00076.html
next step - auto WB in fluorescent light. both pics sucks, C902 colours are shallow, K800 colours are not bad but with yellow tint
K800 http://www.4shared.com/file/143893367/4fb263ba/DSC00012.html
C902 http://www.4shared.com/file/143896238/9466106b/DSC00096.html
K800 http://www.4shared.com/file/143888272/cd6062f2/DSC00013.html
C902 http://www.4shared.com/file/143890195/371565d9/DSC00078.html
final test, low-light
auto mode, both sucks
K800 http://www.4shared.com/file/143888772/cbaba019/DSC00019.html
C902 http://www.4shared.com/file/143891270/630665e4/DSC00084.html
twilight mode, a lot better
K800 http://www.4shared.com/file/143888968/38fb554c/DSC00020.html
C902 http://www.4shared.com/file/143887828/536ea29/DSC00085.html
K800 short enhanced mode (SEM)
http://www.4shared.com/file/143889161/f788db35/DSC00021.html
conclusion? in low-light AF is noticable faster in C902, no touch key shortcut to WB, legendary great auto WB doesn't exist. you'll say "because light was poor", yes it was... for both cameras. I'm expecting much more from auto WB in poor light, sorry but it's quite obvious that sunlight is not a problem for auto WB and every pic taken in such conditions is somehow beautiful-WOW!-nice-amazing-10/10-great for each of these two cameras
last thing are camdrivers, I assume that situation is clear enough and nobody will tell me that modded old 3.2MP camera is unfair competitor for newer 5MP camera
| |
|
Access the forum with a mobile phone via esato.mobi
|
Posted: 2009-04-19 22:33
jay0726 | 
