| Author |
Why dont CyberShot phones have Carl Ziess lenses? |
number1
Joined: Sep 12, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: UK,kent,Sittingbourne
PM |
It's not overall sharpness , whatever the sharpness level it should be consistant from corner to corner with a good lens. |
|
|
xironghostx
Joined: Feb 06, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden
PM |
According to this Motorola zn5 is also using Carl Zeiss optics:
http://www.motorola.com/media[....]Id=9966_9895_23&pageLocaleId=8
"5 Megapixel
Autofokus
4fach-Digitalzoom
Carl Zeiss Optik" |
Mizzle
Joined: Oct 06, 2006
Posts: > 500
PM, WWW
|
xironghostx,
Funny - Motorola partnered with Kodak on the ZN5.
On 2009-03-20 16:50:36, number1 wrote:
It's not overall sharpness , whatever the sharpness level it should be consistant from corner to corner with a good lens.
At f/2.8? Are you kidding me? That's optically impossible.
[ This Message was edited by: Mizzle on 2009-03-20 15:54 ] |
number1
Joined: Sep 12, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: UK,kent,Sittingbourne
PM |
It's a kodak sensor and carl zeiss lens. |
number1
Joined: Sep 12, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: UK,kent,Sittingbourne
PM |
On 2009-03-20 16:51:53, Mizzle wrote:
At f/2.8? Are you kidding me? That's optically impossible.
I'm not on about what looks focused and whats not, you can't blame the aperture for blurry corners or the enitire right hand side of a pic being blurred, the sharpness of the entire pic even the less focused parts should be the same from corner to corner. |
Mizzle
Joined: Oct 06, 2006
Posts: > 500
PM, WWW
|
On 2009-03-20 17:04:38, number1 wrote:
On 2009-03-20 16:51:53, Mizzle wrote:
At f/2.8? Are you kidding me? That's optically impossible.
I'm not on about what looks focused and whats not, you can't blame the aperture for blurry corners or the enitire right hand side of a pic being blurred, the sharpness of the entire pic even the less focused parts should be the same from corner to corner.
Sharpness in blurry parts of the picture? Right.
|
number1
Joined: Sep 12, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: UK,kent,Sittingbourne
PM |
not blurry, unfocused, smeary is probley a more accurate word than blurry, my sony p100 which it carl zeiss lens doesn't have completey random spots of smear like my C702 did with it's sony lens they both have the same aperture f/2.8 , will the sony has 2.8 & 5.6 or more depending if optical zoom is used. |
xironghostx
Joined: Feb 06, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden
PM |
On 2009-03-20 16:51:53, Mizzle wrote:
xironghostx,
Funny - Motorola partnered with Kodak on the ZN5.
Yes I know it's funny, butt still the official Motorola website says so. Well, Im not sure what to believe.
|
Bonovox
Joined: Apr 13, 2008
Posts: > 500
PM |
Yeah i sometimes do wonder. Surely its not allowed to say its Carl Zeiss lens in a phone but its not. Surely thats false advertising and conning customers. Well the thick customers anyway 
Phone?? What phone?? |
number1
Joined: Sep 12, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: UK,kent,Sittingbourne
PM |
If it says carl zeiss it must be a carl zeiss lens , i doubt carl zeiss would just let there name be used like that. |
panonski
Joined: Dec 13, 2008
Posts: 345
From: Croatia
PM |
On 2009-03-20 17:56:38, number1 wrote:
If it says carl zeiss it must be a carl zeiss lens , i doubt carl zeiss would just let there name be used like that.
maybe it's a Carl Zeiss lower quaillty product.
I doubt that is Carl Zeiss very pleased with quality in Nokia phones,
and their name is shining on them....
ACTUALLY I THINK,
THAT'S THE WORST CARL ZEISS MARKETING MOVE TILL NOW.
Nobody believe in Carl Zeiss anymore after that.
[ This Message was edited by: panonski on 2009-03-20 17:06 ] |
plankgatan
Joined: May 20, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden fur alle
PM |
On 2009-03-20 16:49:00, Bonovox wrote:
Nokia phones do produce sharp images but very over sharpened sometimes with unnatural colours.
yeh you right, nokias n-serie produce way to over-saturated pictures, (they looks "cool", but natural ??? no way)
and like i said, this matter is also about Nokia camera software. its NOT about their Carl ziess lenses.
[ This Message was edited by: plankgatan on 2009-03-20 18:06 ] |
Raiderski
Joined: Jul 03, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: Poland, Hell, Mountains
PM, WWW
|
I guess all this story about Carl Zeiss in Nokia is not about the hardware but technology. notice that Nokia is using (Vario-)Tessar structured (or just name) lens which is patented. Carl Zeiss don't have to be manufacturer of the lens used in Nokia phones. if Nokia have licence they can create cheap versions of (Vario-)Tessar lens or anything else signed by (Vario-)Tessar in own factory or by other 3rd party vendor. Tessar or not Carl Zeiss is not manufacturer
Tessar is still great but only when glass is much bigger than this what you have in cameraphone
[ This Message was edited by: Raiderski on 2009-03-20 21:12 ] |
frankthetank
Joined: Jan 28, 2008
Posts: 159
From: Christchurch, New Zealand
PM, WWW
|
On 2009-03-20 16:51:53, Mizzle wrote:
At f/2.8? Are you kidding me? That's ECONOMICALLY impossible.
Try telling me that my nifty fifty is optically impossible!
The fact is that a fixed lens of fixed aperture at the size used for a camera phone is cheap because it has to be affordable. What is impossible is fitting the required number of filtering and corrective lens elements to remove aberrations, distortions and blurring into a cellphone body
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/profile.php?id=793404578
http://www.flickr.com/photos/franhams/ |
Mizzle
Joined: Oct 06, 2006
Posts: > 500
PM, WWW
|
frankthetank,
There is no way your 50mm lens can be sharp throughout the picture at f/2.8. Try to take a picture of a building at f/2.8 and compare the center sharpness with the side sharpness.
Also - don't change the content of my quotes!!!!!!!!!!!!!
[ This Message was edited by: Mizzle on 2009-03-21 07:21 ] |
|
|
Posted: 2009-03-20 16:50
