| Author |
Post pictures taken with your C902 Cybershot Phone |
plankgatan
Joined: May 20, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden fur alle
PM |
well, i give a shit, it looks great in my eyes 
ps. not meaning you, just happy to see such clear, vibrant colours
[ This Message was edited by: plankgatan on 2009-04-27 12:41 ] |
|
|
plankgatan
Joined: May 20, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden fur alle
PM |
i tried the stabilizer a bit today...i thinks it gets slightly sharper but a bit brighter colours.
(the quality is good in both pics though)
off
on
crop
nice quality
full size
http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/viewphotos.php?pid=19378
[ This Message was edited by: plankgatan on 2009-04-27 18:46 ] |
plankgatan
Joined: May 20, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden fur alle
PM |
a tip to all c902 owners. USE cloudy.WB when its bad weather (common sense maybe, but its really great stuff).
auto + cloudy.WB taken in really bad weather 
think the quality became pretty good for such pissy weather, (better then i expected)
http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/viewphotos.php?pid=19384
----------------------------------------------------------------------
studying strength-science (hållfasthetslära) indoor, macro
[ This Message was edited by: plankgatan on 2009-04-28 13:30 ] |
blerk
Joined: Jun 12, 2008
Posts: > 500
From: London, UK
PM |
I've just played around with my new C902, and the cam is just awful. Macro pictures are full of weird noisey smears and a simple shot of a well lit room results in a smear fest too. I'm running the latest firmware. Wonder why it's so bad, even my Z610i 2mp non-AF camera takes better images.
100% crops:
I couldn't even get closer with the C902 as the image would be washed over with white due to the flash flashing very weirdly compared to the C702. And without the flash the C902 can't focus properly until I have more distance than with the C702. Both pictures are taken without flash, forced it off.
What is causing this? Both pictures are taken in the same room with the same level of light.
Full sizes here:
C702: http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/viewfullsize.php?id=19393
C902: http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/viewfullsize.php?id=19394
[ This Message was edited by: blerk on 2009-04-29 00:51 ] |
brazzuka's
Joined: Nov 14, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: South World-Antartida-Sweden
PM, WWW
|
Forced Led Flash c902
auto
[ This Message was edited by: brazuka on 2009-04-29 04:10 ] |
plankgatan
Joined: May 20, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden fur alle
PM |
well, blerk, it either 2 ways. (bad camera or bad photographer)
its nearly impossible to get such blurred macro by c902, not even my indoor have so bad quality
http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/viewphotos.php?pid=18361
macro taken outdoor is even easier to get good, (so i cant see how you can fail with the pictures).
http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/viewphotos.php?pid=18759
http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/viewphotos.php?pid=18675
http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/viewphotos.php?pid=19036
--------------------------------------------------------------
wondering where Muhammad-Oli is (long time no seen)
[ This Message was edited by: plankgatan on 2009-04-29 07:07 ] |
blerk
Joined: Jun 12, 2008
Posts: > 500
From: London, UK
PM |
Well I don't know how bad I can do it wrong, it's point - focus - shoot. Did it with all my previous camera phones and none have had so much problems focusing in macro mode. The flash light comes on to help focussing then the whole screen looks like an over exposed white sea then the "i have focus" beep goes and the image is just washed out with white due to the flash. I will have a little shoot out in my garden later today. Contestants: C902, C702, N95 and my Panasonic Lumix FS5. |
plankgatan
Joined: May 20, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden fur alle
PM |
well, what can i say, c902 is the best point & shot (phone)camera i have.
i get nearly always great pics (regarding focus, white balance, etc). im not trying to brag, just reality.
anyway.... some beautiful flowers
fullsize
http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/viewphotos.php?pid=19402
fullsize
http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/viewphotos.php?pid=19400
[ This Message was edited by: plankgatan on 2009-04-29 16:11 ] |
blerk
Joined: Jun 12, 2008
Posts: > 500
From: London, UK
PM |
I'd like to see some indoor macro shots with flash. Outdoor ofcourse is easy to get good pictures, sun, light, etc, etc. Indoor macro with flash is where it goes wrong here, focusing goes slow and often it can't focus at all where my others focused just fine. That can't be me, I'm only pressing a button at the same distance from the subject. Later tonight I will post the pictures I've taken with a bunch of phones and a digicam. Need to get some 100% crops and decent thumbs and then upload it all to my site. Here's my first real contribution to this thread; macro shot taken outside in the shade.
Full size: http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/viewfullsize.php?id=19401
I notice a lot of C902 pictures have these odd specs/bits in them, is it the over sharpening of the camera drivers?
|
number1
Joined: Sep 12, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: UK,kent,Sittingbourne
PM |
@blerk , The C702 & c902 have the same sized sensor , probley the same sensor the difference is the number of megapixels loaded on it, the C702 has the advantage of less it means less noise/less processing is needed and better quality images notice how the C702 looks alot better on iso500 than the c902 does on iso400, nothing you can do about it.
As for the macro problem have you tried just coving the autofocus led with your finger that used to work for my k800, when doing macros autofocus assist leds are useless as they just flare up and make focusing worse, most devices have the option to turn them on or off are you sure the c902 doesn't???. |
blerk
Joined: Jun 12, 2008
Posts: > 500
From: London, UK
PM |
I can force the flash off if thats what you mean, but then it cant seem to focus too  Also the macro shots are quite blurry compared to the C702. It's not a big deal or something, just strikes me as strange. Having both devices side by side its so much easier to take very close macro shots with the C702 than the C902. The C702 seems faster/easier to focus and the pictures are much sharper. Just took another macro of those little stickers you get on laptops, about 1x1cm in size.
I'm not here to diss the C902, just trying to figure out what is going on. On the example above (which I jsut took 5 mins ago) both phones focus fine and I see a green rectangle, my hand is steady enough, I will even use a tripod later with some bluetack to be sure
Edit: Just took the same picture as above with the C902 on a tripod + timer, still blurry results. I did not touch it and we had no mini earth quake.
[ This Message was edited by: blerk on 2009-04-29 16:27 ] |
number1
Joined: Sep 12, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: UK,kent,Sittingbourne
PM |
Is the C702 using a modded camdriver??? , if your using 1 i created or helped create then i did change pretty much the whole focusing property,
The C902's pic does look a little bit shaked which is werid as the C702 uses longer shutter speeds due to it's smaller aperature, so if you can hold the C702 still the C902 should be no problem, also remember the C902 has stronger processing so the C702 pic will be more detailed & sharper. |
plankgatan
Joined: May 20, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden fur alle
PM |
???? blerk, why does that c902 picture looks out of focus in some way...both pics have same among of noise but its just c702 who have accurate focus....thats fu##ed up).
besides, im not sure what you looking for ???? c702 doesn't have a chance against c902 my friend, (c702 quality is often way to blurred)
[ This Message was edited by: plankgatan on 2009-04-29 16:35 ] |
blerk
Joined: Jun 12, 2008
Posts: > 500
From: London, UK
PM |
All stock drivers. Outside macro's are fine though, just inside its a whole different story when there's less light, not really low light, just less. I've did a little shoot-out in my garden earlier today. Need to find a way to display those nicely for easy comparing. I'll open a N95 vs C902 vs C702 vs FS5 for it when it's ready
Edit:
Plankgatan, I'm looking for a sharp indoor macro picture with less than optimal light. The C702 can pull it off, why can't the C902? I'm just wondering why I can't get a nice "sharp" image of the same subject with the C902 as I can with the C702. It is nothing more than curiosity on my part.
As for the C702 is often too blurred I have no experience with that, nor have I seen any examples of such a thing, I know nothing beats your C902 
[ This Message was edited by: blerk on 2009-04-29 16:34 ] |
number1
Joined: Sep 12, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: UK,kent,Sittingbourne
PM |
Your C902 isn't faulty otherwise it would be like that all the time even in full light, the C702 probley just has better auto-focus in lower light than the C902, the C902 & C702 do have very different focus properities in there drivers.
As for plankgatan's comment the C702 has no chance against the C902 just check the red colour on that pic.
Fullsized pics & 100% crops would be good in your comparasion. |
|
|
Posted: 2009-04-27 13:36
