| Author |
Hello! k750i Vs a 2Mp cam |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
Not always, but yes, mostly. But don't forget people happily used VGA digital cameras and thought they were the ducks guts, yet K750 is way better than many of those early vga cameras.
Not my old VGA epson though - apart from resolution and a little bit of softness, the colours, exposure, noise everything is way better than the K750 (doesn't mean I'm going to keep using it though - or buy a newie, since my interest in photography at the moment is with camera phones, even shitty ones like the T610 (from an artistic point of view).
Epson 500 VGA:
no exif data with this camera
And this one: notice the almost complete absense of noise 
These photos are not edited in anyway
The epson in it's day was comparable to a $800 digital camera in todays money (relatively speaking of course - obviously they are higher resolution now, but notice how good the photo of the epson is compared to ANY cheap digital camera, either camera phone of dedicated).
Low end digital cameras today may have higher resolutions, but they are still shit quality cameras with cmos chips and poor lenses. This is why I maintain that the K750 is comparable - because it is not much better or worse than the low end of digital cameras. It therefore deserves to be classified as a true digicam, albeit a low end one.
_________________
File System Tweaks for the K750 K750 Tricks
[ This Message was edited by: max_wedge on 2006-07-19 07:14 ] | |
|
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
regarding shutter speed affecting sharpness, here is a comparison:
1/20s, Night Mode off, ceiling light on, ISO 800
1/5s, Night mode on, ceiling light off, ISO 800
So I'm happy that you can take steady shots at slow shutter speeds. It seems to me, people just have to be careful when taking a photo to remember to hold the camera steady. Photography 101 I would have thought 
You do have to be more careful than with faster cameras, but it's still doable.
BTW, i realise the photograph above is crap and filled with noise - I chose extreme low light to force a slow shutter speed.
|
rockygali
Joined: Nov 21, 2005
Posts: > 500
From:
PM, WWW
|
yes... i believe i have to agree on that idea max.
coz my friend has this Microtek MP500
and as you can see
Specifications
Image sensor: 5.1 MegaPixels CMOS sensor (Max: 12MegaPixels)
Sensitivity Equivalent: Auto
Lens Aperture: f3.0
Zoom: 8 x digital zoom
------
Video / audio clip Up to 24fps @ VGA (640 x 480)
-----
Focus range Near: 1-2.2m
Far: 2m - infinity
Flash Yes
Flash range 3-6 Feet
-----
Internal Memory 128MB NAND
LCD 2.5" LTPS TFT LCD (201.096 pixels)
-----
Battery Type 1100mah rechargeable Lithium battery
Dimension 4.1"x 2.7" x 0.7" / 104mm x 68mm x 18.5mm
and when i compare the shots taken with K750, man! it never came close to what a Digital Camera would be doin. it has very poor color realism, cant adjust to low light conditions while on viewfinder, and when FLASH is used, it burns up everything within a meter...
crazy! very crazy!
"Darkness is the absence of light.. and not the opposite..." |
mongoose3800
Joined: Nov 29, 2005
Posts: 416
From: Australia
PM |
The original question was "is the k750i with flash equivalent to a 2mp camera". The correct answer is: It's good but not as good as a dedicated 2mp camera. The original question also stated that the poster was looking for "general picture quality, not portability". So, before everyone goes off, read the original question 1st! If you are buying solely because you want a decent 2mp camera obviously you should buy the camera that offers the best picture quality. I have just looked through a stack of my old 1mp pictures and believe they are on par with the best photo's I have been able to achieve with my W800. Yes, I agree resolution is not everything. I really only set my 3mp camera to 2mp for most of my photos. And all these 2mp pics are far superior to anything my w800 has produced.
Max_wedge: whilst the photo of your dad is pretty good take a closer look at the hashing in roof and on the brown rails in the background. Make sure you view at full resolution. Doesn't it drive you mad? This is where the camera can not compare to a 2mp (or even a 1mp) camera.
Quote:
|
On 2006-07-19 06:34:53, max_wedge wrote:
@mongoose3800, actually the original poster posted this thread to compare low end 2MP cameras, not mid to high end 3MP and above (very few low end digicams have optical zoom, and although that is changing quickly, so are camera phones). BTW, there are camera phones that have optical zoom..
|
|
Reply: 1) interesting - The question was "equivalent" not low end. You are obviously comparing K750 to a low end camera. 2) I only mentioned 3mp because that is pretty much the lowest spec camera you can now buy. 3) Yes, I'm not wet behind the ears, I know some phones (namely philips) have optical zoom. But, you wouldn't really compare them to the optical zoom on a reall camera.
Max_Wedge: To sum up, I really don't want to get into a long running blurb on who's right and who's wrong. I can see and appreciate your comments. I even agree with most of them. I have some great photos from my w800 and have printed quite a few. But, I also have had a lot of disappointing photos as well that left me wishing I had a real camera on me. So, view mine and others responses as being in the spirit of the original question and not a criticism.
|
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
the orignial question:
Quote:
| i m thinking of upgrading to a k750 from my current k508i. i was just wondering, n this may have been asked before.... is the k750i with flash equivalent to a 2mp camera? tried searchin but couldnt find anything along these lines. and i am wondering specifically about general picture quality, not portability and stuff where it obviously wins!!!! |
|
@mongoose, the original poster had a K508 and wants to know if a K750 upgrade will mean they don't have to buy a dedicated digicam. The fact they said "equivalent to a 2mp camera" indicates they don't care as much about quality as you and Mark assume (being true photographers this has a different meaning for you).
Later in the thread letsjam1984 went on to say
Quote:
| comparison with a 2mp bottom line model.....not the fancy ones......those ll b better obviously. |
|
So I feel quite justified in claiming that the answer to the original question is that the K750 is a suitable alternative to a dedicated LOW END digital camera, and I also feel justified in recommending to letsjam1984 that they go out and purchase a K750 POST HASTE, and forget about spending an extra $100 on a shitty 2MP dedicated digital camera and buy a 256MB MSDP instead.
_________________
File System Tweaks for the K750 K750 Tricks
[ This Message was edited by: max_wedge on 2006-07-19 10:56 ] |
mongoose3800
Joined: Nov 29, 2005
Posts: 416
From: Australia
PM |
mmmm. If if letsjam1984's k508 is meeting all his mobile phone needs and only wants to take higher quality photos he may save himself far more money by buying a digicam  But, if he wants a new phone as well - absolutely buy a K750. But, I would recommend the w800 as it comes with a heap more memory(512mb) for storing more photos. Therefore, getting the best value for your dollar. Note, you don't want to buy cheap/fake MS memory for these phones. And, if letsjam1984 wants decent pictures at night - he should fork out the extra cash for a flash and mod the camera driver with FAR to fix the excessive default jpg compression when using night mode. |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
Agreed!
|
mongoose3800
Joined: Nov 29, 2005
Posts: 416
From: Australia
PM |
Excellent! I hope this discussion has offered letsjam1984 some insight.
letsjam1984: I'd be keen to know what your decission is and what you think of your purchase. | |
|
Access the forum with a mobile phone via esato.mobi
|
Posted: 2006-07-19 08:02
