| Author |
Nokia 6220 Vs Sony Ericsson C902 |
shyam335
Joined: May 25, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: 127.0.0.1
PM |
Fair enough,then why don't i see 17mm k850 beat 17mm N82.6220c is supposed to be eual to N82 in terms of cam.
6220c is a brilliant mid range phone,i cant see how c902 is going to challenge it feature-wise or value-wise.
|
|
|
MADReaLJL
Joined: May 22, 2006
Posts: 35
PM |
its not like 6220 has a great cam.. its just c902 cam is sucks to the max |
mib1800
Joined: Mar 18, 2004
Posts: > 500
PM |
On 2008-05-20 05:50:16, >500 wrote:
The 6220classic is 15mm, so im also assuming the nokia has a larger/better quality (obviously judging from these pictures) unit
5mm is a lot in a phone, and im sure a better unit would have been used if the c902 were 15mm.
But its not, its 10mm, and now we have this shabby photo quality.
Life goes on...
You got it all wrong.  Bad picture is not due to thinness. It is just due to SE wants to maximise profit by including a cheap & crap sensor/lens in the C902 just like they did in all their recent and future phones |
carkitter
Joined: Apr 29, 2005
Posts: > 500
From: Auckland, NZ
PM |
On 2008-05-19 14:26:55, Pop Lover wrote:
NOKIA 6220 & SONYERICSSON C902
1st Pic is for 6220 the 2nd for C902
 
My 2.0Mp V640i can match that!
I don't trust these supposed pre-released claims especially as that website is down prventing me from checking the EXIF data... how about uploading those shots to the Esato picture gallery and posting the link here? If they're real of course. 
|
carkitter
Joined: Apr 29, 2005
Posts: > 500
From: Auckland, NZ
PM |
On 2008-05-20 07:26:45, mib1800 wrote:
... It is just due to SE wants to maximise profit by including a cheap & crap sensor/lens in the C902 just like they did in all their recent and future phones
How do you know this? It just sounds like cinicism to me. Maybe SE cannot use the same sensors as Nokia due to an exclisive deal just like Nokia have with Carl Zeiss lenses. Maybe Nokia who sell 4 times as many phones as SE can swing a better bulk purchase price? Who knows? But making cinical generalisations dressed as expert commentary is NOT helpful to the discussion.
|
QVGA
Joined: May 23, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: Pakistan
PM, WWW
|
On 2008-05-20 05:50:16, >500 wrote:
ok the c902 produces very bad photos (going by these images), so im 'assuming'  have used a smaller/low quality unit as a result of the phone being 10mm thin.
The 6220classic is 15mm, so im also assuming the nokia has a larger/better quality (obviously judging from these pictures) unit
5mm is a lot in a phone, and im sure a better unit would have been used if the c902 were 15mm.
But its not, its 10mm, and now we have this shabby photo quality.
Life goes on...
ps. before anyone calls me a fanboy, im not defending im just saying that this MAY be the cause of the poor image quality. I'd be saying the same if the results were the other way around.
_________________
May the be with you!
[ This Message was edited by: >500 on 2008-05-20 04:52 ]
Wasnt C902 suppose to be the new camera high end from SE? If yes, then why would they make it thin to compromise picture quality?
|
driftmania
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: California, USA
PM |
Because they have the idea that thin is in. |
>500
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: > 500
PM |
@mib1800
so you're size has ABSOULTELY NOTHING to do with quality  okkkkkkkk........... the less space there is, the smaller the unit, you do realise that.
@qvga
good question 
but yes it is a high end'ish phone i guess, though the flagship camera phone is still due to come this year of course. still, these photos are quite poor.
i leave my final judgement though until the final version is out and on the market, as i do with any other proto from any other companies.
god why did the 6220 have to be so ugly (my opinion) i may have bought one..... o well.
|
Vipera ammodytes
Joined: Sep 22, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Serbia
PM |
On 2008-05-20 07:26:45, mib1800 wrote:
On 2008-05-20 05:50:16, >500 wrote:
The 6220classic is 15mm, so im also assuming the nokia has a larger/better quality (obviously judging from these pictures) unit
5mm is a lot in a phone, and im sure a better unit would have been used if the c902 were 15mm.
But its not, its 10mm, and now we have this shabby photo quality.
Life goes on...
You got it all wrong. Bad picture is not due to thinness. It is just due to SE wants to maximise profit by including a cheap & crap sensor/lens in the C902 just like they did in all their recent and future phones
you know everything about se future phones????
give me a break...
OnePlus 8 |
Raiderski
Joined: Jul 03, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: Poland, Hell, Mountains
PM, WWW
|
what i see is very bad quality, however i still believe that final product will show us something much better. i like 6220 features but battery lifetime is disqualifying this phone from the use. so, relax everybody and give chance to SE
|
lolcito
Joined: Dec 25, 2007
Posts: 79
PM |
the nokia 6220 won to the c902 :S |
Killfr3nzy
Joined: Mar 08, 2008
Posts: > 500
From: Arabia and Hollanda
PM |
On 2008-05-20 10:02:44, Raiderski wrote:
what i see is very bad quality, however i still believe that final product will show us something much better. i like 6220 features but battery lifetime is disqualifying this phone from the use. so, relax everybody and give chance to SE
Totally agree with this, |
dancingfate
Joined: Sep 25, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Jakarta, Indonesia
PM |
This is from gsmarena preview of C902:
Unfortunately, the trademark red-to-pink conversion that all recent Sony Ericsson cameraphones manifest is still present here and judging from our experience it will be there in the final products too.
Link :
http://www.gsmarena.com/sony_ericsson_c902-review-223p3.php
Apple iPhone 4, HTC Evo 3D, HTC Sensation, HTC Inspire 4G, HTC Desire S, HTC Wildfire, S001, SO905iCS, T650 (Gold & Green), C901, W800, K660, K700, Beibei (G702), Severine (DEAD) |
xpx
Joined: May 29, 2004
Posts: 79
From: canada
PM |
i thought 6220 is ugly... but sitting beside that remote control c902, 6220 suddenly looks good.
SE is just falling out. the once i loved company is no more.. cybershit is just icing in the cake, and i would not be surprise if the romours on downgrading x1 is also real.
eat my short! |
carkitter
Joined: Apr 29, 2005
Posts: > 500
From: Auckland, NZ
PM |
On 2008-05-20 10:19:57, Rifqi_Aziz wrote:
This is from gsmarena preview of C902:
Unfortunately, the trademark red-to-pink conversion that all recent Sony Ericsson cameraphones manifest is still present here and judging from our experience it will be there in the final products too.
Link :
http://www.gsmarena.com/sony_ericsson_c902-review-223p3.php
And the paragraph above the one you quoted reads:
"Judging the camera quality of a beta unit is a risky business. Even so, it's clear the C902 camera is a capable shooter. The images are crisp with nice detail. Noise level is relatively low, especially with sufficient light. The autofocus camera does very well at close-ups. Color rendering is relatively good; yet all colors are a bit cold. We think they need some 10-15% more saturation to ride high."
Well guess what... some contrast and saturation tweaks could be all that's needed, and those are things that firmware can deal to... lets wait for the retail version eh? 
|
|
|
Posted: 2008-05-20 06:41
