| Author |
K800 camera outperforms N95 |
QVGA
Joined: May 23, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: Pakistan
PM, WWW
|
totally agree, what i've seen here are standalone K800 shots with no comparable N95 shots. The shots in which N95 and K800 are compared, N95 comes out top, i dont know what the matter with people here, either they are blind or blind in love for SE. |
|
|
goldenface
Joined: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Liverpool City Centre
PM |
On 2007-06-11 07:03:07, RevoWution wrote
The QUALITY of the camera is more important, not QUANTITY of pixels 
This is what some people just can't seem to grasp. Who on earth wants their cam pictures artificial and over-coloured?
QUALITY is what counts.
|
QVGA
Joined: May 23, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: Pakistan
PM, WWW
|
On 2007-06-11 09:03:40, goldenface wrote:
On 2007-06-11 07:03:07, RevoWution wrote
The QUALITY of the camera is more important, not QUANTITY of pixels
This is what some people just can't seem to grasp. Who on earth wants their cam pictures artificial and over-coloured?
QUALITY is what counts.
look at the comparison shot posted on the last page and then tell me whats artificial and whats not. nobody here thinks quantity is better than quality. |
goldenface
Joined: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Liverpool City Centre
PM |
I've looked at all of the comparison shots thank you.
|
QVGA
Joined: May 23, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: Pakistan
PM, WWW
|
On 2007-06-11 09:27:40, goldenface wrote:
I've looked at all of the comparison shots thank you.
and? obviously you might think there was something wrong with K800 there |
goldenface
Joined: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Liverpool City Centre
PM |
What?!
|
QVGA
Joined: May 23, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: Pakistan
PM, WWW
|
i'm asking what do you make of those shots? |
goldenface
Joined: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Liverpool City Centre
PM |
I think I have already made that clear. While the N95 takes more detailed pics, in my opinion its let down by the fact it exagerates the colour too much.
Look at the ashtray pic for example. It just doesn' t look natural.
I would prefer to have pictures with Natural tones and have the option to 'fix' the pictures afterwards than to have the phone do it for me, be unhappy with the results and have no option to repair any damage.
Basically, the N95 tries too hard.
|
Blutarsky
Joined: Jul 11, 2006
Posts: 136
PM, WWW
|
On 2007-06-11 08:32:25, mib1800 wrote:
Blutarsky - I bet you didnt know that mobileburn uses a pre-production N95 firmware to take those picture. So we can trash that (mobileburn) opinion/conclusion.
--
As of now photos which are comparable (i.e from phonearena review and from shanespencer - shots taken of same subject by both phones), it is plain obvious that N95 takes much better photo. I am still waiting for those who said K800 takes better shots to post some comparable shots which show K800 is better.
Mib, if that is the case, I'll buy it!
Im happy about my K800 but I want my next phone to be (at least) slightly better than k800.
Please post the links to the comparisons you've spotted out
[ This Message was edited by: Blutarsky on 2007-06-11 10:18 ] |
plankgatan
Joined: May 20, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden fur alle
PM |
when someone find a N95 who have this photo-quality. let me know.
|
Blutarsky
Joined: Jul 11, 2006
Posts: 136
PM, WWW
|
Guys, sorry for pushing it again, but for those complaining about N95's early firmware, I've just discovered that the samples of my previuos post (a link from phonearena comparison) were taken from a Q2 camera comparison dated may 11....... that's a quite recent comparison..... I doubt that the N95 used in the test was sporting and early firmware.........
QVGA, did you look at the pics in that test? |
goldenface
Joined: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Liverpool City Centre
PM |
@plankgatan
Now, thats truly a fantastic picture.
Now taking into consideration the comparison pictures we have seen, the N95 would happily take the colour of the yellow building in the centre of the picture and 'enhance' that colour when clearly it doesn't need enhancing.
I'm not sure I would like my cam to do that much processing of the picture for me.
|
Blutarsky
Joined: Jul 11, 2006
Posts: 136
PM, WWW
|
On 2007-06-10 23:04:34, shanespencer wrote:
It's like being in a kindergarten
Shane did you take a look at the pics coming from phonearena? I'd like to get some thoughts on them. |
hemnath123
Joined: Dec 04, 2006
Posts: 49
PM |
On 2007-06-08 17:46:43, antichrist wrote:
On 2007-06-07 21:27:25, QVGA wrote:
and i suppose the 3MP of K800 is anywhere near to a "real" 3MP camera? Dont forget N95 doesnt brag about the camera, whereas K800's ONLY selling point is camera. How dumb do you have to be to not understand that?
nobody said k800 is near a real camera, only that k800 camera is BETTER than n95's. i don't know why you don't want to accept that.
look at the bondizi's pictures he posted. can't you see the n95 picture lacks of color?
and don't insult others.someone who reads this topic can observe everyone is against you.maybe they even think you are the dumb one
On 2007-06-08 13:04:54, QVGA wrote:
some people just dont accept the reality, they think every phone's main point is camera, and even if doesnt perform as good as K800, just look at the other stuff it offers K800 can only dream off.
who said that the phone's main point is camera?????? THIS THREAD IS ABOUT K800 AND N95 CAMERA, NOT GENERALLY SPEAKING!!!!
[ This Message was edited by: antichrist on 2007-06-08 16:50 ]
Look at the price you will always dream off N95 |
Blutarsky
Joined: Jul 11, 2006
Posts: 136
PM, WWW
|
Blutarsky wrote:
Guys, sorry for pushing it again, but for those complaining about N95's early firmware, I've just discovered that the samples of my previuos post (a link from phonearena comparison) were taken from a Q2 camera comparison dated may 11....... that's a quite recent comparison..... I doubt that the N95 used in the test was sporting and early firmware.........
QVGA, did you look at the pics in that test?
QVGA??? |
|
|
Posted: 2007-06-11 08:52
