| Author |
New NOKIA N86 camera 8 megapixeles |
-PERFECT-
Joined: Dec 29, 2007
Posts: 461
PM |
On 2009-03-30 16:51:47, plankgatan wrote:
well, Innov8 produce good pics,..but i think c905 is better then renoir.
besides, N86 will wipe all this phones especially indoor, lowlight (and thats what i talk about mostly...yes)...think Renoir and some other high end phones is quite bad lowlight or indoor.
In one of the more reliable shootout the Renoir came first, and this comparison was made by gsmarena...have you ever dreamed the reason?
We all know yours very strange and variable preferences (ask to Abu..), if you want great shots in lowlight get the i-mobile 902 or a k800 with Raiderski cam. driver.
Renoir is way better than C905, except only for the xenon flash, if it’s horrible (as you wrote before editing) in lowlight and indoor pics (strangely they have rated in low light 5 the Renoir, 4 the Innov8, and 2 the C905) what can we say about your crappy lowlight shots? That you live in a fairy tale?
|
|
|
Radu_91
Joined: Sep 14, 2008
Posts: 201
From: Romania
PM |
c'mon man the N86 has the most most advanced and innovative camera on a phone with variable aperture and wide lens and will beat every phone so stop sayng that the k800,i-mobile,renoir or innov8 is better |
-PERFECT-
Joined: Dec 29, 2007
Posts: 461
PM |
Only on paper, we’ll see if it will be better than I-mobile on low light or than Renoir and Innov8 in daylight. Looking the pics available i think it will not.
|
Radu_91
Joined: Sep 14, 2008
Posts: 201
From: Romania
PM |
those pics are posted from early prototypes,so it's that relevant remember how the first C905 pics where and how they are now |
se_dude
Joined: Nov 07, 2007
Posts: > 500
PM |
Actually the C905 pics were better in the latter prototype stages.  |
driftmania
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: California, USA
PM |
On 2009-03-30 18:43:10, se_dude wrote:
Actually the C905 pics were better in the latter prototype stages.
Early C905 pics were pretty dreadful looking, looked like they put tint over the camera lens.
[ This Message was edited by: driftmania on 2009-03-30 19:31 ] |
se_dude
Joined: Nov 07, 2007
Posts: > 500
PM |
Thats coz the sensor was the different. The prototypes with the current sensor had brilliant quality. |
driftmania
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: California, USA
PM |
On 2009-03-31 04:11:43, se_dude wrote:
Thats coz the sensor was the different. The prototypes with the current sensor had brilliant quality.
Then that means it was an UPDATED prototype. Those pics from the N86 were from an EARLY prototype, get what I'm saying? |
Emelianenko
Joined: Nov 29, 2008
Posts: 18
From: Russia
PM |
On 2009-03-30 16:51:47, plankgatan wrote:
well, Innov8 produce good pics,..but i think c905 is better then renoir.
besides, N86 will wipe all this phones especially indoor, lowlight (and thats what i talk about mostly...yes)...think Renoir and some other high end phones is quite bad lowlight or indoor.
proof:
N86 28mm lens...(can inhale more light and gives much better quality)
Exposure time+low iso(or not) and post-processing... Just this padawan... Nothing "spectacular". |
Supa_Fly
Joined: Apr 16, 2002
Posts: > 500
From: Toronto, Ontario
PM, WWW
|
On 2009-03-30 18:38:51, -PERFECT- wrote:
Only on paper, we’ll see if it will be better than I-mobile on low light or than Renoir and Innov8 in daylight. Looking the pics available i think it will not.
Not directly solely to you or to Radu_91.
WHY on EARTH does EVERY phone conversation on these boards HAVE to be about WHICH camera component is better than the other from various SE phones vs the competition?!
Does anyone actually USE the camera MORE than making phone calls, sending MMS/SMS or browsing the web?! SERIOUSLY!!
The arguement about which phone not released YET has a better camera than a 2yr old phone is getting REALLY old, childish and long in the tooth. Sorry but it is.
BOTH cameras are quite capable and for everyone to knit pick about which reders Red/Purple (5 tones + or - ) better than the other when not 1 of those participating in the rebuttal are developing pictures professionally or for a job for a living or for an actual project to be launched into the public place besides a forum is getting really tiring. Sure I want quality just as much as the last guy. I complain when even summer sun pictures taking on my first Nokia E71-2 (NAM) was obviously rendering purple fringing (and destroying the quality and more so the enjoyment of my pictures). I enjoyed the pictures taking by my long gone & treasured W810i and the quality was up to snuff with the K790a I used after it, better than the BB 8100 Pearl immediately after it, and BETTER than the K850i. I complained about the picture quality on the K850i over time because the quality was subpar or only seldomly equal to that of my W810i; although it was 3yrs after the W810 was released. I forgave the K850i for its subpar pictures due to the video quality much improved.
SO ... unless you've USED the N86's camera and SAVED the pictures to post - stop complaining about it or raising it on a pedestal as its a PRE-PRODUCTION and any assessment is premature until production units ship! I don't care if its an SE, Samsung, or LG, or other manufacturer ... apply the same principles please without beginning to sound asinine. If the camera can do HD video recording but only last 1.5hrs ... then having a rebuttal on its implementation or usefulness makes sense since the battery life will be a concern under 2000mAh.
|AppleTV2|iPhone 12Mini 256GB|iPad Pro 256GB| Previously ...  K750|Z500|Z520|K700|K790i|K850i, :Ericsson: T18z|T28World|T36m x3|T68m (Ericsson, not the rebranded T68i). |
-PERFECT-
Joined: Dec 29, 2007
Posts: 461
PM |
On 2009-03-31 08:22:40, Prom1 wrote:
WHY on EARTH does EVERY phone conversation on these boards HAVE to be about WHICH camera component is better than the other from various SE phones vs the competition?!
Because the camera is the MAIN feature
SO ... unless you've USED the N86's camera and SAVED the pictures to post - stop complaining about it
I don’t complain, i judge
as its a PRE-PRODUCTION and any assessment is premature until production units ship!
On 2009-03-30 00:25:56, -PERFECT- wrote:
Maybe with the final product something could change.
I know as you can see 
|
plankgatan
Joined: May 20, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden fur alle
PM |
On 2009-03-30 20:29:15, driftmania wrote:
On 2009-03-30 18:43:10, se_dude wrote:
Actually the C905 pics were better in the latter prototype stages.
Early C905 pics were pretty dreadful looking, looked like they put tint over the camera lens.
[ This Message was edited by: driftmania on 2009-03-30 19:31 ]
he he...are you mad
first firmwares from c905 where the best. (firmwares as ex, R1AA085 )
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[....]1510/in/set-72157605677584532/
Perfect...i though Renoir was good first time a saw some compare pics, but after seen MUCH more pics i think c905 is better (in all aspects)
and serious, i-mobile902 ????? (oohh, yeh i forgott, set iso.50 and 1 sec exposure and hold your camera damn still...how hard can it be ??? same thing with tweaked k800).....besides, a original k800 is worse then c905, c902, w902 at lowlight, (ive test it myself several of times)
guess which one is one ???
[ This Message was edited by: plankgatan on 2009-03-31 23:46 ] |
driftmania
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: California, USA
PM |
On 2009-04-01 00:23:18, plankgatan wrote:
On 2009-03-30 20:29:15, driftmania wrote:
On 2009-03-30 18:43:10, se_dude wrote:
Actually the C905 pics were better in the latter prototype stages.
Early C905 pics were pretty dreadful looking, looked like they put tint over the camera lens.
he he...are you mad
first firmwares from c905 where the best. (firmwares as ex, R1AA085 )
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[....]1510/in/set-72157605677584532/
Perfect...i though Renoir was good first time a saw some compare pics, but after seen MUCH more pics i think c905 is better (in all aspects)
and serious, i-mobile902 ????? (oohh, yeh i forgott, set iso.50 and 1 sec exposure and hold your camera damn still...how hard can it be ??? same thing with tweaked k800).....besides, a original k800 is worse then c905, c902, w902 at lowlight, (ive test it myself several of times)
[ This Message was edited by: plankgatan on 2009-03-31 23:46 ]
Can't find a picture, but I swear I remember a couple of pictures taken with probably one of the early prototypes of the C905 that were really blue, it was like a parking lot or something.
You are giving the 902 way too little credit.
And you don't need to do no tweaking.
[ This Message was edited by: driftmania on 2009-04-01 00:53 ] |
-PERFECT-
Joined: Dec 29, 2007
Posts: 461
PM |
Plank, you think what the majority of guys doesn’t, do you hate the Renoir more and more? Whyyy?...eh eh...one million dollar question...
And yes, it’s very hard to get a good lowlight shot...there are some very skillful photographer here!
This comparison is too much dated...anything new?
|
Raiderski
Joined: Jul 03, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: Poland, Hell, Mountains
PM, WWW
|
1 sec exposure and hold your camera damn still...how hard can it be ??? same thing with tweaked k800
16 july 1969
Neil Armstrong, Edwin Aldrin, Michael Collins landed on the moon
40 years later...
01 april 2009
human race is in possession of more than 100 different methods of taking good photos at night. unfortunately Plank still don't know any of them
[ This Message was edited by: Raiderski on 2009-04-01 09:09 ] |
|
|
Posted: 2009-03-30 18:13
K750|Z500|Z520|K700|K790i|K850i, :Ericsson: T18z|T28World|T36m x3|T68m (Ericsson, not the rebranded 
