| Author |
Is it worthwhile me selling my 3mp CyberShot and using K750i/W800 instead? |
Sammy_boy
Joined: Mar 31, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Staffordshire, United Kingdom
PM, WWW
|
I currently am using a Sony CyberShot DSC-P7 digital camera which is a 3.2 megapixel cam. However, it has seemingly developed a slight charging problem, and I'm thinking about replacing it.
I'm wondering whether it's worth me when I get a bit more money selling this camera, and putting the money towards a K750i or a W800 (not sure which, as they both have identical cameras I believe) and using that as my main digicam as well as phone.
Question is - is it worth my while doing this? I tend not to use the DSC-P7 for resolutions above 1600x1200 as filesizes get a little unwieldy and I generally don't have a need for higher res's than this, and this is the max res of the K750/W800. The photo quality from what I've seen is at least a match for my digicam, if not better, as I've found this camera seems to take slightly grainy photos even in good light. Plus of course it has a pretty good looking macro function
What are people's thoughts? Is it a good idea to put all my eggs in one basket? Will a dedicated digicam still be the best option?
"All it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing" - Edmund Burke
|
|
|
crumbs
Joined: Mar 24, 2005
Posts: 14
From: London, UK
PM, WWW
|
I would not use the K750i instead of a proper digital camera. For a start it's only got a CMOS detector instead of a proper CCD. Whilst the pictures it takes are okay, they are in no way better than a proper digital camera despite the hype.
My very old Fuji 1.5MP camera produces far, far better pictures than the K750i's 2MP camera.
However, the K750i is great to carry around when you need to take a phot of something in a hurry and you don't want to carry a digital camera around as well. But the quality on the K750i will always be inferior. |
Kryptik
Joined: Jun 24, 2005
Posts: > 500
From: Port Elizabeth, S.Africa
PM |
Hang onto your digital camera, mate
This message was posted from a Nokia |
admad
Joined: May 26, 2005
Posts: > 500
From: Poland
PM |
Hmmm, my uncle got a digital camera(not sure which) but the cam is 3 MP no optical zoom and no auto focus, and k750i makes better shots than this digital camera. So You decide. |
Sammy_boy
Joined: Mar 31, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Staffordshire, United Kingdom
PM, WWW
|
This one has optical zoom - that's one thing I might miss!
"All it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing" - Edmund Burke
|
Sammy_boy
Joined: Mar 31, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Staffordshire, United Kingdom
PM, WWW
|
Any more views on this?
Has the K750i/W800 got a camera equivalent to my 3mp digital camera?
Sounds like the general consensus so far is that a separate digital camera is still the best. btw, I'm not after a review of how good the k750's camera is, just whether it could replace what is now a lowish end digicam 
"All it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing" - Edmund Burke
|
D&C
Joined: May 14, 2004
Posts: 21
PM |
Obviously, a 2MP camera on a phone isn't going to take as good pics as a 3.2 digi camera. But the point is, you only need to carry one little thing around and it'll do everything, with radio and mp3s as well. I had a 3.2 but it broke and now i've got the W800i I feel no need whatsoever to go out and get a digital camera - I'm just not that serious about photography, and the phone takes great snaps. It just depends what you need. The benefit of having just one gadget for all the functions is the winner for me. Looking forward to phones having huge memory and power, GPS recievers, digital radios and whatever the hell else they can cram in there... The W800i is the first machine I've had that feels like it does the music, camera and phone jobs well enough to not need anything else for any of those things. |
bart
Joined: Feb 03, 2002
Posts: > 500
From: Flanders
PM, WWW
|
sell it and get the W800.
simple and correct answer
With Ericsson and Nokia gone: we must keep their spirits alive and buy JOLLA or YOTA |
o44wen
Joined: Dec 11, 2002
Posts: > 500
From: Coleraine (NI) and Dundee
PM, WWW
|
I would suggest keeping a proper digital camera to hand.
I have a Panasonic DMC-LC70 and a W800 and would never discard of my digital camer yet. The W800 just doesnt have that quality yet. The camera on the W800 is excellent but just not that excellent. It will take good enough picture if you happy to need to take a photo and have forgotten the camera.
Dont discard of your digital camera just yet.
|
Sammy_boy
Joined: Mar 31, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Staffordshire, United Kingdom
PM, WWW
|
Thanks for the replies.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the number of megapixels a camera has only dictate the maximum size of the image, not necessarily the quality? This was one reason behind my wondering whether to just use the K750/W800's camera as I generally don't take pictures above 1600x1200 res.
One thing I have just thought though as well - not only would I miss not having an optical zoom, but a decent flash too - one that really lights a dark room or scene up like you get on a proper digicam! I know the one on the phone is good, but I bet it's not that good!
So far, I think I will still get another digicam when finances allow
"All it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing" - Edmund Burke
|
dancingfate
Joined: Sep 25, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Jakarta, Indonesia
PM |
I suggest you to keep the digital camera and also buy either K750 or W800.
I myself have a 4MP Canon Digital Camera and also a SE W800. What I really like in a real digital camera is, refer to my Canon, its CCD lense and capability of optical zoom, whilst camera of W800 give me only digital zoom...
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) |
Kryptik
Joined: Jun 24, 2005
Posts: > 500
From: Port Elizabeth, S.Africa
PM |
Good choice, Sammy!
This message was posted from a Nokia |
xerx
Joined: Jul 31, 2002
Posts: 375
From: New York City
PM |
keep your digital camera
|
crumbs
Joined: Mar 24, 2005
Posts: 14
From: London, UK
PM, WWW
|
Quote:
|
On 2005-09-06 03:35:30, Sammy_boy wrote:
but doesn't the number of megapixels a camera has only dictate the maximum size of the image, not necessarily the quality? |
|
People get hung up on MP size. The quality of a photo is to do with the optics (lens/shutter mechanism) and the detector (CMOS/CCD). It has very little to do with number of megapixels. In fact, most cheap digital cameras give a false megapixel number in their advertising because they use interpolation to generate extra pixels in the saved image (based on the colour of nearby pixels). The true megapixel value is often far lower and should really reflect the actual number of CCD receptors in the camera.
As I said in a previous reply, my 8-year old Fujifilm 1.5MP camera takes far better pictures than the K750i and my recent Canon Ixus IIs 3.2MP camera! It's down to optics, not megapixels. |
textappeal
Joined: Jun 18, 2005
Posts: 55
From: London, UK
PM |
If you really want to replace your digital camera with a camera phone, get a Sharp 903. It's got 3.2 MP CCD, optical zoom and decent video recording. I've heard the file sizes aren't too massive, either. |
|
|
Posted: 2005-09-05 19:09
