| Author |
K800 - Not really a 3mp camera |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
On 2007-06-09 12:59:41, opexblue wrote:
I hope someday there will be super camera driver for k800, just like super camera driver for k750/w800/w810.
Have faith..!!
yes, as soon as customisation is available for K800 cid51 on DCU-60, I'll be there. The first thing I will do is mod the jpeg compression as low as possible without crashing the camera. I want as little of that stuff going on as possible.
Now that I have the K800, looking at the issue more closely I can see that what mongoose is talking about is definitely true (though not as bad as other camera phones). The problem is due to over compression. Like K750 this should be fixable with access to the driver.
|
|
|
centur
Joined: Jun 10, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Bulgaria
PM, WWW
|
See this photos :
http://www.esato.com/phonephotos/index.php?uid=119609
more with different SW , but good with setting Picture quality > Fine .
|
PowerLee
Joined: Sep 22, 2005
Posts: 344
PM |
Never really rated the K800I as a decent phone or camera, not really much of an upgrade from a K750I, its just people suffer from badge snobbery & try to show off with there 3.2 mega pixel's
Until SE make a decent successor to the K750I I own im sticking with it.
|
kimot01
Joined: Jul 06, 2007
Posts: > 500
From:
PM |
i make some experiment:
shot taken by my k800 at 3mp and cropped:
2mp (resized to 3mp and cropped)
3mp is a little bit clearer...
what's your opinion??
[ This Message was edited by: kimot01 on 2007-07-29 17:58 ] |
REO
Joined: Nov 21, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: U.S.A.
PM |
@Plankgatan
Again we ask, please post full resolution photos of previously posted.
I'm curious to see and so are others.
iphone rocks... |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
the above pictures are cropped, therefore they are at 1:1 (ie: full resolution)
the 3MP is only just a little better than the interpolated 2MP!
|
mongoose3800
Joined: Nov 29, 2005
Posts: 416
From: Australia
PM |
Max-wedge. I'm so glad you've picked up on what I'm seeing. Keep experimenting and you'll become even more aware of it as time goes by. Try taking photos of silver or bright coloured cars and look at the panel gaps and trim. Try taking pictures of objects with fine edges (a bottle brush is a good test). I'd like to know what you find.
You know what, the only way I can make a W800 exhibit the same jagged effect is by using digital zoom. And, after looking a hundreds of photo's I can not find any other camphone that suffers so badly from this effect. What does this say about the k800?
I'd like to encourage everyone to do some testing and post there findings. Note: the best way to see the fault in the images is to use Windows Picture and Fax viewer and then select "actual Size". Then, perhaps we can bring this to the attention of SE and they may fix it.
When it comes to taking photos of cars here's a cropped sample of what you looking for:
[ This Message was edited by: mongoose3800 on 2007-07-30 01:50 ]
[ This Message was edited by: mongoose3800 on 2007-07-30 01:56 ]
[ This Message was edited by: mongoose3800 on 2007-07-30 02:01 ] |
suland
Joined: Sep 06, 2006
Posts: 122
PM |
What are you guys talking about? K800i I have had, has great camera! I never doubted it's a 3MP camera. Comparing to photos taken with my K750 - K800i brought brilliance to cellphone photography. I am sure, K810i has even better quality. And those samples posted by author of this topic are not photos you should look at...bring full resolution samples and then we will compare them.
_________________
Want more music? - walkman950
[ This Message was edited by: suland on 2007-07-30 01:47 ] |
O-Dawg
Joined: Oct 17, 2006
Posts: 9
PM |
I agree some times there’s hardly any difference in the 2mp & 3mp pictures I take. Slightly going off topic but I have a 3mp pic on my phone as a wallpaper and it looks pixelated, like its been stretched to fit the screen! Maybe we are being cheated! |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
I'm convinced we are not beaing cheated as such. The K800 images are most definitely NOT interpolated 2MP images.
But there is certainly something not 100% and hopefully this can be addressed with modified cam drivers.
I will try and post some pics myself shortly.
|
AbuBasim
Joined: Nov 04, 2005
Posts: > 500
PM |
On 2007-07-30 02:49:56, O-Dawg wrote:
. . .
I have a 3mp pic on my phone as a wallpaper and it looks pixelated, like its been stretched to fit the screen!
. . .
The screen is QVGA. For a photo to look pixalated it would have to be smaller than QVGA, right? I doubt the K800's camera is that bad.
It's probably the phone shrinking the picture to a manageable size to be usable as wallpaper.
|
Supa_Fly
Joined: Apr 16, 2002
Posts: > 500
From: Toronto, Ontario
PM, WWW
|
On 2007-07-30 02:25:18, mongoose3800 wrote:
Max-wedge. I'm so glad you've picked up on what I'm seeing. Keep experimenting and you'll become even more aware of it as time goes by. Try taking photos of silver or bright coloured cars and look at the panel gaps and trim. Try taking pictures of objects with fine edges (a bottle brush is a good test). I'd like to know what you find.
You know what, the only way I can make a W800 exhibit the same jagged effect is by using digital zoom. And, after looking a hundreds of photo's I can not find any other camphone that suffers so badly from this effect. What does this say about the k800?
I'd like to encourage everyone to do some testing and post there findings. Note: the best way to see the fault in the images is to use Windows Picture and Fax viewer and then select "actual Size". Then, perhaps we can bring this to the attention of SE and they may fix it.
When it comes to taking photos of cars here's a cropped sample of what you looking for:
[ This Message was edited by: mongoose3800 on 2007-07-30 01:50 ]
[ This Message was edited by: mongoose3800 on 2007-07-30 01:56 ]
[ This Message was edited by: mongoose3800 on 2007-07-30 02:01 ]
Dude I have NO CLUE what phone your using because my K790a does better even at auto with crappy lighting than what you've got there. 3.15MP is a stange setting to go by from SE considering Sony's digicam experience.
Here's some of mine.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/90666752@N00/947449862/
horrible setting in an underground garage, I can't even remember what I set it too.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/90666752@N00/947449526/
This SUV is less than 12 feet away ... roughly 7-10 ft to be honest.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/90666752@N00/947449834/
So where oh where are the jagged doors that you exibit in your post above. I didn't even see them in Windows Picture & Fax viewer on my WinXP PC either.
EDIT: forgot to add.
On 2007-06-07 23:59:05, alrodlop35 wrote:
I agree with the previous poster. It's not like you're gonna be snapping a crime scene with a camera-phone...
Oh you'd be amazed. Cam phones became the hole focus of all major phone manufacturers since 911 and other chain events such as the trainstation bombing in London, etc etc. ppl have QUICK access to any crime or event because their cellphone is right there, no big worry to warm the flash.
_________________
Dream as if you'll live forever, live as if "you'll die today" - James Dean
[ This Message was edited by: Prom1 on 2007-07-30 05:44 ] |
mongoose3800
Joined: Nov 29, 2005
Posts: 416
From: Australia
PM |
Prom1: It would be nice if I could see your photo's at their full 3.2mp not downsized to 1024x768. I'm talking about viewing 3.2mp photos at their full size on a full screen. Viewing a photo at a smaller size than original will make it look clearer and hide flaws. Your images are a good example of this. They initially look good when viewed at a small size. But as soon as you zoom in to view them fullscreen there are jagged edges all over the place(see below). However, in the case of your photo's this will be the result resizing the pictures and can only be expected. But this is the effect you get with a full 3.2mp picture taken on a K800 and it is not acceptable.
Please, can everyone please stop using the "It's only a camera phone" comment. I know this. If that's your attitude go and buy a 1.3mp phone. And, for the last time, I do understand that a camera phone will not match a dedicated camera. BUT, SE market this phone as a true digicam and you pay the extra price for the camera. All I'm am expecting is photo's that are not ruined by what now seems to be too much JPEG compression. All I want is the confidence to take a photo and know I can view it at full size on my mediocre 17" monitor without images being ruined unsmooth edges. Once you become aware of these jagged edges they strike you like a strobe light in every photo you look at. Also, I am yet to see any other 2 - 3mp digicam that is affected as badly as the K800 is.
Again, I ask everyone to go out and take some pictures of cars (try different angles and be reasonably close), view them a full size and let me know what you find. I expect Max_wedge will come up with some good examples. |
centur
Joined: Jun 10, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Bulgaria
PM, WWW
|
Original : http://www.esato.com/phonepho[....]n/k800i/200707051350sueOOI.jpg
|
mongoose3800
Joined: Nov 29, 2005
Posts: 416
From: Australia
PM |
Centur - Nice pic and not that badly affected. But when you view the original at "actual size" you'll see the there is a jagged effect on the bumper - cars right hand side (your left). Below is a is crop of the area i'm talking about. It's a little over zoomed to to exerate the point. But, when everything else is clear this stands out.
You'll also notice the effect if you look along gap between the bonnet and righthand guard.
|
|
|
Posted: 2007-07-29 10:05
