| Author |
C902 pics and Nokia N79 pics compared |
GNandGS
Joined: Mar 06, 2009
Posts: 54
From: Kuala Lumpur
PM |
This isn't a review or a full comparison but a co-worker has the N79 which allows me access I might not otherwise have.
My approach: grab phone and take pics. Not bothering with optimum settings but just quick glance to see if settings say "auto" and that flash was used or not for both.
These are pics of things in my immediate surroundings when the N79 was left alone for a few moments today.
First, was a wall clock. I moved toward and away as needed to frame them about the same in the preview screen.
C902:
http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/9050/clkc092.jpg
Data:
Make - Sony Ericsson Model - C902
Software - R3EA037 prg12041733_CHINA_AO 00.00
DateTime - 2009:03:24 17:22:11
YCbCrPositioning - Co-Sited
ExifOffset - 134
ExposureTime - 1/20 seconds
FNumber - 2.80
ISOSpeedRatings - 250
ExposureBiasValue - 0.00
MeteringMode - Center weighted average
LightSource - Auto
Flash - Not fired
FocalLength - 5.18 mm
InteroperabilityOffset - 416
CustomRendered - Normal process
ExposureMode - Auto
White Balance - Auto
DigitalZoomRatio - 1.00 x
N79:
http://img165.imageshack.us/img165/5869/clkn79.jpg
Data:
Make - Nokia Model - N79
ExifOffset - 132
ExposureTime - 1/20.4 seconds
FNumber - 2.80
ISOSpeedRatings - 388
ShutterSpeedValue - 1/20 seconds
ApertureValue - F 2.80
LightSource - Auto
Flash - Not fired, compulsory flash mode
FocalLength - 5.40 mm
CustomRendered - Normal process
ExposureMode - Auto
White Balance - Auto
DigitalZoomRatio - 1.00 x
SceneCaptureType - Standard
GainControl - High gain up
I could tell even in the preview that the N79 was going to make a better shot.
[ This Message was edited by: GNandGS on 2009-03-25 14:44 ] |
|
|
GNandGS
Joined: Mar 06, 2009
Posts: 54
From: Kuala Lumpur
PM |
I also took a fairly close shot with flash. Tried to adjust camera placement so similar items were visible in preview without changing distance much.
The C902 could have done the better but I suspect that because of the flash location it was reflecting more than it might have otherwise. This illustrates though what I have had happen a few times... over strong flash firing. Any tips to avoid yet still use flash?
C902:
http://img240.imageshack.us/img240/8245/fpc902.jpg
Data:
Make - Sony Ericsson Model - C902
ResolutionUnit - Inch
Software - R3EA037 prg12041733_CHINA_AO 00.00
ExposureTime - 1/8 seconds
FNumber - 2.80
ISOSpeedRatings - 250
ExposureBiasValue - 0.00
MeteringMode - Center weighted average
LightSource - Auto
Flash - Fired
FocalLength - 5.18 mm
InteroperabilityOffset - 416
CustomRendered - Normal process
ExposureMode - Auto
White Balance - Auto
DigitalZoomRatio - 1.00 x
SceneCaptureType - Standard
N79:
http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/4472/fpn79.jpg
Data:
Make - Nokia Model - N79
ExifOffset - 132
ExposureTime - 1/100 seconds
FNumber - 2.80
ISOSpeedRatings - 127
ShutterSpeedValue - 1/100 seconds
ApertureValue - F 2.80
LightSource - Flash
Flash - Flash fired, auto mode
FocalLength - 5.40 mm
CustomRendered - Normal process
ExposureMode - Auto
White Balance - Auto
DigitalZoomRatio - 1.00 x
SceneCaptureType - Standard
GainControl - Low gain up
[ This Message was edited by: GNandGS on 2009-03-25 14:51 ] |
GNandGS
Joined: Mar 06, 2009
Posts: 54
From: Kuala Lumpur
PM |
Finally the last shot before N79 owner came back 
For this one, no flash used and I kept the phones at the same distance - CLOSE. I would not have expected such a large difference in what was framed in the picture. This might have to do with camera placement in the casing but someone here would know better I'm sure.
C902:
http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/6012/ltrc902.jpg
Data:
Make - Sony Ericsson Model - C902
Software - R3EA037 prg12041733_CHINA_AO 00.00
ExifOffset - 134
ExposureTime - 1/15 seconds
FNumber - 2.80
ISOSpeedRatings - 200
ExposureBiasValue - 0.00
MeteringMode - Center weighted average
LightSource - Auto
Flash - Not fired
FocalLength - 5.18 mm
CustomRendered - Normal process
ExposureMode - Auto
White Balance - Auto
DigitalZoomRatio - 1.00 x
SceneCaptureType - Standard
N79:
http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/9217/ltrn79.jpg
Data:
Make - Nokia Model - N79
ExifOffset - 132
ExposureTime - 1/20.4 seconds
FNumber - 2.80
ISOSpeedRatings - 316
ShutterSpeedValue - 1/20 seconds
ApertureValue - F 2.80
LightSource - Auto
Flash - Not fired, compulsory flash mode
FocalLength - 5.40 mm
CustomRendered - Normal process
ExposureMode - Auto
White Balance - Auto
DigitalZoomRatio - 1.00 x
SceneCaptureType - Standard
GainControl - High gain up
I nearly always get a good macro shot with C902. The only time I don't its from the flash.
Usually I dont notice such a difference in pics based on the ones he showed me but these had large differences. Also, the file sizes are VERY different.
[ This Message was edited by: GNandGS on 2009-03-25 14:55 ] |
Luci'sPower
Joined: Oct 29, 2006
Posts: > 500
PM |
we can't see the pics in full size
For those who believe no explanation is necessary, For those who don't none will suffice |
Luci'sPower
Joined: Oct 29, 2006
Posts: > 500
PM |
it works now
don't know what happend
For those who believe no explanation is necessary, For those who don't none will suffice |
mopedia
Joined: Mar 23, 2009
Posts: 7
PM, WWW
|
The N79 seems to be less grainy close up, C902 has darker images also.
|
plankgatan
Joined: May 20, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden fur alle
PM |
indoor with poor light, there i think N79 is better.
(c902 needs a bit more light indoor to get good quality)
GNandGS........shot some auto pics or macro outdoor, and i think c902 wipe the floor (more or less) with N79....(better colours, sharper, etc)
edit... Nokias N-serie have not the same accurate auto-focus as SE cybershots...as you see on the last macro, (N79 looks quite blurred).
c902(k800, c905, etc) have ridiculous accurate focus, (its nearly never gets unsharp)
edit again..sorry for removing this amazing macro by Pitzons c902, (i took them away because im not want to brag about this phone more then i already do )
[ This Message was edited by: plankgatan on 2009-03-25 15:19 ] |
GNandGS
Joined: Mar 06, 2009
Posts: 54
From: Kuala Lumpur
PM |
Apparently there are some limitations or controls in place regarding remote images. I have added the direct link for each.
Also, the EXIF data isnt showing for me using the links within imageshack so I am adding that. |
GNandGS
Joined: Mar 06, 2009
Posts: 54
From: Kuala Lumpur
PM |
Indeed, my outdoor are better than what is illustrated here. The macro on the C902 is really good. Even indoor macro is avg to above avg.
I think even for the pics I took it would be possible to match or come very close to N79 but its a matter of settings and one could always point out settings are adj on the N79 also.
For the close or macro shots its actually difficult to be fair and compare as the phones use different physical camera placment. To do properly would be difficult without my own N79 to test with to overcome human error. In this case I was holding the phone the same rather than positioning the actual lens.
Let me be clear though, I was comparing what was handy and didnt seek out any particular phone or surroundings. I like the N79 well enough but have no regrets with C902. I posted figuring others would be curious like I was. As opportunities present themselves I'll take more pics in other conditions and update sometime later. |
plankgatan
Joined: May 20, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden fur alle
PM |
go outside and set both phones i macro mode and then shot a flower at ~5cm distance....see the result
nice pics though
|
GNandGS
Joined: Mar 06, 2009
Posts: 54
From: Kuala Lumpur
PM |
Was in a Secret Recipe today and grabbed the N79 phone. The attached is a definite crop/resize. Want orig?
What am I doing wrong here? I expected to be able to do full "auto" and get a better pic? I think the N79 isnt so much a better camera but its auto detection seems better and I dont think the owner knows or cares to have made any special adjustments. Notice the "high" gain? That isnt there for all pics.
I have for sure taken some better pics than this but the consistency isnt there. I am not able to tell what settings to use as the preview seems ok but obviously full auto isnt the one. Well anyway, pic attached.
 |
number1
Joined: Sep 12, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: UK,kent,Sittingbourne
PM |
The C902 pic has motion blur you must of moved when you took the pic. |
blerk
Joined: Jun 12, 2008
Posts: > 500
From: London, UK
PM |
The C905 is not in focus at all, it couldn't focus on such a close target? Or did you shake too much? 
|
GNandGS
Joined: Mar 06, 2009
Posts: 54
From: Kuala Lumpur
PM |
Well it beeped and turned green... Some movement "maybe" but I didnt perceive any more than when I took the other pic.
This is a crop though... I was not all that close. I think the key here is the lighting and where the camera reads light from. The N79 seems to use a larger sampling area, or that is the impression I get from the viewfinder.
What I didnt do was try altering settings. But its not THAT dark I thought and would prefer the point-shoot method and if I had there wouldnt be any point to a comparison. I read several say not to bother with the image stabilization but I wonder if that would have helped here.
I didnt like the N79 menu though. Prefer Samsung I used to have or obviously the C902
[ This Message was edited by: GNandGS on 2009-03-27 15:49 ] |
number1
Joined: Sep 12, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: UK,kent,Sittingbourne
PM |
Don't bother with digtal image stabilization , only optical is good, C902 uses digital, the C902's pic is just blurred from handshake in that shot the C902 was slightly more sensitive to handshake than the n79, look at the exposure times. |
|
|
Posted: 2009-03-25 15:12
