+ Nokia N95; Carl Zeiss; Tessar Optic; 5 MPX - Video and Image Samples

what branches are blue?????


and compared to this pic as an example

the flowers look way better and less artifacted.


taking from that review/show posted on the first site..
 
Why do we critique only Nokia here?? Because this is a Nokia N95 thread, not a SE K800 thread. Simple as taht.

If you want to discuss SE's image flaws, do it somewhere else, because it clearly does not belong in this thread!

Notice how Apoc only compares the images to other Nokias?
 
It is entirely the sensors fault. In fact if you wanted to accomplish all of the goals you just mentioned, they need to dump the CMOS and use a CCD instead. All modern digicams use CCDs (higher quailty cams use 3, R G & B each get their own). CMOS chips are easier (cheaper) to produce and I believe require less logic around them (cheaper still). There has recently been some major breakthroughs with CMOS stuffs and we might eventually see them overtake CCDs in quality or at least match, but those are a few years from market still. As far as your time between shots goes thats more of the processing power and the I/O busses on the phones main board.

I would love to see a CCD based phone cam at 3.2MP instead of a 5MP CMOS cam, but its a matter of cost, and possibly a few other factors. I am not an expert in the field, but I do have a general understanding of it. Anyone please feel free to contribute and/or correct me if I am mistaken.
 
Seeing as how the retail is not out yet, and probably won't be for another month...

Proto?

=D

I think the hardware is pretty much finalized now its a matter of the firmware tweaks/bug fixes.
 
i am not trying to be picky,

the both of these pics aren't taken from the same exactly location, like the park above...

as you can see the top pic is further away and the , bottom pic is close to the lens, therefore, the closer one is probably not focused correctly. simple.
 
Nice try..
You missed the whole point, try to read it over again, and it wasn't me who posted LG pictures first. For comparative purposes.
 
as for the pic posted above the nokia n95, the brown hat thing at the top blurs out.
is artifacted all over it. even the keyboard at the lower left side, is hardly noticeable, with the blurred effect it has going on.


is that supposed to be a macro shot? if it is it sucks big time..
even the pants on the doll, you can see lil detail and then it goes really crappy..

u guys call this good? lol
 
Is that a joke?

They are taken at same location, lenses are different hence the difference (as you can see, park is also seems to be a bit closer)
Besides, difference in quality is too huge to explain it with couple of mm.
I new that some one will come up with lame excuses again..
 
Ditto, but as per your post (#63) you accuse me of not comparing the LG/SE images and touting LG/SE better, when I never did mention LG/SE anywhere in any of my posts. Quote the proper person next time.
 
God... this is ridiculous, especially since the fact that you haven't owned either phone and basing on pics taken by others with no first hand knowledge as to how they took it (hand shake etc.) and the environmental conditions (actual colour reproduction, lighting, etc.). I've stated time and time again that not having the same pictures taken from each phone is not the point. The point is that the N73 has a bluish tint in almost all (if not all) it's low light photos, whereas the K800i has very little blue/red (whatever colour you wish to say) if any at all.

Anyways, if you want full resolution pics, here're a few for your amusement.



The rose was taken with a flash indoors.
 
Ugh... I'm lazy to read the whole arguement, but I'd definitely say you seem extremely Nokia fanboyish there, ORK.

The Blue Haze is darn obvious. I get it all the time. I'll show you pics if you don't believe me.

The flash is poor. Nothing compared to K800's Xeon flash.

The colors are overexaggerated. Nokia got some bad logarithm in there.

The colors are not processed properly too. Sometimes it shows faulty colors. It seems like it lacks some sensors unlike point and shoot cameras.

The shutter delay fails. K800i performs much quicker.

Startup time is slow at times.

Sometimes, photos in normal lighting conditions are purple'ish. The N95 demonstrates this in a much more extreme manner. Nokia has to get the purple tint out.

When zoomed in, the photos edges aren't smooth at all... It's like it's been added some effect. There seems to be scratchy lines. You can take a look at the Playground pic with the LG and SE. Does it look like some JEPG saved by MS Paint?? (If you don't know how poor MS Paint saves JPEG's, make a plain white file and save it.) The effect that photo has looks just like it's saved by Paint. Well, the K800 has this too, but the edges are better than the N73. Not that much better, but still better.

The K800i's camera is much much better. The thing is, the video capabilities of the K800i sucks.

I can post up pics if you want. Besides, many people telling you otherwise all at the same time should make you reconsider yourself.

Don't get me wrong, I love my N73, A LOT. The camera is just not as good as the K800i. I accept that fact.

PS. I own an N73ME. My friend owns a K800i and I play with her phone A LOT. I can't understand why you, who OWNS NEITHER phones are arguing about this.
 
and angel i know u answered this but how does the screen of the n95 compare to the n73 because i read some comments that they not to happy with it, and really compared 2 the 2.8 pocket pcs im sure its much nicer.
 
Back
Top