Jack, what I am trying to prove here is how good the camera is on the N95. 5MP doesn't look great on screen, but opened on a computer or whatever it looks fantastic as it isn't so squashed.
No, a cameras resolution determines the size of the image, nothing more.
I can have a 17" screen with 4000*2000 resolution, but that doesn't mean it will look any better
Yes, in an ideal world more MP = Better, but in the real world more megapixels on a small sensor can work out worse (see the D40x).
Yes, I will admit the N95 has a much better camera than a lot of other phones - But it's not good because of the random collection of numbers on the back of the lens, or because it's 5MP.
Any proper digital camera, even at "only" 2 or 3MP would look much much better.
Ok:
1.8:
3 reduced to 1.8:
5 reduced to 1.8:
To me they look pretty similar...
Now what I will say is that if you look at 1:1 pixels on the 5MP image it does look pretty bad, but downsizing to a lower resolution helps to blur out the noise. The lower one does this by accident as it's resized.
If you had a 2MP camera which was just 2MP then a full size image might not look great because of this, but thats simply a cheap lens / sensor imo.
Jack, I am not saying that it is good because of what's on the back or how many megapixels, but I just mentioned what was written in case it meant anything to anybody.
3MP in a phone is more than enough.
I used to have a N70 with a 2MP camera --> horrible pictures.
- For example, the first pic: taken with my N70, outdoors, sunny day, like 10ft from my bike. Result: out of focus, not that good colours, so detailed you can barely see the make of the bike.
Then I bought a first generation iPhone, same MPs, but somehow better pics.
-Like the second photo: a wonderful day in Central Park. The colours are right, the pic isn't that detailed but more than enough for a phone. I thought.
I bought an iPhone 3Gs, 3MP camera, auto focus/brightness where you tap on the screen. And that's a GOOD camera, even if it hasn't Karl Zeiss lenses, even if it hasn't five million MPs.
Here are the pics taken in my New York holidays, in August.
- In the first pic, I was in front of Lady Liberty. Gorgeous colours, perfect focus.
- Then, indoors, Museum of Natural History. Almost no light, behind the glass. Focused, right colours, you can actually read well.
- Next: same museum, a diorama. Same conditions, the pic isn't perfect, but my father's pic taken with his Fujifilm FinePix S9500 (9MP) isn't either.
- Then, I'll tell you the story of the next pic. New York, August, hot, walk, walk, walk, walk...
I hear this loud noise, look around myself and see that car. Take the iPhone out of pocket, fire up the camera (double tap on the Home button), -the lights turn green-, let the auto focus work, the car was accelerating hard... CLICK. All in less than 5 seconds. The pic speaks for itself.
- Next photo: the Chrysler Building. There wasn't much light where I was, so the picture looked very bright. I just touched where the building was, and it did all by itself. You can see that the Chrysler is focused, and that the rest is slightly out-of-focus.
- Last, that squirrel. A hazelnut and it stayed still just the time to take a pic. It isn't well centered, I know, but I was so near I feared he would attack me. And kill me. To death.
In the end what I wanted to say is: I've seen several 5MP phones that take worse pictures than my 3MP iPhone. I don't say that the pics taken with a phone can compete with the pics taken with a REAL camera, but for an "emergency" it can be enough.
And yes, the iPhone can run GB, GBA, NES and PSX games too.
Wow, this topic snowballed! Some interesting points though...
I have a Fuji 5700 bridge camera as well More than photos, I want decent video from my phone. When it comes to still pics though, generally like Jack demonstrated, higher MP equals better images when scaled to desktop res.
Interesting comment from whoever said the WinMo office apps are a bit rubbish. The reason I was drawn to the Omnia II was that it had everything. Thing is, I'm not sure if I really need it. Day to day I won't do more than Youtube etc and a bit of writing on some kind of office app, so the N95 is looking really tempting especially as it has the camera quality I want. And the N95's screen is bigger than that on my Satnav (Garmin i3, ancient!) so naviagtion won't be a problem. Loving the Windows 3.1 too, wouldn't do it myself though!
In terms of buying, I'll either go PAYG or SIM-free. Budget is £350ish.
EDIT: The Nokia N97 Mini looks good too... Ticks the boxes.
Here's an interesting one for you...... using the HTC HD2 as an example!
If you try to buy the phone without a contract, it will cost you about £450+ from anywhere from O2 to play.com.
If I was going with that phone, I can buy it from O2 for £277 if I use someone who already has a contract with O2. Get them to phone them up and you can just buy a phone. Doesn't have to be the HD2. They are only allowed to buy one phone during the contract term from what I can gather. Might save some ££££
I meant the 100GBP used one . Good luck with the N97 Mini! We quite like our Nokias . My first phone was the 3330 (3310 with pinball), my second a 3510i and my fourth an N95. My dad had a 3310, the 3330 that he later gave to me, an N95 and a 5800 XpressMusic. Then we bought our grandad a 1680 and our nan a 3110 Classic.
Actually standard definition TV is 576x 700+ for analogue. Generally translated to 576x720 for full resolution DVD. But you make a good point.
However the fact that you only view photos on a computer screen or photo prints from around 12" rather than 12 Feet makes a big difference to the resolution "needed", to give a good quality picture.
Whilst I'd agree that for phone cameras, (which are in all honesty little more than gimmicks), there really isn't much point getting over 3-5MP because they are limited by the quality of the lens and CCD noise (due to it's physical size), I wouldn't agree with that limit for full on SLRs. Professional Digital SLRs are 8MP+ for a reason, (often 10MP or higher). When it comes to needing to enlarge photos then such high resolutions are required.
Interesting article on digital photo print quality and resolution here:
but not the same. i see the difference. look at the dark part of the mouse and the edge of the rolled up paper (top of pic). the bottom pic is sharper.
In much the same way with that two pictures of the same size, and of the same subject, one can be blurrier. Or have less contrast. You know the Sharpen tool (or unsharp mask) in paint programs? It doesn't change the image size, but sharpens it. A.M.A.Z.I.N.G.
Because of the resizing method? Because of the lens? Because of camera shake? Because of so many factors it's untrue. Besides, if they're all 1.8MP pictures, then why is the 1.8 one bigger than the other [resized] 1.8 ones?
This whole conversation isn't helped by the fact that monitor "resolution" is a mis use of the term. The native resolution of LCD monitors is actually almost identical irrespective of the size. Sure the bigger monitor will display more pixels, but all that's really happening is the area being displayed is increasing the actual resolution, (defined as pixels per inch/cm or "dot pitch"), is pretty much identical on a 17" and 26" LCD monitor.
See the "pitch" of various typical screen sizes and "resolutions" in the table on this page:
The point being, that when you then display a 5MP photo from a camera on a screen it just looks bigger than the 2MP version. It's not possible to actually scale it down to the same physical size as the 2MP without loosing data and therefor quality. However, the point of increasing the No. of pixels in cameras was never for the intention of them being displayed on computer screens, it was to increase the fine detail in a print and thereby allow that print to be enlarged to a greater size before it started to loose perceived quality, (generally accepted as 250-300dpi).
Finally, making comparisons of photo quality on websites/forums is pointless as they will all be scaled down to 72dpi, (the web standard), and so all the difference will be lost anyway.
I'm replying using a omnia2 right now using opera and the experience is horrible. i STRONGLY suggest trying this out for yourswlf before considering purchase.
I own one and I think its a pretty good phone for £150, it does everything you wanted, you can even hook up a USB Keyboard for ur typing (In MS Mobile office etc)
and with the 1ghz snapdragon its damn fast too and has a nice big screen...
More than photos, I want decent video from my phone. When it comes to still pics though, generally like Jack demonstrated, higher MP equals better images when scaled to desktop res.
.
