im from england the phones supposed to be out this mounth and im really exicted but all these opinions are saying its bad its good i dont know but can someone who has the phone tell me if its to big or heavey if the features such as realplayer and games are good and last of all is the carmera and video recording good plz i need to know if its worth buyin
Re: Carl Zeiss
Carl Zeiss did not fail with the N90. In fact, if you will take a closer look on the "better" pictures taken (search), the COF or Cicle of Field and the DOF or Depth of Field is outstanding because of the Carl Zeiss lens - which this review is unable to "achieve".
If you will look and observe the shots of the N90 (in the review) although it's underexposed (due to unknown reason), it's not that noisy compared with the W800. Although W800 has brighter (overexposed) pics (maybe over edited), the noise is very noticeable and the light SENSOR and the LENS plays the major role here.
"The debate is not how bright and vivid the colors are, it's also base on geometrics and the N90 with it's Carl Zeiss is a phone with dignity and quality."
Regarding some parts of the review, i'd like to criticize more on the the pictures of the man on the 2nd page. The face of the man on the first (N90) is so reddish to yellowish, if the flash has been activitad here, this should not happen. it's so obvious that the man's face has been retouched. the eyes are so red and sharp and VERY ROUNDED TOO. the eyes of the human being is concave in nature, so the red-eye should not be that flat/round. "The angle between the camera and the man having no shadow is prood that the camera has been pointed directly into the eyes." no doubt about it.
The third which is w800, the camera positioning is almost perfect. Take a look at the shadow of this 3rd picture. it has been taken at a different angle compared with the 1st picture (N90), in effect, no rendition of the eye committed.
Let me quote this from the article:
"We haven't adjusted any of the image settings; we have always chosen the highest resolution and the highest quality (lowest compression). The automatics cared for the rest. You may judge between the two models in the article below. We express our opinion after every photo session and this could help you to make a choice. "
THEY HAVE CHANGED SETTINGS. Removing the EXIF information is the most critical change involved. At this point, your reasoning is already unreliable and further reading is not recommended.
Most people will believe the pictures here because they have no or little idea about photography. Trust me on this, the N90 and W800 are both good phones, they don't deserve something like this.
i cant believe this the N90's camera lost to a phone's camera which is one-third the price!!!!!!!! i cant believe this!
What Balance tryin to imply is that you look onto the file property of the pictures. To do this, download the pictures. Right click on the picture you have downloaded and click on the tab Summary. click the button advanced and you will see a list of information such as the camera model, shutter speed, exposure, etc. This is called EXIF information.
These information has been removd in he pictures in the W800 vs. N90 review just right here. This could mean the following:
1. they have removed this information due to cheating.
2. they were unable to change the entries so they removed them once and for all.
3. all the the entries can be edited but can be detected with a special software.
IMO, N90 and W800 did not dserve this comparison. they are both putrid in this article. N90 has a very low exposure and W800 has very high exposure, exposing the absurd noise on the pictures.
A exact picture can be accomplished by these two phones provided they set some manual settings. all they care is the Auto mode which has different standard setting on both phones. Auto on W800 is different from the Auto of the N90.
Don't base your judgement on a single review like this. search for others. many has accomplished outstanding pictures both with the Nokia and SE W800.
the sample photos in the camera test review are fake. N90 has much better quality. Believe it or not, go to N90 official website and have a look.
Ok, the N90 lose in the GSM Arena review. Congratulations to SE. I'm happy for them.
The GSM Arena had made an incredible review for the N90. Only more on the negative side. This is what i'm looking and waiting for to happen. Why? It's like this:
I want the majority of people to hate or dislike N90. haha. You see guys, the N90 has the features I want and need. A person I know who own an N90 proved that N90 has sophisticated imaging and video capabilities. Macro modes are oustanding.
MY FIRST CONSIDERATION in buying a cell phone is that it should not be on hands of many people. And N90 by negative appeal to many is the phone for me. YES!!! I want my phone to be unique on my surrounding. And a name for it to carry on. Students are using K750i already and soon W800 and i don't wanna put my level on them coz i'm not a student anymore.
Photography is not the only concern on buying a phone, IT'S MERELY base on what you need. I wonder why people compare camera capabilties hard where there are so much to focus on to. N90 is symbian, 3G, outstanding screen resolution, able to multitask, etc.
Even if N90 will not sell that much, it's not a loss to Nokia. It's just merely a peny for them. Cheers!!! thanks GSM Arena. Well done review. It really favors me!!! ;o)
both phones are crap. N90's pictures are underexposed. W800 is overexposed. crisp they say, but full of noise garbage. and by the way SE does not win again and again. SE should pass with Seimens, Samsung and Motorola to get their hands on Nokia. sad but true.
oh, my god this piece of brick cost around us 800+, must be joking,still no fm radio,get a 5mp digital camera + a mp handphone together still cheaper,please nokia up the atte something better like 8800 or v3 etc....
was looking at the comment and saw that sony ericsson w880i or k750i are better than N90 except for the video portion. I guess SE is a lot of better deal in term of prize and picture quality, after all, video is not important to me at all. Moreover N90 will be another overpriced n full of bugs phone to be witnessed.
o my god whats nokia trying to do n look at the review n w800i,k750i camera is better than n90 n thats gsm arena n looks like i be getting myself a new sony ericsson w880i or k750i n i already have s700i which is the best but becoz of limited mb i switching to k750i n sony wins the race again n again n again
Reply to EK76:
I think that is an irrelevant question. The choice is clear: SE any day. Just look at the photo comparison review on this site comparing the 2 phones in question, and that should answer your question.
Nokia is for novices, the enlightened use Ericsson (SE)
omg - 173 g
k750 is only 99 g
this nokia is like a bottle with wine ,ha !!
Actually i was struggling to choose btw n90 n SE k750i, b4 i was a SE fan, but after using the k700i n s700i i found tht they both r having similar problems... thts why i wan2 get nokia n90 for a change, so should i go for nokia or SE????
No matter how deep I look, SE pics looks far better, i mean they are bright, sharp and crisp reproducing more natural colors.
N90 pics are dim, blurry, lacks sharpness and seems not giving natural colors :(
Did you actually look at the specifics of the comparisons? Look "deeper", "deeper" into the files my friend...
I was very much excited about this phone and now I'm disappointed equally because of the following reasons:
1. No Vibration (It is a must in a mobile phone, no excuses whatsoever!)
2. Camera not meeting the expectations (All the hype about the Carl Zeiss failed, giving a normal picture quality, and the much cheaper SE 750i and W800 has won in every possible ways, when comparing the camera).
Following things can be done to overcome these disappointments:
1. Jabra has come up with a new bluetooth headset with Vibration support, it could be helpful when you want to put the phone in silent mode, not very practical though.
2. Nokia could definitely do something to improve the camera. I'm sure that the lens is better, but something to do with the software. They can fix all the bugs with the camera and come up with a new firmware, which should atleast be par with SE K750i and W800 picture quality.
Let's hope that Nokia will do this.