Hehehe, proud to be a nokia user. User-friendly. Its a customer's choice!
Wi-Fi, GPS, Quick Office tools, and DVB-H or mobile tv are first attributes of NOKIA.
This phone rocks!!!
950 mAh (BL-5F)...Nokia why you make fools of us ? Same batery like N95, and you now it's a very bad batery life !!! So WHY you do same stupid mooves like Samsung do???
Agreed. This handset is basically a mash up of all the most advanced Nokia phones. It's not a bad design, it's just that Nokia once again fails at innovating in design, but thats my opinion. Glad that the thing that makes Nokia's flagship handset so well recieved is its feature set and not its design. I would also like to note that Nokia needs to do something about that battery fast! With all those high end features, how the hell will that sweet sweet phone last more that a few hours on a single charge. This was one of the major drawbacks of the N95, so why wouldn't they improve on that atleast? Beats me.
this phone sucks! Its like a copy-paste for Nokia phones! They hardly revolutionize their interface and doesn't add anything that can make their phone stands out when it comes to their software. they've pretty much relied on Symbian to even bother themselves of animation and a new GUI.
like n95, the battery seems to be the archilles heel again, only 950 mAH for their flagship phone.
Yeah its pretty sweet. High powerful handset. Would be good for nokia lovers as its not just a phone its a bloodt t.v
Battery life.. hmm.. its like expectin a new-age car/bike to offer economical fuel efficiency.. similarly.. fones with high end applications, multiple features will obviously take up more power.. power n economy dont go hand-in-hand..
All phones try to have the same design and they are all copying from a uniq Apple iphone but from experience Nokia is the best if you look the software side, i agree that LG doing some efforts but the difference is still far....
Regarding your question of which flash, Xenon or dual LEDS, is better ultimately depends on the specific device usage. Both flashes has their advantages and disadvantages.
Xenon flashes naturally have a high light power. Light power is the term used to describe the brightness of a flash. In addition, Xenon flashes are able to produce this intense brightness in milliseconds. As a result, Xenon equipped digital cameras have the ability to take action (motion) shots and provide excellent results in poor lighted areas.
In contrast to Xenon flashes, LEDs cannot produce equivalent light power in the same given time, thus restricting the ability to take action shots. Fortunately, LEDS are able to match Xenon's light energy. Light energy is the measure of light power x time. Light energy is the most important factor involving pictures. Light energy is what CCD and CMOS sensors capture and convert.
The details of photography is very detailed. If needed, further explanation will be provided upon request.
Getting back to the stated question. Like I said, it all depends on the usage. For still photography only, xenon flashes are the best choice.
Concerning multimedia devices such as the Nokia N96, dual LEDS are the best choice. In addition to providing excellent still photos, the same LEDS can be used in video recording. Xenon equipped devices requires a separate LED for this feature. Furthermore, LEDS drainage on the battery is much less. The physical construct of LEDS and the accompanying components requires less space as well.
Articles that disputes Xenon and LEDs in mobile handsets.
Hey guys, anyone has any idea on which is better in camera terms.. Xenon flash or a dual LED flash? Damn, this N96 would be perfect if only it had Xenon flash :(