how does the size of the k800 compare to the k750? is it much bigger?
This is funny SE fans just can not accept that NOKIA can produced goos pictures as good as SE and sometimes better than SE itself.Hahaha i need to laugh.I have used 2 SE phones before: K500i and K700i,and they are good at first but when i used them for months they caught a lot of problems especially the keypad. They are not responding to our key press.Even to navigate the menu it is too tough. Now i'm using Nokia 6630 and 'm very happy with it.I just cant stand that SE fans cant even admit that they lose. Featurewise, camera-wise Nokia N73 is better.Oh god just see the pictures produced by Nokia. You dont even have to edit it to make it better.Just print them out. Whats up with SE?The pictures are dull, with some dust in front of it or it is just like looking the pictures through a glass window. God job Nokia. At last all SE fan should just admit that they r wrong to put their SE in such a top classy phone than the other phone although in the truth it is not.I am used to SE and i know how they r.N i am used to my N6630 and i know how good it is.
i aint a fan of either brands as ive been using i-mate. the d900 is not even worth a mention. its poor poor poor. the nokia is good and anyone that picks one up will be happy. but lets face it the sony ericsson is better. the colours are more realistic, the colours on the nokia are to warm for such a dull day, while the sony gets it just right. as for the flash this is where sony buries nokia. question for nokia. why have a 3.2 mp camera with such a poor flash. the flash on the sony will make me leave my dig cam at home on them nights out clubing. the pic quality is far better. condidering i use i-mate and i dont really like any of the brands i would have to say the sony is better if it really matters.
I live in Bombay, India and got a chance to play with both phones only yesterday. Disclaimers: I used a 6230i (before my O2 Atom) and my wife uses a Nokia 7610. I did not get the opportunity to download the photos to a PC. I have never used a SE.
The K800 photos looked nicer (on the phone's screen). But that just maybe becuase the SE's screen is smaller and since it has the same resolution as the N73's screen it's "dpi" would be higher which could result in a sharper looking picture.
The N73's buttons were smaller but it was easier to SMS with. But again this could be due to my familiarity with Nokia.
The K800's lens cover protudes a more and can get caught in headset wire and other paraphenelia my wife would have in her purse. (This phone is for my wife).
I so wanted the K800 to win decisively. It would mean that we could share chargers, address books and memory cards (once I got my P990).
I did not see a decisive winner so becuase the N73 would mean less of a learning curve and becuase the K800's lens cover protudes I got the N73.
My 2 cents.
To be honest, i don't really mind who's winning n who's losing cause i ain't fan of both.But i just cannot stand those sore loser who can't accept defeat.They behave like SE is belong to them.
I've been monitoring all these posts for few days, here's my comment:
1. Fairly speaking, the photos taken by N73 is clearer
2. It's meaningless to compare the photos after modified by any software
3. N73 takes "warmer" photos & K800 takes "cooler" photos, which one better is up to the invidual's tastes. For me, i prefer "warmer" colours.
N one more thing, i feel weird when i don't see anyone mentioning this 'modifying' stuff when K800i is winning when compared to N93.
As someone mentioned earlier, they can get better result after modified the pic using photoshop.But the comparison now is about the cam for the phone, what's the purpose of comparison if everyone using photoshop for the pic? Any phone also can get better result after modifying then this comparison is pointless.
The D900 is definatly the poorest one out of them all, and yes, I looked at it in Photoshop. No difference.
Its a tough call at some stages between the k800i and the N73, but overal, the k800i wins, if only just for its excelent shots at night.
which phone captures better video, and cost wise.. honest answer please...
i can't agree with you more...
"To those who say "Nokia photos do look better, but the winner is K800 because it is SE and uses famous Sony brand" - Isn't it a stupidity?
The comparison showed us that cybershot is nothing but a label only, the k800 results are average.
d900 is the worst by far and only samsung fans can't admit this..."
they are just defending the brand and saying the colors are "more realistic" but if that are realitic colors, your world its pale and blurry dude.
in sharpness you can see the difference in macro, nokia are more detailed, there on picture with one guy with beard... nokia did a better job for the color. samsung and sony ericsson picture of that one the guy LOOKS PINK, the text have noise around, and the letter looks pale gray and blurry (not much in the k800 but does look pale)
while nokia pictures are more readable, say what you want the proof its posted in this review!
nokia pictures are awesome outdoors, with nice green tones and the best macro, still with tones of black it looks red abit but no much.
sony ericsson colors are somewhere int he middle, but the lack of contrast, and blurry pictures, and overexposed pictures with purple fringing are not so nice, indoors with not a natural lighting pictures looks nice. more warm. but a bit blurry.
macro its somewhere in the middle... the text looks gray and a bit noise around the edges of the letters.
samsung have the best zoom of the 3 and video (fps not size, in size nokia its better again, but then no one uses that because it worse the picture quality the colors are pale as every other samsung camera, considering the size of the lens... they are quite good but they will need to do some editing to get the quality of the k800, N73.
and NO, the k800 does not have better video playback that any nokia as someone said.... in the k800 you are limited to the installed codec, any nokia smartphone you can still programs to watch Divx, or Xvid. especially the n93 (2.4'the screen size) that supports TV OUT, VGA 30 Fps, and i am sure that its better to watch the videos on a big TV than the 2' screen that the k800 have. not having to convert your avi videos to mp4 or 3gp.
Just look at the pictures made by the N73. The colours aren't real, the contrast is too high, they shine... come on..... And the SE macros......WOOOOOW
I think all you "Nokia fans" must be blind. Can't you see the close-ups made by K800 compared to the ones made by N73....?
What is this? Haven't you realized that Nokia isn't what it used to be? At first I was a Nokia fan too, but I grew up.....Why shoud I pay obscene amounts of money on brand? oh....sorry....It's cooler to have an expensive, worthless NOKIA
hi there all my friends i just want to say that im a huge fan of SE ....and now after watching the comparisson it becomes difficul for me to decide which one is the best im SE OR N73 and as far as the samsung concern give it a side......
So all of u phone maniac who wants to buy the best phones i will sujjest you to buy SE K800 OR N-73
1) camera and music lovers go for SE-K800
2) for decent and user friendly phone users go for N-73
LOL, comments are nice: SE is better by far, SE is 60% and Nokia 5%...
People, are you blind or just work for SE?
This is clear that N73 shots are much more qualitative.
Visit your local optician, should help.