first of all, i'n no fan of N or SE. Not sure about N73 version, but as for SEK800i,they definitely used some crapy beta version phone in this review.Actual pictures on K800i are much better. Go to
and check yourself.
The 903SH is a about the same lenght as the N73 and 5mm longer than the D900...OK, it's not as massive as the N93 though.
The pics taken with the 903SH are DAMN good compared to the D900, and probably better than the N73.
903SH definatelly has the best LENSES (5 of them) and optical zoom, with a great CCD sensor. That makes the difference!
The only thing people want to see from you is perhaps some evidence of friends and perhaps even evidence of a life.
Unfortunately, the nail in that coffin has been firmly hammered in by none other than yourself.
game over!!!all 4 phones have their weaknesses!sharp 903 closed has the size of n73
SHARP 903SH take 2
Here are some other 3.2Mpx pictures taken with the SHARP 903SH. You should look at these and then judge the above three phones. Keep in mind that the 903SH was released in July 2005.
www.christianlegere.com/images/05-11-06_13-401.jpg (MUST SEE!!!)
www.christianlegere.com/images/06-02-11_17-27.jpg (MUST SEE!!!)
These are the best of the best that SHARP can offer!
if these gadgets were phones there would not be million sites dedicated to them .also why do you think people buy 1 billion phones a year?because they want phones with high-end feutures.and yes we have a life we are just fooling around.and that's funny
SHARP vs. Nokia, SE and SAMSUNG
Because GSMARENA is a bit biased in their reviews, I decided to give everyone a fourth player: SHARP 903SH. It really deserves a look and it bugs me that no one can even acknowledge its brilliance.
Look at this picture and tell me what THIS is to you:
Oh so pity samsung? Not really, coz D900 design is somewhere N73 and K800 can't catch up. Personally, N73 design sucks, K800 best pic and D900 best design.
Personally I like the K800i's pics....
All others are too pixelated or blurry.
The best pics of all time's is the SHARP 903SH though!!! 3.2 Mpx CCD with 2x optical zoom beats these three by miles!
N73 has much to high contrast and the color is also too saturated. The k800i produces images with far more natural colors, and much better contrast. Look especially at the image with the purple flower, and the image of the flowerbed with the yellow and purple flowers. Here the colors are far better on k800i.
When looking at the indoor images, the k800i has a bit of a blue tint, which makes the colors look less natural, and colder. Here, the N73 looks more natural.
Image-sharpness seems more or less the same on the 2, which is to be expected.
Overall, id say they are pretty equal, but if i had to choose, I'd pick the k800i. This is mostly because the N73's oversaturation of outdoor colors are, in my eyes, very disrupting, even more so than the coldness of k800i indoor images.
Ps. Samsung sucks :p
N73, nice crisp photo's only the colour balance is really off. If you drag the photo's in to photoshop it maintains a redish glow in every photo. The car is purle istead of blue!. Good lens, very little barrel distortion. Very low grain. Nokia cam's just cant keep colour.
D900, very low colourdepth, very high barrel distortion. The colours you do have match quite good. (More a gimmick then a cam)
So only 2 "real" cams are still on the list
K800 vs. N73
Sharpness: just check the word ANTI-VIRUS in the upper left hand corner in the car photo
Colour, just check the bushes in the wide angle city shot. Nokia thinks that those need to be purple... or the highlight in the buildingshot. Sony is the only one to have a grain of colour all over. Whilst Nokia only has the front of the building.
Compression: check the leaves on the outdoor shot, Nokia rasters a lot of information just to kill of noise. You be the judge...
I would choose the K800i
(If my Nikon D200 and my Sony DSC-W100 where left at home...)
Sony makes Hyped HAD CCDs with produce the best possible small scale preformance. Larger scale preformance go to the DX format sensors made by Nikon in my humble opinion.
Cameraphones are far from being there,
I still miss good colourbalance, even a 100$ 3mpix cam can produce better photo's. Also these phones don't have very good lenses, flouride lenses as used on the canon ixus are way better then the simple plastics inside these small buggers. Names like Carl Zeiss don't mean much here... If you are going to make prints from these phones, please use photoshop to correct colours and sharpness (a mild unsharp mask really does magic!). Also keep in mind that these phones are VERY wide in angle. So keep some distance when focussing and try not to compromise your composition that much...
That dude, second post underneath mine...
Yes, maybe we are geeks, but why DO YOU waste your time here? Who cares about your useless comment? Allow us our hobby and little joy in life...
Cars should only be able to drive and store luggage...
We shouldn't have CD Players in our cars, nor should we have leather seats, air con, windshield wipers etc.
Do you recognize how stupid your argument is?
I thought so...
To the guy below me on the rant...did you not think what it would look like u criticising other people for posting on a forum...by postin on it yourself. You must have spent some time reading the messages of previous posters before posting your own message so your own life cant be that interesting either!
Although I do admit that i agree with your comment about the picture quality of the cameras. Essentially they are all the same and you are never going to get one downright winner because everybody has their favourite brand etc Of course they cannot compete with digital cameras, but you are wrong to assume that everybody prioritises the characteristics of their phones the same as you do. Some people look for a phone to do everythin, ie make calls, text, be a camera, an organiser and an mp3 player, maybe because they cannot afford to buy all the separate devices or for sheer convenience. And not everybody likes small phones. Believe me, I work in a phone shop, I know what I am on about.
well.. few little comments from me:
I must admit that N73 take a very good pictures, clearer and sharper than K800 but it doesn't make me think that it is the winner.. some of the pictures taken by the gsmarena guy dissapointed me. My K800 can take alot more decent pictures in the daylight than the one he has taken :p. Especially for the document (does he know that K800 has a setting called "document"? which is spesifically used to take document pictures). I can surely tell u.. the one in the review just not the appropriate one. It is "too" blurry (in case some of u think it is clear? IT IS NOT!!! mine take alot better than that). And btw, N73 still has the same problem with N90 with the red color thing (it just doesn't look natural, but it renders green color perfectly and nice).
Having stated all of these things however, i will comment my comment based on the pictures taken by those guys:
And one more thing ^____^.. (maybe because i am a fanataic guy, so i would like to say it): we might have seen here that nokia has win in terms of picture quality (even with N90, some guys just keep insisting to say that N90 take a better picture. One fact: N90 doesn't make a best seller!!!! K750 is regarded as the best seller for 2005.. so will be K800,which is very unlikely for N73 to achieve it although possible somehow) even N70 (nokia's best seller handset doesnt achieve as much popularity as K750 :p---->guys.. its a FACT, not an opinion, if you don't believe, go out and make ur own poll)