if you be like me,you should hold for the birth of k800 in the market.i just been using k750 for photography,down load and do the same with canon A520,nikon E4100.if you compare,no need to have all the cameras.just have the phone.that time it is 2M.imagine the K800 with 3.2m,image stabiliser not to mention all that is in the specs.
i have been a fun of nokia since 1999,but sory, good buy i belong to SE,come shine or the others.
its really sad to see that there are a lot of other brand fanboys who diss SE just because its SE.
Zeiss is not the best lens in the world, its not even close ... and that's a fact. doing a lil research helps a lot. Yes, Canon and Olympus can easily beat the Zeiss quality. and yes, using the lens on a CMOS equipped mobile phone with slim picture quality enhancement features will mean nothing. the lens doesn't dictate the overall quality, afterall, its just a "lens". but if you're a fan of Nokia, regardless of what lens it uses, you guys will consider that lens to be the best ... right? not only that, you will think that the picture quality will automatically be the best compared to other phones ... its sad really
as for the phone's looks, yes, i'm have mixed emotion on how this one looks. it ain't all that attractive
carl zeiss is nothing without image stabilizer, anti-blur system, and many SONY technologies. and CARL ZEISS is not the best lens,,,
Carl Zeiss lenses is only advertising, a microscope isnt the same as a digital camera. Remember the situation between N90 and K750, the N90 carl zeiss "powered" lose in almost all aspects. ¿¿¿Who won the battle??? Obviously K750.
And Carl Zeiss isnt the best lenses in photographic terms. Leica, Schneider, Canon, Olympus make better lenses than Carl Zeiss for professional photography.
Carl Zeiss make lens for microscopes, but Leica make lenses for microscopes too, and lenses for geology study (teodolites)and others. Schneider make the greatest zooms for professional TV cameras. Canon and Olympus make your lenses for they own camera requirements. And Carl Zeiss be famous thanks to Sony with Cyber-shot line, with Sony tech (HAD, super HAD) cyber-shot cameras takes great pictures with help of CZ lenses.
Conclussion: Carl Zeiss is only advertising. For now the camera phones is in the medium quality and are comparabable to an average DSC, in this area the lens factor (trademark, type) arent important for the result.
To people who don't know. Carl Zeiss is a German lens. It's not a Japanese lens and it does not belong to SONY.
CARL ZEISS lens does NOT belong to SONY. Sony just use it in the their camera but its not theirs.
Well for me carl zeiss lens is nothing but a market strategy to attract imaging enthusiast, same with cybershot. but remember that the carl zeiss lens is from sony corporation. and nokia just adapted their lens to make best camera phones. sonyericsson is a great fool if they will not put that lens on a mobile phone if it proves to be really good. they didnt put that expensive lens coz it's nothing but a lens, the same CMOS sensor is still there. so its no use puting that in n93/n90/n73. and remember that carl zeiss lens in sony didnt make it to be the best cameras so, they have to make anti-blur system, image stabilizer xenon flash and other cybershot features in their cameras to support perfect imaging capabilities. sub features in k800 such as those i mentioned cannot outcomed by that only lens.
can someon give me an example of the difference between in ringtone 32 channels, 62channels, & 72 channels? Becus i have no clue, i know what MP3 sounds like :P
I still dont get it,
when the K800 comes out in July,
i am shure that SE , Nokia already have announced 4mill pixel cameraephone with wifi,
and then i will have to wait for that,
if you change your mobile every 6month it would be no problem, but i think he average mobile life is 2yrs.
To Dirty Harry
SE does propaganda for future products so that there present products indirectly could increase in sales and values. Which I think is done by all manufacturers.
To Nokia SE and the rest,
i still dont understand why the launch a phone 6 month before it hit´s the store,
i think many people(like myself)are saving there money, because why spent 500$ on a mobile, when you know that in 4-6 month there will be a new mobile with better camerae etc. etc. o.k.
Is it just me???
lovely lovely mobile phone keep my words for that if you go for this one & you are not satesfied it would be your axe & my neck
Yes, the K800 is lighter than the N93, but seriously, it´s not a beauty either. So if you have the bucks and want the best, you don´t care if it weights a bit more.
no offence to the typical bias nokia fan whos still clinging on to his 3310. but SE have complemented the k800 with a cybershot camera. and one more thing the n93 is just ugly ! ! !
the sony ericsson k800 its better and great to your 1st rugged sport 3g one so do it plaese now for your coming next ....
I tink N93 camera is much better than k800...no offense to SE fan becoz n93 has carl zeiss lens...
Classy design as oppose the N93 nokia.Both phones have great cameras,but the k800 wins because its smaller & stylish.
why is the n93 got a better camera, sony ericsson always have had a better camera and screen compared to nokias with a simuklar spec, even since it was the nokia 6230 vs se k700 and the nokia 7250i vs se t610. please have a valid reason for your comments instead of being bias towards nokia, because of nokia reputation.