| Author |
K800 - Not really a 3mp camera |
mongoose3800
Joined: Nov 29, 2005
Posts: 416
From: Australia
PM |
I recently submitted a post relating to jagged edges on photos - http://www.esato.com/board/viewtopic.php?topic=148329#post1997120 . Anyway, I have done some more testing and am now wondering if the K800 is actually a real 3mp camera or if it's cheating by just enlarging pictures to make 3mp pictures. i.e. using interpolation (see http://www.americaswonderland[....]igital_photo_interpolation.htm for an explanation). Have a look at the two pictures below. Both show crops of a picture taken in the same lighting and so on. One is 2mp and the other 3mp. By rights the 2mp picture should be worse. But, if you look at the 3mp picture the lines are jagged and no where near as clear as that of the 2mp picture. The 3mp picture is clearly inferior to the 2mp picture. This would explain why I have been so disappointed with just about all 3mp pictures I have taken. I think SE are cheating us.
You be the judge. Try taking a 2mp and 3mp pictures of something yourself and see what results you get.
2mp picture:
3mp picture:
|
|
|
belialwafu
Joined: Jun 01, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Texting Capital of the World
PM |
yes its true the bigger the pixel the bigger the pic...try zooming in and maybe details will be better
[addsig] |
altemyr
Joined: Jan 21, 2002
Posts: > 500
From: Stockholm, Sweden
PM |
I guess that it is the compression algorithm that fails. The supposed color depth of a picture with photo quality is at least 24 bits, possibly 32 bits, thus making a 3.2 MPixel about 12.8 MBytes in size uncompressed. Now, a normal 3.2 MPixep picture taken with a K800 is less than 1GB in size, so a compression to the JPG format has to take place. Sadly, the compression ratio cannot be changed (lower compression => larger file, but better quality) |
aatuif
Joined: Sep 04, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: KASHMIR
PM, WWW
|
try shooting a 2MP res pic with 3MP cam and then zoom it, you'll see the difference...
|
mongoose3800
Joined: Nov 29, 2005
Posts: 416
From: Australia
PM |
aatuif - good suggestion. I just tried the same experiment with my 3mp Digicam. And, as I would expect - the 3mp picture is noticeably better than the 2mp picture. So why isn't this the case with K800? Because it is not a true 3mp camera. I have tried several 3mp and 2mp shots on my K800 tonight and can not see any improvement between the 2mp and 3mp shots. The 2mp shots are still clearer than the 3mp shots. And believe me, I have been very precise with my testing. If the K800 is using a 3mp sensor I should be able to zoom in further on a 3mp picture than I can on a 2mp image. But, you can't. Not on one single photo. We've all been conned! |
aatuif
Joined: Sep 04, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: KASHMIR
PM, WWW
|
well, there is more to an image than just the number of pixels... otherwise how come k810 pics are comparable or even better than N95... 
|
Seanyb2
Joined: Jan 26, 2007
Posts: > 500
PM |
When i had a K800i a year ago i took it on holiday to Cyprus. After getting them developed the photos were all fairly clear but when ever there was sea in the background it was blurred and the sky would be patchy. Now i find on my 2mp Nokia 6233 the pictures are a much larger file size than with the K800i and photos in daylight are better. Need i say more.
This message was posted from a 6233 |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
well that's odd, because in my experience K800 photos are better than my K750 2MP pics. What it looks like is the 3MP are compressed too much - are you using fine or normal setting for "quality"?
|
ajeetpv
Joined: Apr 23, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: India
PM |
why not change the firmware and see is there any change in picture quality? |
*Jojo*
Joined: Oct 15, 2003
Posts: > 500
PM |
I've ALWAYS had doubts about this 3 MP on the K800 since last year  as I find some OUTDOOR-shots much better taken from the K750 than the K800 
[addsig] |
belialwafu
Joined: Jun 01, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Texting Capital of the World
PM |
do all your 3mp shot look like that? maybe you moved a little when shooting it.
[addsig] |
mongoose3800
Joined: Nov 29, 2005
Posts: 416
From: Australia
PM |
I have recently upgraded from R1GB to R1KG. Looking back on pictures taken with the old firmware - the 3mp pictures still suffer the same problems. So it's not one specific F/W. It makes very little difference if you use fine or normal setting. Even if the compression setting is too high it still doesn't make sense to me why you can zoom in just as close on a 2mp picture as you can on a 3mp and why the 2mp picture is clearer. What's also interesting is that I can get a better 3mp picture out of my samples by enlarging a 2mp picture to 3mp with something as basic as MS Office Picture Manager. Explain that. |
aatuif
Joined: Sep 04, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: KASHMIR
PM, WWW
|
that's very professional; only explanation is/can be 'there is more to a pic than just the number of pixels'...!!!
|
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
On 2007-06-05 02:26:26, mongoose3800 wrote:
I have recently upgraded from R1GB to R1KG. Looking back on pictures taken with the old firmware - the 3mp pictures still suffer the same problems. So it's not one specific F/W. It makes very little difference if you use fine or normal setting. Even if the compression setting is too high it still doesn't make sense to me why you can zoom in just as close on a 2mp picture as you can on a 3mp and why the 2mp picture is clearer. What's also interesting is that I can get a better 3mp picture out of my samples by enlarging a 2mp picture to 3mp with something as basic as MS Office Picture Manager. Explain that.
That's very disapointing if it's a generic problem with K800. TBH I don't think my sis's K800 is like that - but to be sure I'll do some tests and see if I can repeat the results you have gotten.
At one point I did some 1:1 analysis of K800 to N95 pictures and remember feeling the K800 had less pixelation close up than the N95 (which is higher MP), ie: that the detail was clearer on the K800 than the N95.
So I'm hoping that there is somethig wrong with your K800!! (not that I wish you any trouble mind you, but just because it would be a real disappointment if all K800 have the same results as what you have found)
|
mongoose3800
Joined: Nov 29, 2005
Posts: 416
From: Australia
PM |
I am 100% certain it's not just my phone as I can see the same issues in images contained in reviews. For example have a look at the images in the N73, D900, K800 photo samples at GSMARENA. Here's the link: http://www.gsmarena.com/n73_d900_k800_photo-review-102.php
In particular look at this picture at full resolution:
http://www.mobilmania.cz/Arti[....]yEricsson_K800i&file=%2F06.JPG
You don't even need to zoom in to see the jagged appearance of the boards. I'm only using a 19 Inch TFT Monitor at work and a 17 inch CRT at home. It can't be missed. The N73 and D900 do not show the same poor result.
Also, look at: http://www.mobilmania.cz/Arti[....]yEricsson_K800i&file=%2F01.JPG . Look at the gutter and area of pavement that has been repaired. Again, with out zooming in and at full resolution the edges look rough and pixelated. |
|
|
Posted: 2007-06-04 12:53
