Active Topics
-
Firefox with Leste (5)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by teroyk - 3 days, 19 hrs ago -
Handbook (2)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by teroyk - 4 days, 19 hrs ago - more...
|
2009-11-05
, 09:59
|
|
Posts: 203 |
Thanked: 68 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
|
#22
|
Originally Posted by attila77
Thanks for the further sensor information. Interesting to look at the chart.
I don't know the exact model, but most places say it has a 1.75um pixel size which would mean roughly the same, a 1/2.6" or 1/2.5".
I'm somewhat surprised nobody mentioned a major advantage of the N86 camera subsystem - variable aperture. The N900 and N97 have fixed aperture lens.
Actually, I did mention the variable aperature on the N86, in my post on the first page of this thread, where I list the specs that differ on the N86 and N900. But you might have to look closely at the list to notice it. The N86 also appears to have a faster shutter, although Nokia doesn't list the speed of the N900 shutter. And Nokia specifies that the N86 has image stabilization, but does not the say this about the N900. And there are more differences I listed above, but those are some of the other major ones.
It's a little hard to tell though if all the specs specified for the N86 really aren't there on the N900, just because they're not listed. Fore example, Nokia specifies that the N86 has a mechanical shutter, but does not say this about the N900. But I'm assuming the N900 must have a mechanical shutter too (doesn't the N97, N95, N82, and most of the higher end Nokia phone cameras?). Since the N86 is the flagship camera in a phone for Nokia, it seems like they are playing it up more in the specs, listing every little thing they can think of.
| The Following User Says Thank You to cb474 For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2009-11-05
, 10:59
|
|
Posts: 946 |
Thanked: 1,650 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ Germany
|
#23
|
Originally Posted by cb474
Digital zoom (poor man's zoom) is not a hardware feature (you can't add information that is missing) and you always loose resolution
On the other hand, the N86 has a much superior digital zoom that takes advantage of the 8MP sensor so you don't lose resolution as you zoom in. And its zoom is 8x vs 4x on the N900.
due to the image cropping.
| The Following User Says Thank You to titan For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2009-11-05
, 11:04
|
|
Posts: 946 |
Thanked: 1,650 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ Germany
|
#24
|
Originally Posted by cb474
most of those are just software features - so they camera independent.
The specs that are different there are:
4.61mm (focal length)
f/2.4 - 4.8
1/1000sec (highspeed shutter)
Features listed for the N86, but not the N900 are: Automatic Aperture Control, Automatic Motion Blur Reduction, Image Stabilization, Mechanical Shutter, Panorama Mode, Red-Eye Reduction.
I wonder what the max. shutter speed of the N900 is.
Could a N900 owner please take a picture of a bright light
with max. ISO and report the exposure time? Thanks
|
|
2009-11-05
, 11:32
|
|
Posts: 3,319 |
Thanked: 5,610 times |
Joined on Aug 2008
@ Finland
|
#25
|
The default camera software does not allow for any parameter settings except for flash, so not really possible for the time being. Also, on a phone-cam, you'll probably prefer a low iso to high shutter speed. Take a look at N900 images - when there is a lot of light, it definitely reaches into basic P&S camera land. Deprive if of light, and it gets noisy/smudgy real quick (compared to dedicated cameras). And 1/1000 is exactly that - depriving light from the sensor 
High motion subjects are going to be problematic anyway because of the speed of focusing and shutter lag (which in case of phones has little to do with an actual shutter, but I digress).
High motion subjects are going to be problematic anyway because of the speed of focusing and shutter lag (which in case of phones has little to do with an actual shutter, but I digress).
|
|
2009-11-05
, 11:39
|
|
Posts: 4,556 |
Thanked: 1,624 times |
Joined on Dec 2007
|
#26
|
For me the n900's camera is for those moments you wish you had a camera but don't carry one with you all the time. If you know your going on a vacation or road trip I just bring a dedicated camera.
__________________
Originally Posted by ysss
They're maemo and MeeGo...
"Meamo!" sounds like what Zorro would say to catherine zeta jones... after she slaps him for looking at her dirtily...
| The Following User Says Thank You to Laughing Man For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2009-11-05
, 11:43
|
|
Posts: 203 |
Thanked: 68 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
|
#27
|
Originally Posted by titan
Since it's digital photography, can the camera really be said to be independent of the software? I'm not trying to start a whole separate discussion about digital photography. It just seems relevant here, because my sense is that firmware and firmware upgrades with phone cameras have made a big different in the actual quality of the images. So it seems the software differences between the N86 and N900 are important. No?
most of those are just software features - so they camera independent.
Originally Posted by attila77
This is one area where, from reviews I've read, the N86 does really excel and do something pretty much no other phone camera before or yet has done. The N86 really does have a more low light sensitive sensor. Many phone cameras produce pretty amazingly good images in bright daylight. So I take that accomplishment as nothing special. But get even a little shadow or go indoors and it gets bad quickly. The images I've seen from the N86 really do seem to be the first to do better in this arena. This ought to also be an advantage with video on the N86.
Take a look at N900 images - when there is a lot of light, it definitely reaches into basic P&S camera land. Deprive if of light, and it gets noisy/smudgy real quick (compared to dedicated cameras). And 1/1000 is exactly that - depriving light from the sensor
|
|
2009-11-05
, 12:11
|
|
Posts: 3,319 |
Thanked: 5,610 times |
Joined on Aug 2008
@ Finland
|
#28
|
Originally Posted by cb474
That's why I explicitly said compared to dedicated cameras
Many phone cameras produce pretty amazingly good images in bright daylight. So I take that accomplishment as nothing special. But get even a little shadow or go indoors and it gets bad quickly.
For any serious comparison we'd need someone with both N86 and a N900 so he could make snaps/videos under the same conditions. But, after nearly a month with the N900 and snapping a lot in various conditions, I can say (even with prerelease firmware) it's IMHO doing *very* well compared to the rest of the phone-cam pack, even if it's most likely not as good as the N86 in a direct 1:1 comparison.
|
|
2009-11-05
, 13:32
|
|
Posts: 946 |
Thanked: 1,650 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ Germany
|
#29
|
Originally Posted by attila77
no parameter tweaking possible? that's bad.
The default camera software does not allow for any parameter settings except for flash, so not really possible for the time being. Also, on a phone-cam, you'll probably prefer a low iso to high shutter speed.
Fortunately, some other thread contains some documentation
about how to control the camera settings in the chipset.
Anyway, the test I suggested would be just a stress test (preferably not with sun) to find out min. exposure time if you can't determine it from the settings.
One main objective for maximizing S/N ratio is to maximize
the amount of photons per pixel per exposure.
And given the small pixel size on the 1/2.5" chip we cannot expect too much...
Originally Posted by cb474
for every picture taken there's is the A/D process (hardware) and the postprocessing (software, incl. firmware).
Since it's digital photography, can the camera really be said to be independent of the software?
What I meant is that the hardware limits the improvements the software can perform on the raw data.
The image quality mainly determined by the hardware, while the software is just convenience and can (hopefully) be replaced (cf. RAW processing on DSLRs).
For some cameras the picture just looks good on a small display because the firmware perform very aggressive perceptual noise-"reduction", but which leads to other problems.
|
|
2009-11-06
, 02:19
|
|
Posts: 203 |
Thanked: 68 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
|
#30
|
Originally Posted by attila77
I guess part of my point was that the N86 has already been shown in reviews to really stand apart from the rest of the high end phone camera pack, when it comes to low light.
IMHO doing *very* well compared to the rest of the phone-cam pack, even if it's most likely not as good as the N86 in a direct 1:1 comparison.
Yes, the N86 and N900 would have to be compared side to side. But if the N900 has a camera that is comparable to the N97 (which has a good phone camera by any standard), then I think we already know that the N900 is not in the same league as the N86 as far as low light situations go. Unless of course the N900 also has an improved low light sensor, but I haven't seen anything to indicate that.
I'm not questioning that the N900 has a good camera. If it's comparable to the N97, then it's among the best of the "pack," as you say. I just don't see any reason to think that the N900 is on the level of the N86, as far as low light goes, since that is the stand out, step above the pack feature of the N86 and this has already been demonstrated in reviews of the N86.
I'm somewhat surprised nobody mentioned a major advantage of the N86 camera subsystem - variable aperture. The N900 and N97 have fixed aperture lens.
You can see the sensor sizes are more or less constant, it's the resolution that changes (as technology is improved). The sizes need to fit some standards as the optics has to be matched to sensor size. This also shows why a low mpix sensor is not necessarily 'better' noise-wise. You'll get either a smaller sensor or an older generation, neither of which is promising for good shots.