Related
Hi guys,
I own a Xperia X10 ( latest firmware version available)and i had the opportunity yesterday to use a Samsung Galaxy S for the whole day. SGS belogs to a friend of mine.
Here are my impressions of the Sam G. S in comparasion to our "beloved" X10.
1.Screen
Colours are more vivid on SGS, but X10 has better resolution. I could differentiate the pixels on SGS, but not on X10. I'm quite picky with screen resolutions. I own a Iphone4 aswell and i can say X10 its not very behind iPhone4 concerning the screen resolution and crispness image. X10 just needs the 2.1 to boost to 16 million colours and get more vivid contrast.
2.Touch screen.
Exactly the same. They're balanced. I just wish to get MT on X10. MT can be useful in certain situations.
3. UI Performance.
Although X10 has the old 1.6 Android, i had the impression that lags less (mine doesn't lag at all and i´ve plenty of applications installed) than the SGS. I felt that the fluidity of X10 is pretty good, now that i've used my friends SGS for a whole day. Switching screens was more laggy and the refreshment rate was worse than on X10 - i couldn't believe what i was experiencing.
4. Multimedia.
Oh god. I've just to say that there isn't any phone with such a great audio quality as the X10. Miles ahead of the SGS and even Iphone4 that i also own. Crispy and balanced tones on X10. SGS was pretty average.
Video is also interesting: Refreshing rates / fps were the same watching the same movie. X10 is more crispy and the SGS has more vivid colours.
conclusion:
Android 2.1 will leverage X10 to a much higher level and it will be on pair or even better than almost all Android phones including those with the 2.2 version.
I'm not replacing my X10 for the SGS as i was planning before.
Hope it helps!
That seems like a fair comparison and is very inline with what I experienced using the AT&T Captivate. I had that device for 28 days and replaced it with the X10.
The lag is generally believed to be because of the file system Samsung chose (RFS). It's not clear why they chose RFS and the lag fixes floating around basically make a new data partition with EXT2, EXT3, or EXT4. It doesn't matter for me at this point but I'm glad I don't have to rely on Samsung to fix all the issues on their Galaxy S devices. There are many other annoyances on the Captivate but I won't bother listing them. The bottom line is that for me the X10 is a much better device.
Thank you very much for an interesting post in a long time and thank you for a good clean review! Very much appriciated
Sent from my X10i using XDA App
miguelsantos1979 said:
4. Multimedia.
Oh god. I've just to say that there isn't any phone with such a great audio quality as the X10.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
REALLY??? I hope you are not talking about x10's speaker audio quality..
i LOVE x10.. but seriously.. i have to listen to everything through bluetooth headset or an earphone.. the sound is HORRIBLE when you just have it on the speaker, and it hurts my ears.. especially on higher volumes...and yes.. i've compared it to other phones.. my lg new chocolate sounds a lot better compared to x10.. (only comparing the speaker audio quality)
Seems fair both phones have their positives and negatives, i think the 2.1 update will make the x10 a lot more solid, some people think theres not much difference between between 1.6 and 2.1, but it has its obvious advantages. preferably i would have liked to have seen 2.2 on there but hey il take whatever i can get.
I have both phones and I agree with some of what your saying,yes it lags a bit and text in definitely not as sharp
but in the multimedia you made no sense... The sgs is far better when it comes to watching movies the sharpness is basically the same as the x10 plus more vibrant colours (it also has divx support out of the box). Audio quality is superior on the sgs without a shadow of a doubt even the gsm arena say so(lets not forget it has an equaliser). It has a better battery life and its fully rooted with full boot loader access you have missed out so many sections, sigh maybe i should make my own proper comparison.
I agree having owned both. SGS colors "pop" more, but the colors are not accurate at all. I used to compare to my Nexus One and colors were actually way off on the Samsung.
SGS plays just about any video codec you throw at it which is nice. Listening through headphones the X10 kills it. The screen is just a smooth I think as well.
Go on a Captivate and read web text while scrolling very slowly. There is a really bad "rolling" effect that actually bugged me while using it.
When the X10 gets 2.1 it will certainly hang with the Galaxy S models in my opinion. I just wish the Xperia had the internal storage of the SGS line.
btw, gps performance on the X10 is spot on where Samsungs tend to not be great in that area. Even after their gps "fix" it won't be as fast and accurate as the X10.
I work for AT&T and I see many problems coming in with the Captivate. The browser crashes often and the phone reboots itself a few times a day sometimes. I owned one and my gf still owns one and her's has some of these issues.
Just for clarification:
i meant that the audio quality via headphones...using high quality headphones. Yes X10 is the best in the market. I owned a Nokia N900 and i did the comparasion as well.
Sorry for disagreeing, but the X10 is also more sharp watching videos than the SGS. SGS has to saturated colours.
miguelsantos1979 said:
Just for clarification:
i meant that the audio quality via headphones...using high quality headphones. Yes X10 is the best in the market. I owned a Nokia N900 and i did the comparasion as well.
Sorry for disagreeing, but the X10 is also more sharp watching videos than the SGS. SGS has to saturated colours.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well i have to disagree in the audio department but thats down to audio taste i guess. But the sgs video quality is better than the x10 i have viewed the same HD video on both, side by side and you would be a fool to tell anyone the the x10 is better to look at.
Edit: In fact im looking at both now, the sgs blows it out of the water sorry. I can upload pics if you want proof.
rocketpaul said:
Well i have to disagree in the audio department but thats down to audio taste i guess. But the sgs video quality is better than the x10 i have viewed the same HD video on both, side by side and you would be a fool to tell anyone the the x10 is better to look at.
Edit: In fact im looking at both now, the sgs blows it out of the water sorry. I can upload pics if you want proof.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since tihs is a VS. Thread any proof can be uploaded.
I would like to ses the pics
berbecverde said:
Since tihs is a VS. Thread any proof can be uploaded.
I would like to ses the pics
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure as soon as I get home around 6 ish my 14mp cam is at home.
What is the rom from SGS? I know that Sony Ericsson have 1GB SLC, 50% to ROM and 50% to Storage, in some websites shows 15GB of ROM to Samsung, others 2GB of ROM, 16GB os MLC in SGS is for ROM+Storage like the 1GB SLC in X10?
My best mate has a SGS. We compare all the time. For those in this thread that think the SGS screen is producing more saturated colours etc...
You are just not used to the REAL colours. The SGS has the best screen on the market. It has a 50000:1 contrast ratio! The blacks are near perfect. Which makes the non-black elements "pop" off the screen.
When we both load up the exact same black screen on the same brightness, my x10 looks like it's GREY compared to his SGS. I can use my full black screen in a dark bathroom as a dull light, he can not. As for video watching, the SGS screen is much clearer and and crisp. This is because of its extremely high contrast ratio. Moreover, the x10 on 1.6 can only show 65k colours on a TFT screen. While the SGS SAMOLED screen on 2.1 uses 16million!
I love my x10 guys, but the SGS screen and display is far superior and certainly looks like it when placed side by side with an x10.
Now, when x10 finally gets 2.1 which will allow the x10 to display 16m colours, it will be a whole lot different for comparison, but it still won't match up to the super high contrast ratio that the SGS has.
Samsung uses fake colours, the sony dont have the best screen, but is good, and with great resolution, Sony have 13.3' screen with 1920x1080 in notebooks, and others better than this, Apple and Sony are the kings of resolution
skydirt said:
My best mate has a SGS. We compare all the time. For those in this thread that think the SGS screen is producing more saturated colours etc...
You are just not used to the REAL colours. The SGS has the best screen on the market. It has a 50000:1 contrast ratio! The blacks are near perfect. Which makes the non-black elements "pop" off the screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
REAL colours and 50000:1 contrast ratios? HAHAHA. First off, maybe a handful of lcds in current production produce accurate colors and they're not put in mobiles. Secondly, 50000:1 contrast ratios is a marketing gimmick and means something, but it isn't an objective measure in any sense as different companies scale it differently.
When we both load up the exact same black screen on the same brightness, my x10 looks like it's GREY compared to his SGS. I can use my full black screen in a dark bathroom as a dull light, he can not. As for video watching, the SGS screen is much clearer and and crisp. This is because of its extremely high contrast ratio. Moreover, the x10 on 1.6 can only show 65k colours on a TFT screen. While the SGS SAMOLED screen on 2.1 uses 16million!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Now that there is a huge exaggeration. Also, video quality also varies depending on the media file, player, And screen. Either way, lcd screens on mobiles aren't that great to begin with.
I love my x10 guys, but the SGS screen and display is far superior and certainly looks like it when placed side by side with an x10.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe, but you certainly don't have any compelling arguments as to why the Galaxy S is better than the x10. Even with the increase in colors, how many can the eye actually distinguish from another? Certainly not 16 million.
Now, when x10 finally gets 2.1 which will allow the x10 to display 16m colours, it will be a whole lot different for comparison, but it still won't match up to the super high contrast ratio that the SGS has.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Once again, contrast ratio is a subjective metric defined by manufacturers used as a marketing gimmick.
will.m said:
REAL colours and 50000:1 contrast ratios? HAHAHA. First off, maybe a handful of lcds in current production produce accurate colors and they're not put in mobiles. Secondly, 50000:1 contrast ratios is a marketing gimmick and means something, but it isn't an objective measure in any sense as different companies scale it differently.
Now that there is a huge exaggeration. Also, video quality also varies depending on the media file, player, And screen. Either way, lcd screens on mobiles aren't that great to begin with.
Maybe, but you certainly don't have any compelling arguments as to why the Galaxy S is better than the x10. Even with the increase in colors, how many can the eye actually distinguish from another? Certainly not 16 million.
Once again, contrast ratio is a subjective metric defined by manufacturers used as a marketing gimmick.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Whats your point ? the x10 has a better screen?
He is suggesting that the samsung dont have a fantastic screen as it appears to be...
anjo2 said:
He is suggesting that the samsung dont have a fantastic screen as it appears to be...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well in all honesty its quite an amazing screen and down playing the specs doesnt make any less amazing.
Samsung is known for it's great picture quality, from it's out of this world LED Tv's to it's cell phones.
the Samsung Galaxy is a superior phone. The X10 better get a lot better with the 2.1 upgrade. Otherwise, Im upgrading it to 2.1 just to add a selling point.
In 2009 it stays in 4th place in TVs...
1º Pionner Kuduro
2º Philips
3º Panasonic
4º Samsung
5º Sony
Something like that, so, nothing impressive... btw, i dont like the samsung colors, totally fake...
Link HERE
Kicking off this week’s battle between the HTC EVO (unboxing) and Samsung’s Epic 4G (unboxing, update and Media Hub first run), is a post covering the cameras. First, a video walking through the software on each device, followed by a series of video and photo samples. All video samples were shot in 720p HD with reminaing settings left at defaults. Don’t forget to select 720p from the resultion playback menu for the YouTube vids! All still photos have been resized to 600 pixels wide–Epic’s 5MP images were scaled down from 2560 X 1920 (max resolution), and EVO’s 8MP shots were scaled down from 3264 X 1952 (also max resolution). All other settings were left at their defaults.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yikes, hate to say it...... but you know........
someone needs to figure out how to get our fps up on cam record!!!! this hurts... lol
I really don't understand the fascination of mega pixels on smartphones. It's good for marketing but when it comes to actual use.. you realize that they probably sacrificed the quality of the sensor for a higher number. A good example of this is the FF cam, the EVO's shoots at 1.3 MP and the iPhone 4's shoots at a measly VGA resolution, yet the difference in quality is like night and day (in favor of the iPhone 4).
All things being equal, more is better but I'd still argue that a high MP count is useless on smartphones. It takes up more space and is very, very rarely ever going to be displayed at full resolution. 99% of the photos you take on a smartphone will be resized for use on Facebook/Twitter/MMS/or general web use.
I hope HTC realizes this when designing their future phones.
Does the evo video just suck when its at such a high resolution? Is framerate better when you lower the resolution?
wonder if the fps unlock will effect the video camera as well.
Wow, I used to think our camera was good. Very good comparison though, especially the night video. Even the sound quality on the Epic is great. Too bad everything else about it sucks.
^^ exactly, you're gonna use the camera like what, 1-2 days per month, at the most. But I use my 4.3inch lcd screen every single day. Suck on that.
Last-Chance said:
^^ exactly, you're gonna use the camera like what, 1-2 days per month, at the most. But I use my 4.3inch lcd screen every single day. Suck on that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How do you know how much I use my camera? And I can bet MOST people here use the camera a lot more than 1 - 2 days per month. Plus the Epic's Super AMOLED screen is also A LOT nicer than ours. Thats about all the Epic has over the EVO though.
fmedina2 said:
Wow, I used to think our camera was good. Very good comparison though, especially the night video. Even the sound quality on the Epic is great. Too bad everything else about it sucks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The CPU/GPU (which downright crushes the EVO) and Super AMOLED screen doesn't suck. I was also pretty satisfied by the size of the display the couple of times that I've seen a Galaxy S phone. It's definitely not perfect but there's no need to be a EVO fanboy.
In my tests with the evo and epic in video, I found some interesting results to me at least. Note, I haven't looked at the article posted by op yet. I found that when both are set to 1280x720 and 640x480, the epic has color saturation that seems closer to real life than the evo. Evo's was exaggerated. The epic's focus seemed a little sharper. Those two resolutions were the only ones I saw that both had in common, so that's what I tested at. One bad thing about the epic was when it was at 1280, after a few minutes or less, the camera app would crash with an error and the video was corrupted. I shortened the time at that resolution to about a minute and the test was fine. I didn't include sound in testing because my car was too noisy and would be too irritating to listen to during playback. I haven't posted them to youtube yet because I want to do an effect of putting both videos together side by side but I can't figure out how to do that easily. I don't have any experience in that end of video editing. I also noticed something that is already known to many people, the evo compresses the video too damn much and the video looks pretty bad sometimes. The filesizes from the epic are noticeably larger because it isn't compressing as much. I forget if there was an encoder choice in the phones or not. I might have remembered that from another rom...
I am not, repeat not, trying to slam the evo. I still love that phone very much. I'm just reporting my findings and opinion.
I have the evo and the epic and the camera is way better on the epic then the evo even taking pictures at night the epic looks like it was day time full color everything on the evo you see pixels from a picture shot in the dark
Send from Your Mothers Basement
makes me wanna trash my evo and get an epic or wait till next year for gingerbread
Wow. HTC can't code camera drivers worth ****t. HTC camera is from the same company as the iPhone 4's camera...I see why Samsung used the phone to film the TV ads...The HD video looks damn good!
Tooo bad the G S has so many other problems that Samsung will never fix. Apple is really good as getting everything working perfectly, at least.
fmedina2 said:
How do you know how much I use my camera? And I can bet MOST people here use the camera a lot more than 1 - 2 days per month. Plus the Epic's Super AMOLED screen is also A LOT nicer than ours. Thats about all the Epic has over the EVO though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well in that case you should of bought a camera instead.
Samsung always has and probably will continue to have a better phone cameras than HTC. Thats one thing Sammy does right. Too bad the cons outweigh the pros in everything else though.
My Samsung moment pics Id say were on par with the EVO if not a little better, and the max was 5mp with that phone. I never got that motion blur that I get using HTC.
I actually don't care which camera is best or video, it's handy to have for the odd this or that kind of thing. But I carry a camera for quality pictures and a camcorder for movies if I'm going somewhere that I know I will want that sort of thing.
There are times when you just don't have the camera or camcorder handy, so in that case use the phone.
I too got the EVO for the 4.3" screen so I can see it without having to put glasses on.
I just bought the Kodak Playsport HD Camcorder. I doubt the camera issue will ever get fixed
Jim M said:
I actually don't care which camera is best or video, it's handy to have for the odd this or that kind of thing. But I carry a camera for quality pictures and a camcorder for movies if I'm going somewhere that I know I will want that sort of thing.
There are times when you just don't have the camera or camcorder handy, so in that case use the phone.
I too got the EVO for the 4.3" screen so I can see it without having to put glasses on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
qft. If you want high quality pics then you should have a camera. There is a reason why cameras are still being sold even though most phones have a built in one.
phatmanxxl said:
Samsung always has and probably will continue to have a better phone cameras than HTC. Thats one thing Sammy does right. Too bad the cons outweigh the pros in everything else though.
My Samsung moment pics Id say were on par with the EVO if not a little better, and the max was 5mp with that phone. I never got that motion blur that I get using HTC.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
umm....the moment has a 3.2MP cam, how could you possibly have got 5? just curious..
Just thought I'd post another preview of the Arc.
The only thing new that I saw in this review when compared to the others is the display and some camera info. (I'll try to keep my SE opinions out of this).
Specifically...
The 'Bravia Engine' pretty much looks like it's just an advanced driver. You know how nVidia has their Digital Vibrance option in their drivers? It adjusts the contrast and color so that they appear to 'pop' better. The Bravia Engine looks like it does it on the fly, that's it. Other than that and the 16m colors, it has the same deficiencies as the current X10 LCD panel. Same viewing angles, etc. I thought that they would at least have put in an S-IPS LCD or something.
I also thought the camera was going to be better than the X10's camera but it doesn't look it (at least in this stage). It's still good. The backlit sensor seems to improve night shots but there's still the chance of getting a yellowish picture (nowhere near as bad as the iphone). If you compare the standard shots at GSMarena, the X10 photos look better (way to sharp vs not sharp enough?). Colors are a little better but sometimes too much. It seems the biggest improvement is that video will do 30 fps.
Wow, I didn't expect this. Phone arena done a test where users have to vote for which they think are the best photos taken with three smart phones and a digital camera. They were not told which photo is taken by which device. The results were really suprising as I thought my Samsung had the best camera among Android smart phones!
What do you guys think?
wwwdphonearenadcom/news/Smartphone-camera-comparison-you-choose-the-winner-Results_id20750[/url]
(remove the d's!) stupid url rule....
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Smartphone-camera-comparison-you-choose-the-winner-Results_id20750
full right link
Seriously??? I wasnt expecting them results either! Perhaps its just the screen on the S2 which makes the images look better than they actually are. Damn shame that!!!
Too bad there wasn't a Arc in the Game. It takes really great pictures, but the Galaxy doesnt do a bad job either. But if you take a picture with the iphone it uses HDR This is why the iphone images has more details on it.
I have no complaints about taking pictures with the phone, it's a phone not a camera. It is getting better (look 5 years back).
another great site for comparing pictures is gsmarena look at the following link http://www.gsmarena.com/piccmp.php3?idType=3&idPhone1=3621&idPhone2=3275&idPhone3=3619
Ex iphone4 user here, and these results just make me lol.....
Set the S2 to iso100 in daylight and it DESTROYS the iphone 4 camera.
Indoors and low light is probably not its strong point though, same as most phone sensors.
I haven't seen any pictures taken by the sensation but the sensation pics look like how my sgs2 takes pics (ie colors a little oversaturated)
I didn't spend too long looking but in the outdoor tests doesn't the S2 photos look most like the canon photos? The other two camera phones distort the image more compared to the samsung.
The flaw in this study has been pointed out in the comments on the website. They just asked for the best one and so as this was obviously the canon the results for the camera phones don't mean too much. They need to do another test just between camera phones.
I expected this anyway. The saturation, white balance, etc are not that satisfactory. My previous phone Nokia N80 produced much better images.
Well, for me this is the one of the weaknesses on SGS2. I hope Samsung will improve it on the next Samsung Galaxy S series. Other than that, this phone is really spectacular.
benjatt said:
I didn't spend too long looking but in the outdoor tests doesn't the S2 photos look most like the canon photos?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly ... in the outdoor tests the S2 even outperformed the Canon, because it shows more shadow detail.
This review only shows one thing ... not the best cam, but that the voters have been idiots, who don't know nothing about photography
What I find strange is, that my S2 shows a much better indoor white balance, as shown in these test shots. It seems Samsung fixed it in the latest updates?
looking at the pics, the canon is the best overall, and the SII comes very, very close (sometimes better outdoor, and slightly worse indoors).
the other 2 phones are far from their level of detail, balance and overall quality.
that's what I expected, too, and i checked the device names only after looking. the iphone level of detail is very disappointing.
one difference however is that the htc and the iphone both do heavy color correction (thats also a reason why they lose a lot of detail) while the SII and the canon do much lighter correction.
lastly if they're using HDR on the iphone and take front light pics it would be logical to use the free HDR apps on android and do offline HDR rendering on the canon, but that's not the case here
from that pic its easy to determine which phone is the iphone4 and thats probably why it has most of the vote there, since every iphone owner knew which one was the iphone ;-)
bilboa1 said:
looking at the pics, the canon is the best overall, and the SII comes very, very close (sometimes better outdoor, and slightly worse indoors).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But the Sensation is the only one where you can see the guys pores in the outside pictures, all the other ones his skin just looks even
I'm starting to doubt the credibility of the comparison. Allaboutsymbian done a comparison between the Arc and the Galaxy S2 and the S2 came out on top.
wwwdallaboutsymbian.com/features/item/13021_5_Top_Smartphone_Cameras_pitch.php
Now I look at the photos again, I think the results are chosen from what initially appears the best image (from untrained eyes) and what appears the best to a technical photographer. The Galaxy S2 are noisy, outdoors but do contain more detail. Whereas other phones have more noise reduction at the expense of details but at first look most people would choose the less noisy photo.
danman7200 said:
I'm starting to doubt the credibility of the comparison. Allaboutsymbian done a comparison between the Arc and the Galaxy S2 and the S2 came out on top.
wwwdallaboutsymbian.com/features/item/13021_5_Top_Smartphone_Cameras_pitch.php
Now I look at the photos again, I think the results are chosen from what initially appears the best image (from untrained eyes) and what appears the best to a technical photographer. The Galaxy S2 are noisy, outdoors but do contain more detail. Whereas other phones have more noise reduction at the expense of details but at first look most people would choose the less noisy photo.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can see a lot more detail in the sensations pic, like I said I can see the guys pores in the pics taken with the sensation but the other sensation pics are better too
godutch said:
I can see a lot more detail in the sensations pic, like I said I can see the guys pores in the pics taken with the sensation but the other sensation pics are better too
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But at the expense of the detail on the tree at the right of him.
HTC Sensation captures what seems to be a smudge of green, while in the GS2, you can make out the leaves. And his skin looks unnaturally red.
So the SGS2 decided to focus on the tree instead of the subject and instead of the subject looking slightly more tanned he looks like a shining ghost
The fun thing with this test:
If a voter would be good in recognizing quality pictures, they would most likely choose the real (Canon) camera 1st. The mobile camera that is the best, right after the Canon, would then have reasonably less chances of being picked as 'best', since the voters nót picking the Canon as best have proven to be bad quality-recognizers.
Thus the best camera-phone will have the highest chance of ending with the least of all votes
(as pointed out by several commenters already)
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA App
Interesting article....
I have both devices, I'll take a pic with each and post to see which one you all think is better. I would post an iPhone as well but my wife is out and about.
Here's unbiased review, including the camera.
http://www.mobile-review.com/review/samsung-galaxy-s2-en.shtml
[URL http://www.gsmarena.com/pureview_blind_test-review-773.php] Blind test picture quality[/URL]
am i the only one who can see that pureview sucks compared to GS3 and iphone 4s camera shots, unlike what the auther says???? i mean i tried multiple times looking at crops and full pictures and find pureview tobe blurry and dull compared to GS3 and iphone 4S...
what ya think !
atifsh said:
[URL http://www.gsmarena.com/pureview_blind_test-review-773.php] Blind test picture quality[/URL]
am i the only one who can see that pureview sucks compared to GS3 and iphone 4s camera shots, unlike what the auther says???? i mean i tried multiple times looking at crops and full pictures and find pureview tobe blurry and dull compared to GS3 and iphone 4S...
what ya think !
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you're completely and utterly wrong. The Pureview is VASTLY better than any of the other phones for imaging.
Did you even watched it?
Because I certainly thought what you said until I saw the crops....
atifsh said:
Did you even watched it?
Because I certainly thought what you said until I saw the crops....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, I did look at it. I have absolutely no idea how anyone could think the S2/4S is even remotely in the same league as the Pureview there. I wonder if the more appealing enhanced contrast of the S2/4S are making you think those are better? Look at resolved detail and you can plainly see the superiority of the Pureview - colours you can change if you want to, there is no regaining lost detail.
Wow something wrong with my eyes than lol
Because s3 looked Sharper and well focused than Nokia.
I also think that the pureview is far better then Galaxy S3 or the iPhone. But to be honest, I think the Olympus E-PL2 is the winner. Maybe it's the too warm white balance of the testshots of the E-PL2 that made it second place, but that's something that could be easily corrected afterwards - missing detail not.
I had thought E and F were the best ones after inspecting all photos...
i thought C was definitely the worst though, which sucks cause i just had the Evo LTE and thought the camera was good, haha...
but id say if i had to rate them in order:
F, E, B/D tie, A then C
A (Nokia N8) seems to offer the best compromise between sharpness and dynamic range
HTC One X's camera has an amazingly high dynamic range and nice color rendition, too, but its sharpness sucks...
S3
PureView: amazing sharpness, but worse dynamic range
EDIT:
The One X picture is at least one stop underexposed
it was F,B,E for me.
radeonxt said:
it was F,B,E for me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It was F,E,B for me, though I think the downscaling (with a most certainly good downscaling algorithm) helped them a bit...
IMO, I think from crops
As for Sharpness is PureView > S3 > 4S > One X
One X pictures looks very grainy..
Colour-wise, I think S3 is abit saturated whereas PureView is more natural.
Pureview does look great and Nokia have done something impressive with it. Whether it actually sells or not will be a different story.
Pure view really killed the field, here...
It's even better than the PEN, IMNSHO. And to me, S3 is second among smartphones, just hairs in front of iPhone 4S... Shockingly the OneX is way way behind. From the review I had read before its camera was one of the points that made me hesitate between HOX and SGSIII... Glad I picked the SGSIII!