As the mobile phones nowadays get more and more complicated, the communication part is just a basic feature that they all share and what matters is the additional functionality they offer to the customer, trying to take the role of all its mobile gadgets: music player, camera, or pocket computer.
Back in 2001, Nokia announced the first phone with integrated camera (7650 with 0.3 megapixels) and made the first step - since then cellphones try to beat pocket point-n-shoot entry level cameras and to replace them totally. Their main advantage is the reduced weight and space needed to carry two devices at the same time, as you have two-in-one device - camera-phone.
Today we are comparing five 3-megapixel camera-phones that claim to kill' the low-end digital cameras they have camera-specific features like Xenon flash, Carl Zeiss branded lens, Cybershot branding, macro switch, and even optical zoom. Which one is the best and how they perform, compared to an old 3-megapixel point-n-shoot pocket camera? You can see this by checking out our sample images that are taken in different lightning conditions (we've also added our opinion).
I don't agree with the outdoor and macro conclusions. The reason is D900 and K800. On a closer look on this photos, the white balance of D900 is far whorst than K800 and the natural colours of the K800 are more acurate, like Canon camera.
So, in my opinion, I think that the K800 has a little advanced in front of D900.
I agree with the first comment. Either you guys are getting paid by Samsung or you've absolutely no experience of photography. The D900 photos were low contrast and the lens is soft. Also how you can give the D900 first place in the macro test after the mess it made of the toy photo is beyond me.
I don't have any of these phones nor am I a fan of any of these companies as I think that all have something different. I think that the camera of sony ericsson k800i was the best over all (sometimes even better than the cannon camera). Since I wanna buy a phone with a good camera, I am thinking about the sony ericsson k800i which is an overall king. :)
you know, after seeing how the conclusion is clearly a lie. the SD200 outdid the D900 and the K800 in every phot and is not even included in the cocnlusion, and they still lied, i dont trust em anymore, how do i even know that the photos were taken by what they claim to be taken by, what a waste of my time of closely examining the photos.
I have used N93, and the quality is nowhere near bad! Even in dark areas, it can take excellent quallity photos. And the video quality is absolutely exceptional! Only Nokia N95 and 6233 have the same video quality! I think the N93 you guys bought is defective. I suggest you retry this comparison test to clear the confusion you guys have made to those who want to buy a N93!!
great effort by this guy, thx alot!!
i agree k800i takes the nearest real life pic. but in times k800 tends to darken the picture abit, d900 is soft, yea i agree, but details wise d900 do have abit of advantage.
d900 is no where good indoor, and lots of ppl say it need steady hands compare to others.
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.