View Full Version : Some Pics Taken With Nokia 5800


TheUndertaker
16-03-2009, 11:26 AM
For all those guys who are saying that the nokia 5800's cam sucks, i have to disagree with you mostly. It performs bad only in low light. when there's enough light, the cam is as good as any 3.2mp cam should be, you've all read steve's posts about this, now i've got some pics to prove it! check these out,


http://i39.tinypic.com/23siv40.jpg
http://i40.tinypic.com/2ilddf6.jpg
http://i43.tinypic.com/2qmqe02.jpg
http://i41.tinypic.com/ykwgg.jpg


I used 5800's cam during my class trip to a place called srisailam. I honestly think the performance was more than satisfactory, especially considering all the factors such as the price of the phone, and that its supposed to be music-centered. Overall, i was definitely satisfied, and never did i hear any of my mates say that the cam sucked! :cool:

Feedback please! also post your own pics taken with 5800 here! ;)

bartmanekul
16-03-2009, 11:54 AM
By and large most complaints seem to be about the noise when in low light. Even my old navigator did ok in decent light.

However, any non N series phone, no matter the camera, does very poorly in low light.

They might not be camera focused, but the E71 and E66 were AWFUL in low light, it had such noise it the pictures they were almost pointless.

For the 5800 to take such pictures in low light (though not as bad as the above 2) with a CZ lens and dual LED flash is not right.

TheUndertaker
16-03-2009, 11:56 AM
precisely my point! the pics in low light suffer due to small camera aperture size as steve mentioned once. The CZ lens shows its very much capable in good light conditions as seen above! :) still it is exceptionally good for a non n-series phone.

angusbrasil
20-03-2009, 06:47 AM
For me this pictures still sux.
My old Sony W800 can make photos more sharper than this.

What is the difference between N series ? only the software ? Does have any chance of a firmware fix that low light problem ?

Same place/time shot on a N95, a 5800 xm and a Sony S500i.
As you can see, the 5800 is amost worst than the S500 2mp shit camera. (in gradient, it is worst).

N95
http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/7155/n95y.th.jpg (http://img9.imageshack.us/my.php?image=n95y.jpg)

5800 xm
http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/8627/5800q.th.jpg (http://img12.imageshack.us/my.php?image=5800q.jpg)

SE s500i
http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/9572/s500.th.jpg (http://img19.imageshack.us/my.php?image=s500.jpg)

For me, its far away from a aceptable picture of a hi-end cel.

matchstick
20-03-2009, 10:26 AM
In slight defence of the 5800, it's a very long way from a high-end phone.
For example the high-end N97 and Samsung Omnia HD both have current estimated prices of 600+

Basically it a mid-range handset, it just has an unusually wide feature set for a mid-range phone and consequently somethings have had to give and I guess the camera is one of them.

skagen
20-03-2009, 01:35 PM
For all those guys who are saying that the nokia 5800's cam sucks, i have to disagree with you mostly. It performs bad only in low light.
http://i39.tinypic.com/23siv40.jpg
http://i40.tinypic.com/2ilddf6.jpg
http://i43.tinypic.com/2qmqe02.jpg
http://i41.tinypic.com/ykwgg.jpg


I all fairness even the daylight pictures above show a sever case of purple haze. Its not a very good camera at all. Which is odd if the niche is for a multimedia device.