|
Originally Posted by thasheik
Wow...
Can't wait to see the price! |
|
Originally Posted by Junglizt1210
i wonder why the black bit says 8.0 and the lens-sy bit says 5.0.........
|
|
Originally Posted by biggy135
who'd spend 700$ on a brand that can't be trusted for anything
|
|
Originally Posted by DMC8260
Samsung started out small and no ones knows about them. Look at them now~~ Also you don't know about it, that doesn't mean everyone doesn't know about it. The built quality and features are there and this phone is a proven success. You should try to explore the world more dude.
|
| It would seem that reviewing a device that’s destiny won’t touch majority of the Europeans makes a little sense – for 700-750 USD one could seamlessly pick a solution bearing a label of a top5’s member boasting completely different level of build quality, interface layout etc. There is no doubt about the author expressing its own point of view on the model but the truth is, neither quality of plastic, nor solidity of casing offered by a minor manufacturer, can match that of world’s best companies – you will get even more confident of that after checking out the photos. |
|
Originally Posted by BoxWave
5.0MP on a phone is crazy! Anyone have this phone? Hows the battery life?
BoxWave- |
|
Originally Posted by DMC8260
|
|
Originally Posted by DMC8260
Samsung started out small and no ones knows about them. Look at them now~~
|
|
Originally Posted by PaPeRo
Why not just buy a REAL camera if you need really good pics? Why risk draining the battery and not have what a phone is supposed to be used for->communication? I never understood why anyone would need such a high megapixel camera in a phone. I guess the phone's FUGLY non-photogenic design needs something to make it worth buying?
|
|
Originally Posted by braindead5400
It's a matter of people wanting to take high quality pictures whenever they need/want to. It keeps people from always needing to bring their camera along just in case
|
|
Originally Posted by PaPeRo
That doesn't make any sense. If you need high quality 4/5 Megapixel pictures then it's likely you'll want to take your dedicated camera along for that special situation that doesn't happen too often.
If it's a "just in case" situation then it's likely not a case where you "need" 4/5 Megapixel quality. Give me some examples of a "just in case" situation where you would need 4/5 Megapixels. Unless you're constantly looking for UFO's or want to take pictures undercover like a terrorist or are a wannabe Paparazzi I don't see the logic behind a 4/5 MP phone/camera. 1.3 MP is more than enough for those unimportant "just in case" situations. |
|
Originally Posted by PaPeRo
That doesn't make any sense. If you need high quality 4/5 Megapixel pictures then it's likely you'll want to take your dedicated camera along for that special situation that doesn't happen too often.
If it's a "just in case" situation then it's likely not a case where you "need" 4/5 Megapixel quality. Give me some examples of a "just in case" situation where you would need 4/5 Megapixels. Unless you're constantly looking for UFO's or want to take pictures undercover like a terrorist or are a wannabe Paparazzi I don't see the logic behind a 4/5 MP phone/camera. 1.3 MP is more than enough for those unimportant "just in case" situations. |
|
Originally Posted by shaolinmonk
it's not really the mp's... it's the fact that people want some decent quality pics.... and a camera phone that can do that on the fly without any planning ahead has it's advantages
|
|
Originally Posted by braindead5400
No one wants to take a crappy picture, even if it is a random situation. A better quality camera phone means those pictures that you want to take when you don't have a camera, won't look like complete crap, which could actually be a problem in some cases (like in an auto accident).
|
|
Originally Posted by PaPeRo
Exactly, in other words these 4/5MP cameras are really pointless and superfluous when you could get "decent quality pics" from 2MP camera phones.
|
|
Originally Posted by shaolinmonk
well the thing is if 2.0 camphones were the same as true 2.0 digitcams then it would not be an issue... but right now camera phones do not stack up to a d/c eventhough the mp is equal...
manufacturers are caught up in a mp race and not building the quality that could be had at a lower mp.. so for now we'll need higher mp's means better quality |
|
Originally Posted by PaPeRo
Most 1.3MP and 2MP camera phones give "decent pics" for those "just in case" situations. I've yet to see a one with "crappy pics".
|
|
Originally Posted by shaolinmonk
then your standards are quite low.. no offence...
|
|
Originally Posted by PaPeRo
Either that or your standards are quite high or misplaced..no offence....
Of course all of this means absolutely nothing without pics to PROVE how "crappy" a 1.3MP cameraphone supposedly is at taking "decent" pictures. Feel free to offer PROOF to back up your claim. |
|
Originally Posted by breathe
so am i the only one to notice this phone pretty much has the same UI as SE??? is this a rebranded SE?
personally, i think i will wait until SE offers something similar, instead of importing a phone from a company ive never heard of |
|
Originally Posted by olouie99
Can anyone post links to an unresized pics from the camera?
|
vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2008,
Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
vB Easy Archive Final ©2000 - 2008
- Created by Stefan "Xenon" Kaeser