Motorola V710
Camera quality
Is the camera on this phone really as bad as people are saying it is adn is there a way to make it better, because i saw pictures off a v600 and thye were really good, are pictures from a v710 as good as from a v600
...
The camera quality sucks. Its even worse indoors. The flash is about as useful as using a string between two phones to save air time.
...
RDB88 said:
Is the camera on this phone really as bad as people are saying it is adn is there a way to make it better, because i saw pictures off a v600 and thye were really good, are pictures from a v710 as good as from a v600
People bitching about this phone's camera simply do not know much about camera's nor the physics involved. With good lighting indoors, the pictures are OK when viewed on a PC. I've a strong feeling that most people are judging the pic as viewed on the phone. They aren't perfect, they are not suppsoed to be, but for a camera on a phone it's fine.
I agree the light is basically worthless unless you are just looking for some sort of image in a really dark area for a closeup or somet...
(continues)
...
I'll second the good quality on the camera. Its a phone, not anything else. Sure even a $100 digital camera blows this away, because its a real camera. As far as a phone camera goes, this is as good as I've seen. Here's a few samples I've taken over the last month or so:
The first photo was taken outdoors in the middle of the day and looks great. There are some color problems on the bottom of the picture, but overall it it doesn't look like a camera phone picture. The second was taken at a much later time in the day, still outdoors, but I was fighting with the camera settings to get a good photo with less light. It still came out good. The last photo was one of my first, taken at a grocery store, very close up.
Judge your...
(continues)
The first photo was taken outdoors in the middle of the day and looks great. There are some color problems on the bottom of the picture, but overall it it doesn't look like a camera phone picture. The second was taken at a much later time in the day, still outdoors, but I was fighting with the camera settings to get a good photo with less light. It still came out good. The last photo was one of my first, taken at a grocery store, very close up.
Judge your...
(continues)
...
I'll second the good quality on the camera. Its a phone, not anything else. Sure even a $100 digital camera blows this away, because its a real camera. As far as a phone camera goes, this is as good as I've seen. Here's a few samples I've taken over the last month or so:
http://img28.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img28&image=08-15-04_ ... »
http://img28.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img28&image=08-26-04_ ... »
http://img85.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img85&image=poppers.jpg »
The first photo was taken outdoors in the middle of the day and looks great. There are some color problems on the bottom of the picture, but overall it it doesn't look like a camera phone picture. The second was taken at a much later time in the day, still outdoors, but I was fighting ...
(continues)
http://img28.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img28&image=08-15-04_ ... »
http://img28.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img28&image=08-26-04_ ... »
http://img85.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img85&image=poppers.jpg »
The first photo was taken outdoors in the middle of the day and looks great. There are some color problems on the bottom of the picture, but overall it it doesn't look like a camera phone picture. The second was taken at a much later time in the day, still outdoors, but I was fighting ...
(continues)
...
I have to agree with Stubtify--these pix are fine for what they are. After all, you've got what appears to be a fixed focus/fixed aperture lens with an opening that looks to be about 1/8", no auto-programming modes, no shutter speed control, no optical zoom, etc.
The componentry which makes up the camera is probably responsible for about 10 bucks of the price of the phone. It's for snapshots under decent lighting conditions-ONLY. If you're looking to be Ansel Adams, get yourself a Hasselblad, not a freakin' phone.
The componentry which makes up the camera is probably responsible for about 10 bucks of the price of the phone. It's for snapshots under decent lighting conditions-ONLY. If you're looking to be Ansel Adams, get yourself a Hasselblad, not a freakin' phone.
...
i think the pictures are good. it is only a phone. but this camera was supposed to be the best on a phone to date. quite frankly, it isnt. case in point. i was with my girlfriend in a bar and she wanted her picture with a friend. a called the v710 into action. the picture was bad, you couldnt tell who or what was in the frame. so i used my girls samsung a670. it took the same picture in the same lighting with no problems. the v710 takes great pictures in good lighting. ive got some sweet shots of heinz field.(they look gooood) but when the lights go down so does the cameras performance. its just a little disappointing. thats all
...
goatass said:
i think the pictures are good. it is only a phone. but this camera was supposed to be the best on a phone to date. quite frankly, it isnt.
Yeah, but WHO branded that title upon it? It certainly wasn't Motorola or Verizon. Moto promoted it as 1.2 MP but didn't say "best on the market". Customer hype did it, that's who.
People should not be mad a Moto, they should be mad at believing the hype as manufacturere claims.
Mike
...
