The Register has been taking a close look at the Nokia N86 8MP, concluding "Sure, it won’t shake up the smartphone market. But, bringing 8Mp camerawork to the Nokia range for the first time, the N86 is another heavyweight addition to the Nseries line-up." It seems they didn't spot the variable aperture or true digital zoom in video recording, mind you, but they still liked it overall, just as the N86 won a place in our hearts.
Read on in the full article.
As an N82 owner looking to upgrade to a better camera phone, the N86 certainly looks tempting.But at the moment, the Satio seems a serious 'touch' contender to the N86. Steve, can you tell me if AAS will be doing a Satio review or an imaging head to head with the N86?
Thanks, Aidan
What on earth is a 'true digital zoom'?
if its digital zoom how can it be true?
Yes, we're eager to look at the Satio - but we can't afford to buy one and Sony Ericsson PR aren't being very quick at expediting review hardware..... sigh.
If you're going to compare the N86 camera, you have to compare it to another 8mp phone. Leave the unbalanced comparisons to GSM arena. Btw, I took some great videos on the 5th November with mine.
Some cheap digital zoom systems just crop the middle of an image and present that as it stands at the reduced MP size. Others crop the middle of the image and then interpolate up so you keep your original MP size.
Both are crap.
And in my opinion it is OK to compare cameras across MP ranges, because more megapixels does not necessarily mean better image quality, and very often it means worse image quality.
I've been looking all over for specs. It seems like the only the north american version of the n86 has tri-band 3g? The uk/euro variant only has 900/2100? Is this true? I'm looking to upgrade from the n85 and i love everything about it except the camera in low light and the build quality. But i need 3g that works in north america as well and it seems the only other nokia with a digital compass and FM transmitter is the N97, which doesn't have the camera. Please enlighten. Thanks.
A similar question but the other way round - I'm in the USA and the NAM variant of this phone is available from Amazon for $399 (about �240 at the moment) which is great. The international version is $520 and I'm not sure whether buying the US version will limit use in the UK when I return permanently in six months time. I know both versions have the 2100 band and this is what we use in Europe but will it matter not having the 900 3G band if I get the US version?
Unregistered wrote:I've been looking all over for specs. It seems like the only the north american version of the n86 has tri-band 3g? The uk/euro variant only has 900/2100? Is this true?
No, the European variant has 900/1900/2100.
Unregistered, the only difference I’m aware of is the 850 3G band for America and the 900 3G band for Europe. They're both GSM quad-band and UMTS tri-band 3G.
Also you should consider the warranty which applies for certain areas.
The previous phones Ive used simply crop the video while zooming.
AFAIK, The zoom in N86 takes the video at full 8mp resolution and shrinks the image..
While the term "true digital zoom" is a marketing name, it does finally make digital zooming in videos worthwhile...
Why is there such a big difference in the prices of the NAM and the European version ?
Arcade wrote:Why is there such a big difference in the prices of the NAM and the European version ?
I have no idea. My only guess is there's less demand for Nokia phones in America. It was nice getting it for $400.
I think it's a fair question to ask what's better as a cameraphone, an N86 or a Satio, given that both are pitching their imaging abilities as their prime feature.
As has been pointed out, a good photo isn't just the product of how many mega pixels the phone has, but software and hardware come into play too. The basic question is, which is better for taking photos? That's it. As someone willing to spend a bit of cash, i'd like to make an informed decision.
Aidan
Unregistered wrote:I think it's a fair question to ask what's better as a cameraphone, an N86 or a Satio, given that both are pitching their imaging abilities as their prime feature.As has been pointed out, a good photo isn't just the product of how many mega pixels the phone has, but software and hardware come into play too. The basic question is, which is better for taking photos? That's it. As someone willing to spend a bit of cash, i'd like to make an informed decision.
Aidan
A good photo is more to do with the person taking the photos than almost anything else. An awesome DSLR with uber optics will still take lousy pictures if used by an idiot.
There is little real world difference between an image taken at 8mp and 12mp - its primarily marketing hype. Any differences are nothing to do with the resolution, more to do with quality of sensor and/or post processing.
clonmult wrote:A good photo is more to do with the person taking the photos than almost anything else. An awesome DSLR with uber optics will still take lousy pictures if used by an idiot.There is little real world difference between an image taken at 8mp and 12mp - its primarily marketing hype. Any differences are nothing to do with the resolution, more to do with quality of sensor and/or post processing.
And the lens.
Forget photo composition and lighting. The comparison is for image quality/resolveable detail/colour accuracy and vividness, sharpness etc between phones in identical conditions. This has nothing to do with the idiot taking the picture.
Guide to phones in cameras:
1. Go into a store selling cameras.
2. Find the camera display.
3. Look for a camera that has a lens similar in appearance to the one in your phone.
4. Note the price of this camera and where it stands in the range.
5. Ask the people in store about the image quality that you might expect from this camera.
Cameras in phones = poor image quality. Without exception.
Unregistered wrote:And the lens.Forget photo composition and lighting. The comparison is for image quality/resolveable detail/colour accuracy and vividness, sharpness etc between phones in identical conditions. This has nothing to do with the idiot taking the picture.
Guide to phones in cameras:
1. Go into a store selling cameras.
2. Find the camera display.
3. Look for a camera that has a lens similar in appearance to the one in your phone.
4. Note the price of this camera and where it stands in the range.
5. Ask the people in store about the image quality that you might expect from this camera.Cameras in phones = poor image quality. Without exception.
Theres an element of truth in that, but you're ultimately wrong.
Sure, some phone cameras are poor, but I've taken plenty of pictures with the W810, N73, K800, N95 and even the N85 that 99% of people wouldn't notice that they were taken with a phone, not a dedicated camera.
Sadly I've used some of the cheaper digital cameras that your probably referring to, and they really are incredibly dire.
Are you ultimately just talking BS, or from experience - I'd tend to say the former, as the reality of pictures I've taken with the mobiles over the years shows something completely different.