Medion mobile phones

[Rod Speed]

"BuckyBalls" <"The Pres"@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cvq2tvFkavuU1@mid.individual.net...

On 4/07/2015 2:38 AM, Rod Speed wrote:


"yaputya" <sir.leftlegin.to.U@gmale.com> wrote in message
news:cvnha5Fp2aU1@mid.individual.net...
On 2/07/2015 10:11 PM, Rod Speed wrote:

He's too jewish for that end of the market currently. Just got a
Galaxy S4.

Just changing the topic here...
How good is the Galaxy S4's camera?

Dunno yet, he just got it yesterday and rang me
about getting it authorised yesterday evening.

That is the main reason he got it, for the camera, they are
about to head back to Turkey for a couple of months and
need a decent camera for that.

I've got a cheap (around $60) 14Pixel Medion digital camera with 8x
optical zoom and 16Gb memory. Can the S4 really compete with the
superior optics?

Not on the 8x optical zoom alone.

That medion phone doesn't have much of a
camera, particularly in low light situations.

It's a pure camera, not a phone.

I was talking about the medion phone which I originally commented on.

It has a 14Mpixel sensor, 8x optical zoom and and optical image
stabiliser. Plus 16Gb solely devoted to image storage.
Low light is a weakness with cheap digital cameras, but in normal light
I'm pretty sure the $60 Medion camera can produce a better picture than a
fixed lens smartphone, which only has digital zoom to compose a picture.

Bet it doesn’t do as well as the best of the smartphones like the iphone 6+
and the Galaxy S6. If course it’s a lot cheaper than those too but you have
to fart around with the separate physical camera too.

BTW I've got a Panasonic NV-DA1ENA digital video camera which dates back
to 1999. It has fantastic low-light performance, it produces excellent
video even in candlelight.

So do the best of the smartphones.

The main problem with it is that the DV tape format has become redundant.
It does store DVD-quality video though, with no losses due to compression.

 

[BuckyBalls]

On 4/07/2015 9:52 PM, Rod Speed wrote:

"BuckyBalls" <"The Pres"@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cvq2tvFkavuU1@mid.individual.net...
On 4/07/2015 2:38 AM, Rod Speed wrote:


"yaputya" <sir.leftlegin.to.U@gmale.com> wrote in message
news:cvnha5Fp2aU1@mid.individual.net...
On 2/07/2015 10:11 PM, Rod Speed wrote:

He's too jewish for that end of the market currently. Just got a
Galaxy S4.

Just changing the topic here...
How good is the Galaxy S4's camera?

Dunno yet, he just got it yesterday and rang me
about getting it authorised yesterday evening.

That is the main reason he got it, for the camera, they are
about to head back to Turkey for a couple of months and
need a decent camera for that.

I've got a cheap (around $60) 14Pixel Medion digital camera with 8x
optical zoom and 16Gb memory. Can the S4 really compete with the
superior optics?

Not on the 8x optical zoom alone.

That medion phone doesn't have much of a
camera, particularly in low light situations.

It's a pure camera, not a phone.

I was talking about the medion phone which I originally commented on.

It has a 14Mpixel sensor, 8x optical zoom and and optical image
stabiliser. Plus 16Gb solely devoted to image storage.
Low light is a weakness with cheap digital cameras, but in normal
light I'm pretty sure the $60 Medion camera can produce a better
picture than a fixed lens smartphone, which only has digital zoom to
compose a picture.

Bet it doesn’t do as well as the best of the smartphones like the iphone 6+
and the Galaxy S6. If course it’s a lot cheaper than those too but you have
to fart around with the separate physical camera too.

The smartphones don't have 8x optical zoom, so they might be similar
with a wide angle shot but cannot compete when you have to zoom.
Having a separate camera is fine by me, but I'm not part of the iWank
generation.

BTW I've got a Panasonic NV-DA1ENA digital video camera which dates
back to 1999. It has fantastic low-light performance, it produces
excellent video even in candlelight.

So do the best of the smartphones.

Up to a point, a very expensive point.

The main problem with it is that the DV tape format has become
redundant. It does store DVD-quality video though, with no losses due
to compression.

 

[Rod Speed]

"BuckyBalls" <"The Pres"@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cvr6ioFt4v9U1@mid.individual.net...

On 4/07/2015 9:52 PM, Rod Speed wrote:


"BuckyBalls" <"The Pres"@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cvq2tvFkavuU1@mid.individual.net...
On 4/07/2015 2:38 AM, Rod Speed wrote:


"yaputya" <sir.leftlegin.to.U@gmale.com> wrote in message
news:cvnha5Fp2aU1@mid.individual.net...
On 2/07/2015 10:11 PM, Rod Speed wrote:

He's too jewish for that end of the market currently. Just got a
Galaxy S4.

Just changing the topic here...
How good is the Galaxy S4's camera?

Dunno yet, he just got it yesterday and rang me
about getting it authorised yesterday evening.

That is the main reason he got it, for the camera, they are
about to head back to Turkey for a couple of months and
need a decent camera for that.

I've got a cheap (around $60) 14Pixel Medion digital camera with 8x
optical zoom and 16Gb memory. Can the S4 really compete with the
superior optics?

Not on the 8x optical zoom alone.

That medion phone doesn't have much of a
camera, particularly in low light situations.

It's a pure camera, not a phone.

I was talking about the medion phone which I originally commented on.

It has a 14Mpixel sensor, 8x optical zoom and and optical image
stabiliser. Plus 16Gb solely devoted to image storage.
Low light is a weakness with cheap digital cameras, but in normal
light I'm pretty sure the $60 Medion camera can produce a better
picture than a fixed lens smartphone, which only has digital zoom to
compose a picture.

Bet it doesn’t do as well as the best of the smartphones like the iphone
6+
and the Galaxy S6. If course it’s a lot cheaper than those too but you
have
to fart around with the separate physical camera too.

The smartphones don't have 8x optical zoom,

What I said in my original comment.

so they might be similar with a wide angle shot but cannot compete when
you have to zoom.

Depends on whether they have the same digital resolution.

> Having a separate camera is fine by me,

More fool you.

BTW I've got a Panasonic NV-DA1ENA digital video camera which dates
back to 1999. It has fantastic low-light performance, it produces
excellent video even in candlelight.

So do the best of the smartphones.

Up to a point,

Bet they do as well as that dinosaur.

> a very expensive point.

What I said.

The main problem with it is that the DV tape format has become
redundant. It does store DVD-quality video though, with no losses due
to compression.