LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksRead more.The new compact smartphone is available for pre-order now, delivery on 2nd Nov.
Read more.The new compact smartphone is available for pre-order now, delivery on 2nd Nov.
Compare this with the full-fat Samsung Galaxy S3 at 136.6 x 70.6 x 8.6mm, weighing 133g and with a 14.8 inch screen.
That is a big screen...
mtyson (12-10-2012)
ha ha, fixed...
Originally Posted by Smudger
Since when do people utilize fans instead of hands?to be popular among Samsung Galaxy fans with smaller fans.
Shouldn't you be saying the Galaxy S3 Mini was unveiled yesterday instead of just saying the Galaxy S3? Also as already mentioned, I think you meant to say fans with smaller hands, not fans with smaller fans haha
This kiddo is too expensive for what it offers. Might as well wait for Xperia TL http://www.gsmarena.com/compare.php3...&idPhone2=5015 that should land in about the same price range, or go with Xperia T that's already out.
I think the S2 would be a good alternative to. Sony phones can usually do some lovely photos but the videos on these high end samsungs are lush! I've not been very impressed with the video quality on these xperias. Though I'm not sure I've seen videos from the one you linked...
TL isn't out yet but it will be the LTE version of Xperia L with a few minor changes. I'm using Sony phones quite often (and sammy ones) and I only had complaints about image & video quality on low end Sony models. I actually don't like Samsung's over-processing of photos and videos. Photos on sammies look like they've been put through high profile Imagenomic Noiseware Professional filter, removing noise quite effectively but in turn lacking on fine detail. Videos aren't processed so much for obvious reasons phones simply aren't fast enough, but they still tend to look like they use some temporal cleaning filters and the colours are too lush for my taste. My verdict would be they're equal in terms of IQ, with Sony using higher density sensors (higher resolution images but slightly more noise). I don't like the JPeG compression levels at neither. If I had to choose a phone for the camera, it would be Nokia
Last edited by howdee; 17-10-2012 at 01:33 PM. Reason: spelling
fair enough man. i know what you mean about the samsung images, moving or still. they are quite smooth and vibrant but i personally like that a lotTL isn't out yet but it will be the LTE version of Xperia L with a few minor changes. I'm using Sony phones quite often (any sammy ones) and I only had complaints about image & video quality on low end Sony models. I actually don't like Samsung's over-processing of photos and videos. Photos on sammies look like they've been put through high profile Imagenomic Noiseware Professional filter, removing noise quite effectively but in turn lacking on fine detail. Videos aren't processed so much for obvious reasons phones simply aren't fast enough, but they still tend to look like they use some temporal cleaning filters and the colours are too lush for my taste. My verdict would be they're equal in terms of IQ, with Sony using higher density sensors (higher resolution images but slightly more noise). I don't like the JPeG compression levels at neither. If I had to choose a phone for the camera, it would be Nokiait's also something you can easily adjust afterwards without needing to be knowledgeable in editing software, if you wish to change it. i personally prefer the image detail in the samsungs than the sony's so far. either way, i've got my s3 and i'm loving the videos and photos on it
Glaxy S3 should have been smaller so now they realised this thing to make more money out of us.
It is a natural upgrade for any Galaxy Ace users.
mmm.. price wise probably the Ace 2
Vodka
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
