Username or EmailPassword
While i'm not fond of your test pictures, what i like those phones for is usually the camera.
I can do really good quality pictures with them, as long as there's enough.
They're pretty bad in low light condition and have also no setting for exposure duration.
Eg: N95 picture with he 5MP (last 3 modified in gimp as the link indicates :p):
The N95 camera is much better than the N79's. So don't compare apples and oranges. Also evident from my N95 review: http://www.osnews.com/story/17837/Review_Nokia_N95/page2/
i think he means this class of mobile phone vs the iPhone which you mentionned
the iPhone camera kinda sucks in comparison, being N95 or the phone in question here
your test picture isnt exactly a very nice area, the luminosity is very bad which is usually making bad pictures with these cameras
your test pictures for your N95 link had a much better light (maybe its also better quality etc, but anyway, i think that's the point Edited 2009-03-19 01:52 UTC
Believe it or not, I don't control the weather. The two pictures in the two phones, show the sample place. The only thing different was the weather as they were taken years apart.
As for the indoor pictures, the light was not any different. It was just N95's flash being more powerful. Edited 2009-03-19 03:04 UTC
So... might a phone review be expected to mention something about general signal strength and call quality? Just puttin it out there...
I did speak of call quality in the article, and it was indeed excellent.