2MP Cameraphone Shootout: Sony Ericsson's K750 vs. Nokia's N90

Editorial by Michael Oryl on Wednesday October 26, 2005.

Sony Ericsson K750

K750 sample

N90 sample

Nokia N90

Ever since the Nokia N90 and Sony Ericsson K750 were announced, people have been speculating as to which device would take better 2 megapixel photos. Would it be the N90, with its Carl Zeiss designed optics, or the compact K750 with its parent Sony's electronics? Both devices have pretty similar specs when it comes to their cameras: both are 2 megapixel units, both have auto focusing capability, and both have a history of cameras in the family (Sony's digital cameras and Zeiss' lenses). The K750's camera has a slightly wider field of view, and seems to be a bit "faster" than the N90's (meaning it needs less light), but otherwise these two cameras are pretty evenly matched.

While Sony Ericsson's megapixel cameraphones have always been among the best available, I have to admit that I figured that the N90, with the backing of Carl Zeiss engineering, would end up being the superior camera - at least when it came to optical quality.

But that didn't happen.

An odd thing seemed to have happened on the way from the labs to the phone factory. The optical quality of the K750's camera, which is much physically smaller than the N90's camera, turned out to be superior in most every way. What the N90 did excel at, however, was taking photos that were generally more pleasing to the eye and less "digital" looking.

That's certainly not what I had expected.

As I'll show you in the sample photos that follow, the Sony Ericsson K750's camera is capable of resolving finer detail than the Nokia N90 can. This means that small print is more readable, thin stripes stay visible, and subtle surface textures are more easily seen. You'll also see that the K750 inflicts far less lens distortion on the photos it takes.

But on the other side of the coin, you'll see that the N90's colors are warmer and more pleasant looking (if not always the most accurate). The N90 photos also have more color saturation, which makes them pop a bit more. Its exposure settings are, to my eyes, also closer to the ideal in more circumstances. On top of that, the N90 seems to be able to obtain focus more consistently.

So what we have is a case of the electronics company, Sony, coming up with a better lens, and the optics/phone company partnership, Zeiss and Nokia, coming up with better software and post-processing of the images. Exactly the opposite from what I was expecting.

All of the photos for this story were shot at the highest resolution and quality settings that each device offered. All photos were shot with the same white balance settings on both cameras (auto, cloudy, incandescent, etc). While I tried to make things as equal as possible, this is far from a scientific experiment. The devices were hand held, lighting varies, and it is possible that either of these devices is a particularly good or bad example of its kind. I'm not an optics engineer, but I am a hardcore photographer with many years of experience. Take what I say for what it is: personal opinion. Your mileage may vary.

First up in our comparison: Lens Distortion.