u4/3 beaten by a phone

http://www.gsmarena.com/pureview_bli...view-773p3.php

"Me" wrote in message ...

http://www.gsmarena.com/pureview_bli...view-773p3.php
===============================

Thanks for posting that. On looking at the test images without knowing
which was which, I cannot see how so many voted for the 'phone, as the u4/3
were significantly sharper, although the JPEG may not have had quite so much
shadow detail. Of course, in low-light conditions the result would be
unlikely to be repeated. I find that the images from my iPad3 are quite
good in bright daylight, but there are many features missing as DanP
highlights. I can see the 'phone replacing a separate camera for may
people, though.

Cheers,
David

On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 21:10:20 +1200, Me wrote:

http://www.gsmarena.com/pureview_bli...view-773p3.php

Where did they conduct this survey? At the Perkins School for the
Blind? Without knowing anything else about this so-called test I can
tell, based on the samples, that it's total horse****.

On 28/06/2012 5:57 a.m., Bowser wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 21:10:20 +1200, Me wrote:

http://www.gsmarena.com/pureview_bli...view-773p3.php

Where did they conduct this survey? At the Perkins School for the
Blind? Without knowing anything else about this so-called test I can
tell, based on the samples, that it's total horse****.

They do claim it was a "blind test" - but I don't think that's what they
mean.
They downsampled the u4/3 images to 8mp to match the cellphone image.
It seems clear to me that the u4/3 images are better, and as the
"winner" phone is better than the other phones in the test, and the test
candidates were known, those two were easy to pick.
So, perhaps a lesson in psychology of people who are cellphone geeks
visiting such sites. Perhaps they really want to believe that the
impossible is true - as that's what's being sold to them. I thought
photo geeks get somewhat fanboi-ish, but cellphone geeks are much, much
worse IMO.
I visited the site after clicking a link at DPReview.