what's the general consensus on sony cyber-shots?

[nageov3t]

I've got a $300 gift certificate to amazon burning a hole in my pocket and was thinking about buying one

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obi...1J7WSBJHTGUFA&v=glance

I've already got my SLR big gun, but I'm thinking it would be really handy to have something small and super portable for all the times when I don't need the bulk of an SLR... what's the general opinion on the sony cybershots?

 

[996GT2]

Cyber shots are pretty good, but do you really need to spend $300 on a P&S? Most good P&S cameras will deliver similar image quality and you could save quite a bit by getting a $150 Cyber-Shot W120 that still has all the important features like image stabilization and compact size.

If you really feel the need to get an compact, advanced, high end P&S, look to the Panasonic LX3.

 

[jpeyton]

Not worth $300. If you just need something pocket-sized, why not a Canon SDxxx or a Sony Wxxx series? A good one is $200 or less. No touch screen though.

 

[octopus41092]

Cybershots look nice and are slim, so if you want something easy to carry around and stuff it'd be nice. However, camera's are already pretty small so...

I have a Cybershot too and I think it's nice. If you wanna spend the $300 for it just because, then go ahead theres nothing "wrong" with the camera. The only thing is that there are cheaper alternatives that would work just as well.

 

[Heidfirst]

I agree -Cybershots are fine but do you need to spend $300 on a P+S?
Can't you buy some accessories for your DSLR at the same time?

 

[nageov3t]

thanks, I'll look into some of the suggestions.

compactness is pretty much the #1 factor in what I'm looking to buy... I want something that I can just carry around in my pocket at a party or something to take some random pics if something pic-worthy happens, as opposed to lugging around my SLR (which, even if it isn't that heavy, is pretty bulky... not something that's going to fit neatly into a pocket on my cargo pants).

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Originally posted by: 996GT2
Cyber shots are pretty good, but do you really need to spend $300 on a P&S? Most good P&S cameras will deliver similar image quality and you could save quite a bit by getting a $150 Cyber-Shot W120 that still has all the important features like image stabilization and compact size.

If you really feel the need to get an compact, advanced, high end P&S, look to the Panasonic LX3.

The LX3 is in a different class of camera though - it's nearly 2x as large as the Sony T700.

OP, I bet the large (3.5") high-res (921k dots) LCD on the T700 is a big reason why it is so pricey. It might be worth it if you think you would be in situations where you take the shot, and then want to show it to other people, in-camera. Otherwise, as the other respondents have stated, there are better values to be found.

 

[Heidfirst]

Originally posted by: Flipped Gazelle
.

OP, I bet the large (3.5") high-res (921k dots) LCD on the T700 is a big reason why it is so pricey. It might be worth it if you think you would be in situations where you take the shot, and then want to show it to other people, in-camera. Otherwise, as the other respondents have stated, there are better values to be found.

he could drop down to something like a T77 - still extremely pocketable but substantially cheaper.

 

[shortylickens]

Have you bought anything yet?
If not I have to agree with everyone else. Once you get up to 300 bucks you may as well get a low-end SLR.
But as far as image quality goes, Sony is still the best in the point & shoot arena. Just dont spend more than 200 dollars. Use the rest for memory cards, cases, and maybe a small tripod or bean bag.

I got a DSC-P50 back in 2000 (I think) and even though the sensor is only 2.1 MP its much better quality than pretty much all cell phone cameras and many of todays P&S's. Aside from which, 1600x1200 is still too big for emails to family and friends. I almost always scale down to 800x600 for emails and they look great.
Got a DSLR recently and sent the Sony to my mom. She has been making use of it and the thing still works great.
That says something about Sony quality if 9 years later it still takes decent photos. One would think the sensor just turns to crap after a while, but it doesnt.

 

[Deadtrees]

f/3.5 is too slow. I wouldn't touch anything below f/2.8.

 

[ivan2]

From what I read the only good cybershot is the W300. From what I've experiences, if you don't pay attention to them you can easily end up getting a really craptastic cybershots like my friend did... the thing only take 16:9 pictures or something with high compression, truly shit.

another annoyance is the pre-flash focus assist, but that's the same for all tiny P&S so I will let that one go...

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Originally posted by: shortylickens
Have you bought anything yet?
If not I have to agree with everyone else. Once you get up to 300 bucks you may as well get a low-end SLR.

But you can't slip an SLR into your pants pocket. OP stated he already has an SLR, and wants a "super portable" digicam.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: shortylickens
Have you bought anything yet?

decided to hold off and used my gift certificates for an xbox 360... I might shop again in a couple months, see if the prices on the current-gens drop when sony's next line is released.

 

[Heidfirst]

Originally posted by: ivan2
From what I read the only good cybershot is the W300.

that's definitely not true - the likes of the W120/W130 are as good as their competitors.

 

[ajwray]

I have a w-120 which we use when not toting the DSC-H10. The 120 takes some pretty nice picutres and you don't even notice it when walking around. I travel a lot and it takes some abuse and keeps on going. Before that we had a V-1 which i sadly had to burry this year but took good pictures and a beating.

 

[jpeyton]

Target has the W120 for $99 right now, BTW.