Sony Reviews

If you buy this camera, make sure you purchase the "optional" rechargeable lithium battery and power pack. This camera eats batteries. A set of 2 double-A batteries will last about 4 to 5 pictures if you use the flash. If you use the flash and the LCD screen, you might only get 2 to 3 minutes of camera life, enough for just a couple pictures.

It's very easy to accidentally set the camera to take pictures at slower shutter speeds. The results are very blurry pictures. So the camera is not exactly fool-proof, and with such short battery life with the LCD screen on, you have to flip through the options very quickly to retain your battery life (which leads to mistakes in setting the exposure time, etc.)

I hope these problems I'm having with battery life will be relieved once I purchase the optional battery pack. As it is, the camera is almost un-usable with normal batteries.

This camera is actually a good camera for the price, the major complaint was that it didn't come w/ a lithium battery. But you can order a "Value-Pack" from Sony that includes a battery, charger and a nice case. So that wasn't much of a problem, I also recommend getting a 32 or 64 MB Memory stick, my 64 mb stick can hold about 66 high quality (1600x1200), and about 160 (1024 X 768), and of course about 370 (640X480) Which is a alot of pictures, and about 11 min of video (mpeg)w/o sound. I would strongly recommend buying the "Info-lithium battery" from Sony (comes in Value-pack), because it displays how many minutes of battery life you have remaining, which comes in handy. Normal AA batteries could die on you without warning! One other thing that bothered me, was the lag time of the camera after it took a picture, but all "digital" cameras that I've seen seem to do this; you take a picture w/ flash and after the picture is recorded the screen goes blank for a couple seconds, but if you take a picture w/o flash, there is no lag time. I guess the price you have to pay for getting a digital camera. Overall a really good camera, the optical zoom is nice too.

The P-50 and Canon A20 were my final two choices. I decided to go with the P-50 because it used only 2AA batteries and had the MPEG and Clip Movie recording features which is very neat.

I'm glad I went with the P-50. Here is my pro and con list for the P-50:

Pros:
* 3 optical zoom (it zooms fast)
* Uses 2 AA batteries. Don't get the battery pack. Just get 6 NiMh batteries with a rating of at least 1600mha, which are inexpensive. I got 4 Energizer 1600 mha NiMh batteries and a recharger at Target for only $... NiMH batteries last twice as long as alkalines and I haven't had to worry about my batteries dying.
* MPEG and Clip (GIF) movie modes are real fun. No sound on the MPEG, but spending an extra $... for a camera with sound wasn't worth it to me. For you who design web pages, you'll love the Clip (GIF) movie mode.
* Memory Stick, although expensive, is much more compact and stores more memory. However, the 4MB stick that comes with the camera is lame unless you plan to take only lower quality resolutions. I got a 64MB stick and at FINE quality (if using STANDARD quality, double all the numbers below) can hold the following: 67 1600x1200, 174 1024 x768, 400 640x480. As you can see that's alot of pictures.
* ISO flexibility and twilight mode. This helps when shooting in low light. The AF illuminator really helps the camera to focus in low light.
* Can crop pictures and cut MPEGs.
* If you change the Power Save mode to "off", then the camera lag time (a common complaint in these reviews) after you take a picture is very minimal. It's actually fast compared to other digital cameras I've used.
* Very fast transfer rate using the USB driver. The camera becomes another drive in Windows Explorer that you just drag to your hard drive. Very fast. I have Windows ME which allows Windows Explorer to view in thumbnail mode, so I can even preview all the pictures before moving them to the hard drive.
* The video out mode is cool. Just plug in the supplied jack cord to your P-50 and to your TV or VCR and see a slide show of your pictures you just took.
* If you auto-focus by pressing the shutter button half way, then the camera takes the picture very fast with almost no lag time, unlike other digital cameras in this price range,
* 37mm threads and the fact the optical zoom stays within the camera allows you to use an UV filter for better picture quality and as a lens protector.
* You can view your pictures taken also in thumbnail mode. Also, the camera tells you your settings (i.e shutter speed, iso, EV, etc.) of the picture.
* The camera allows the option to imprint the date onto your digital photos. This is a must for me as I never remember the date of the picture without this feature.
* The lens cap comes with a lens strap so you won't lose your cap.

Cons:
* 41mm lens. If you know photography, you will realize that most SLRs and point and shoots have 35mm lens. The lower the number, the better the wide angle, which allows you to take more area from the same distance making your objects also larger. However, the above pros by far outweigh this. If you're not a camera junkie like I am, you probably won't even notice this.
* The viewfinder only shows approx 70% of the actual picture taken and is slighty "skewed" to the left. If you think you got your object centered using the viewfinder, you'll will find out that the subject will be slightly left in the actual picture. The way around this is to use the LCD, which shows 100% of the actual picture and is not skewed.

All in all, in the 2.1 megapixel range and under $... as of 9/8/01, I feel this camera is the best one.

Pros: I bought this because I wanted something dinky to replace my unwieldy 3.5" disk-using Sony Mavica. It's sleek, styley, and nicely pocket-sized. The pics are reasonably decent, and I think 3 megapixels is enough, unless you're planning on printing billboards.

Cons: The flash isn't that fantastic; indoors and at night, my pics come out not-so-hot. The flash, even on high, isn't really powerful enough to illuminate things that aren't in good lighting. The battery life kind of sucks (60 mins but it really seems to last more like 30-40 mins) with the LCD on, but lasts longer with it turned off. I just take this as a necessary evil and charge the camera whenever I get a chance. The extra battery you can buy has a life of ~70 minutes (it started at 75 when I first bought it but only charges up to about 70 now). As long as you keep an extra battery on hand, charge it frequently, and are conscious of keeping the LCD screen off it's not too bad. You really need to purchase a bigger memory stick (I recommend 128 MB memory stick: stores ~82 pics at highest resolution and quality), but nearly every digital camera on the market comes with something silly like 8 MB.

Here is the shutter specs right from sony:
Maximum shutter speed: .001 seconds
Minimum shutter speed: 2 seconds
So why are people complaining about the shutte speed? Isn't it something that you can adjust?

I was given this camera for Christmas (2001) as a present from my Girlfriend and am quite familiar with it. In a nutshell, the camera is excellent. I had previously used Sony digital cameras on a loan basis throughout Europe and Australia and to own this latest version is just fantastic and I am privileged.

The camera comes with software which allows editing of still and mpeg images. The supplied memory stick however, is only 8meg and this is the only criticism I have. I bought a 64 meg which helps more. Will be getting a 128 meg memory stick soon. Noting the size and quality of the pictures this camera is capable of taking - and the photos are brilliant, you need storage space so at least a 64mb stick is required. That is unless you want to concentrate on just taking small volume jpg's suitable for emailing. The camera doesn't come with a cover but this can be purchased separately, or any old camera cover will do. A spare battery would be a bonus. I guess its these add-ons which help Sony to maintain the profits.... Once again, only minor criticisms.
The quality of the P5 is very good and typical of Sony. The camera is very small and able to be carried quite easily in a pocket. Once again, the quality of photos are excellent and with all digital cameras, the savings in the long term must add up through editing the photos you want and simply printing the good ones. Possession of the software program 'Adobe Photoshop Pro' adds another dimension however the supplied program with the camera is good enough for the average user.
What else can I say, other than I highly recommend the P5. My parents have the P3 which has less zoom and a lower pixel capacity for fine photos and it too is great....

Being a dedicated fan of Sony Digital cameras for the past 6 years, I was dying to get my hands on the new DSC-F828. From all of the specs. I read prior to it's release I was pummped to go online and buy this camera. In fact as soon as they hit the site I bought one!!!! I could'nt wait for it to be delivered the next day and start reading about it and using it over the Christmas holiday vacation week. Much to my surprise I was very disapointed with some classic action shots I took during my ski trip. The white background of the snowy mountains with the sun reflecting off the snow generated the most hideous looking purple flares accross the photo. When I went to read the reviews at all of the well respected Digital Photo websites I quickly found out I was not alone in my observations. Plus I learned that the defects were running deeper than I thought possible.

To be fair the camera is extremely well built and very user friendly. I does take very good pictures. But just don't expect to use it in backlit or bright areas. I wanted so badly to keep this camera and over look the problems. But I did'nt want to be part of a cruel joke that Sony was trying to pull on it's loyal customer base.

Bottom line, I sent it back and received a refund. Sony definitely rushed this bad boy to market way to quickly. Be very carful and do your home work before [buying] this camera. There are several better alternatives available for the same or less $$$.

The Sony DSC-F828 is a great looking camera that has a rock solid feel. Deep rich colors, extremely short shutter lag, and consistently sharp focus. Picture clarity can be a bit grainy in low light situations, nothing unusual for a point-and-shoot digital camera but may have expected better considering the relatively fast Carl Zeiss f2.0. Two features that I've found very useful are the rotating camera body to shoot at waist level and the ability to use both a compact flash card and memory stick at the same time. I can quickly switch from CF to memory stick (and visa versa) and when there's a pause in the action, I can put in a fresh CF card. Would definitely recommend having both CF and memory stick, one having at least 256MB and the other at least 64MB. Battery life is excellent, but I carry a spare anyway. The built-in flash is okay, but an external flash significantly improves picture quality.

I considered a DSLR, but the bulkiness, additional cost of the long zoom, inconvenience of carrying and switching lenses, and the risk of getting dust on the imager did not suit the way I would use the camera (family activities, vacation, and some scenery).

I was apprehensive about this camera due to the talk of purple and other 'problems'. I've been using this camera now (july) since May and I've not had any weirdness or problems.
I was close to buying the Rebel-- but I went with the sony---
1. I now use this camera for video & stills-- No juggling two camera-- which is impossible anyway being a mom with 2 kids! result is that I'm taking way more video and more pictures than previously
2. great quality. i do blow up pictures and I needed the 8mp-- I do use the 5mp setting mostly
3. the macro is just awesome. i've taken some great close up pictures with this camera
4. I love the way I can combine media and flip between compact flash and sony stick.

soo-- no problems here =)

We have used this at our design firm for three years, and it has been flawless. Amazing pictures, great features, excellent usability in terms of downloading from the memory stick. The tilt feature is very useful for shooting low or when you have to shoot over the top of someone's head (great for those auto show pictures when that guy just won't move out of the way!)

I've used it at home as well with my Mac, and the downloading is just as simple. Just plug the USB cable in and there you go.

Recently we decided to get a "new" camera for home, and purchased one of the new sony digital cameras, the P71. It is rated at a much higher megapixel, but immediately I noticed the pictures were nowhere near as good as with the trusty f505. We took it back right away and came here to buy a used f505.

Don't be fooled by "megapixels", you can have a ton but if they are all shot through a tiny lens, the pictures just can't be that good. The size of the lens on the dsc-f505 is huge, and it really shows in the photos. An excellent camera.

This is the camera that finally convinced me digital photography was mature enough to use on a regular basis. It has all the right bells and whistles: 1600x1200 max resolution @ 2.1 megapixels, a nice Zeiss zoom lens, UDB port connection to offload images. The included memory stick is a little small but Sony sells memory sticks as large as 64 meg, which will hold 110 images at the camera's best quality, and 200+ images at "average" quality. A couple of memory sticks and an extra battery make a good kit to travel with. I recently spent a week in Paris and London and took 700 pictures, offloading them each night to a laptop. I was thoroughly impressed with the way the camera works and the photos it produced.

As a former pro-photogrpher and now web/graphics developer, I had heard the usual negative comments about digital cameras. And I am, to say the least, a fanatic about quality. However, when I saw this camera (looks alone) I had to have it. The response from other digital camera owners is generally raised eyebrows. Other reviews here reflect those concerns: "It's a great camera, but no optical viewfinder?" Yes, I thought so myself at first. But consider the following: The lens rotates vertically 180 degrees on the camera body allowing the photographer to hold the camera directly overhead - or anywhere down below - yet still see the LCD pefectly. The advantage? Complete mastery of that universally dogging fact of photo-life, PERSPECTIVE - the single most important factor in any good photograph's composition. To my knowledge, the F505 is the very first hand-held camera in the history of photography to accomplish this. So whatever is lost by the lack of a viewfinder is compensated ten thousand times by this magnificent fact. Further, when I took my first photo (indoor with flash), my jaw dropped to the floor. I could read the cover notes on CD cases across the room. Color? Absolutely precise. Frankly, I had never seen anything quite like it. The new version - the F505v - adds the TIFF format for pros, which places this camera precisely at the pinnacle of its class. Drawbacks? There is a slightly noticeable lack of extremely tiny detail in certain type of outdoor images. And, as with all digital cameras, dynamic range could be improved. But all-in-all, the F505 is, in my view, the hands-down, all around winner.

I just received this camera today, and already I'm finding too many faults, the worst of which is that this is not a 3-mega-pixel camera - it's a 1.5.

That having been said, what attracted me to this model was it's manual control - very important for advanced users. My biggest complaint here is that the focus ring is hardly available. You can see in the photograph that the camera body actually cowls the body of the lens. What I didn't realize until I got my hands on it was that the cowl really gets in the way. You can't wrap your hand around it.

The optical viewfinder is small and dark, the flash tends to wash out the subject when set at the higher ISO, and the drivers for the flash card needed extraordinary user intervention to work (luckily, I'm an IT person).

Sounds like I hate it, right.

I guess if I were less interested in resolution and ease of manual control, I'd keep this camera. I have to say that the photographs I did take were of very high quality for a camera in this price range. It takes very sharp images, with great color. It's also really easy to use, and the automatic features were fairly flawless in their operation.

Now, I have to spend 2 1/2 times as much to get what I really wanted. Alas.

I use this camera to illustrate the many magazine articles I write, and editors and readers like the results. It is not widely realized that to get double the resolution you need four times the number of pixels. So to go to 3 megapixels won't even double the dots per inch as published. I'll move up when I can get 5 megapixels for under $1000.

Another factor often missed is that unless you can fill the frame, you are wasting a lot of pixels. So the zoom range is often more important than pixel count.

Some of the other comments on this camera seem uninformed: I plug the PCMIA card that the camera uses to store images into my Mac PowerBook, no software, no drivers are needed. I then drag them right into Photoshop or into a folder. It's fast and easy. The same holds for PCs that can read these cards.

I like this camera's good handling, true SLR nature (I wish it had depth-of-field preview, though), ability to take closeup and other lenses, and good control of exposure. My photos are seen by tens or hundreds of thousands of people, and nobody can tell that I've taken them with an under-$1000 digital camera, even when published in a glossy magazine. At its price, it gets five stars.

I've been waiting for over a year to find a decently priced digital camera that has the feel of an SLR. When I found this camera (at [money] at [a local store]) it fit my needs exactly. For the price, you cannot get a better approximation of a real camera.

I'm seeing complaints about the software and pc card adapter, but it works fine for me. The other complaints seem to be more about the camera's quality, which I'm finding is excellent if you learn something about how it takes pictures. Adjusting the white balance is critical for indoor and night time shots, but this isn't simple.

I didn't want a simple camera though. If I wanted point and shoot, there are plenty of other choices out there. For the price and the features, this camera is one of the best choices out there, and you can find some incredible deals now that it isn't being produced anymore.

In my accessory manual for my FD200 it lists this
item. That means it will aslo work with the FD200.

So take heed FD users, this will work for you TOO!

Pity it didn't come with the camera, but for outdoor use it's a real lifesaver. Especially for those bright days when it's exceptionally hard to see the viewfinder.

I bought two of these for my Dell Inspiron 8500. They actually worked (both of them ;-D), and well, too. I use a Philips SDVD6004 DVD-Burner (on an Inspiron 8500), and these Sony disks work infinitely better than the Memorex DVD+R's (I burned 6 coasters- out of all 6 burn attempts- using the Memorex DVD's).

Really not much else to say, except these WORK, unlike the Memorex DVD+Rs. Plus, if you have some problem burning these Sony's, you can always erase the disk and try again.

Discs works quite well. No problem using my Sony DRU 500-A DVD burner.

This works fine with Philips DVDR985 DVD recorder and the DVDRW228 DVD+RW drive, which I own and use. The resulting disks also play in my other players that read the +RW discs. No compatiblity problems whatsoever.

I bought the Sony Digital Photo Printer (DPP-SV77) about a year ago with the intention of using it for all my
photo printing. It is easy to use, compact, and fits anywhere. It produces a great looking photo. The photos that measure 4 by 6 inches are perfect for printing postcards or borderless prints.

Negatives: It prints too slow, and it's hard to find the glossy sheets of printing paper/print cartridge packets
that are much too expensive. I'm wondering if they are becoming obsolete??

This makes nice quick photos, but for enlargements and other custom work, this will not be the one to use.

I give this product 4 stars, deducting one star because of the negatives.

If you enjoy printing photos at home from your digital camera, then the Sony Digital Photo printer is a must! I purchased this item a few days ago and have come to the conclusion that the pros definitely outweigh the cons. The PROS: (1) According to Sony, pictures will not fade or yellow for at least 100 years (ink jets do not even come close to this timeframe); (2) Beautiful pictures that rival (even beat) those developed at a photo lab; (3) Pictures will not be ruined if they accidentally get wet - they are protected by a special laminate coating process; (4) Printer was very easy to use and set-up (if you have Windows XP, make sure you download and execute the XP driver from the Sony website despite the fact that the read me file on the CD-Rom says XP drivers are included). The CONS: (1) Print speed is slow - about two minutes for a 4x6 photo; (2) The Sony 4x6 photo paper is rather pricey ...(3) The printer will only print 4x6 and 3.5x4 photos - another printer is needed for other print jobs. One more thing to mention....you can use a Compact Flash Card with this unit but you must purchase a PCMCIA card adapter ....In closing, I must say that I am extremely satisfied with this printer and do not regret this purchase!!

We use this printer as a standalone photo printer with our Sony digital camera and 128 meg memory stick. Well worth the investment. Photos are professional quality. Yes, the paper is expensive, about 50 cents a photo more or less. You get a new cartridge with each box of 25 photos. Printer is a little slow but it really is like having a photo lab in your house. It's the first photo printer the rest of the family can use without dragging me over to the computer. That alone makes it worth it.