Win a copy of Think Java: How to Think Like a Computer Scientist this week in the Java in General forum!
  • Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic

which is the best model in SONY

 
PRavi kumar
Ranch Hand
Posts: 69
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
HI,

I thought of buying digital camera. Plase guide me which is the best model in SONY.
 
Chetan Parekh
Ranch Hand
Posts: 3640
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I wish I could have this
 
Ashok Mash
Ranch Hand
Posts: 1936
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Don't know about Sony, but if you are looking for compact cameras, Canon Ixus models are probably one of the best out there.

Plenty of excellent reviews, comments and comparison at dpreview.com
 
marc weber
Sheriff
Posts: 11343
Java Mac Safari
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Originally posted by PRavi kumar:
...which is the best model in SONY.

At over $47,000 (without the lens), the SONY Digital Betacam might be a little exclusive, but it is the "gold standard" for digital video.
 
Scott Selikoff
author
Saloon Keeper
Posts: 4014
18
Eclipse IDE Flex Google Web Toolkit
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Originally posted by marc weber:

At over $47,000 (without the lens), the SONY Digital Betacam might be a little exclusive, but it is the "gold standard" for digital video.


Do you get a free PS3 with every purchase?
 
Tony Alicea
Desperado
Sheriff
Posts: 3226
5
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Originally posted by marc weber:

At over $47,000 (without the lens), the SONY Digital Betacam might be a little exclusive, but it is the "gold standard" for digital video.


Except that it's no use since it's Beta as in BetaMax. You see, VHS won the battle a long time ago and... oh wait... Oops!



"Never Mind..."
 
marc weber
Sheriff
Posts: 11343
Java Mac Safari
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Originally posted by Tony Alicea:
...VHS won the battle a long time ago and... oh wait... Oops! ...

A lot of news photographers continued using beta at home long after VHS had "won." I guess they are their own breed of tech geeks.
[ June 25, 2007: Message edited by: marc weber ]
 
Tony Alicea
Desperado
Sheriff
Posts: 3226
5
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Wasn't BetaMax a better product than VHS technically? I don't remember since I could not afford either format then, Ha!
 
marc weber
Sheriff
Posts: 11343
Java Mac Safari
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Originally posted by Tony Alicea:
Wasn't BetaMax a better product than VHS technically? I don't remember since I could not afford either format then, Ha!

That's my understanding, but I don't know the details. All I ever owned was low-end VHS players.
 
Nitin Nigam
Ranch Hand
Posts: 129
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Hi,
Sony digital camera are really good. Their prices are on higher side but once you see the results you wont regret the price paid.
A good digital camera should have good opticals and good image processing both. Opticals of sony's camera are as good as others, but the image processing is far far better.
I have DSC T-50. It takes very very good photos even in poor light. Sony cameras are coming with image stabilizers that are really handy when you are shooting while moving(Shooting landscape snaps during journey) or when the object is moving(taking pictures of your friends on dance floor, they dont have to pretent to dance while giving a pose).
Sony DSC T-10 is also very good.
 
marc weber
Sheriff
Posts: 11343
Java Mac Safari
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I don't know much about digital photography, but I'll share what I do know:
  • Optical zoom good. Digital zoom bad. Basically, optical zoom is "real" zoom. It's done with the lens, so you don't lose digital resolution. But "digital zoom" is like enlarging a file in an editor application, and the image starts to look pixilated. So you're best off not using digital zoom at all in order to get the best source file, and then do your cropping/enlarging later.
  • A lens that you adjust manually to zoom (i.e., rotate or slide in/out) is faster and easier to use than power "in/out" zoom buttons. It's also a load off the batteries.
  • Most digital cameras come with a very small memory card, so factor in the cost of a high-capacity card. Also factor in the cost of a battery charger and back-up batteries.
  •  
    Ashok Mash
    Ranch Hand
    Posts: 1936
    • Mark post as helpful
    • send pies
    • Quote
    • Report post to moderator
    Agree with Marc on the first point. Optical good, digital fake/bad.

    Zoom ring - depends on the class of the camera we are talking about I guess. Almost all compact digital cameras come with electronically operated zoom. All DSLR lens and most 'bridge' models (also known as 'prosumer' cameras) would have the zoom ring. If we are discussing that class, I would recommend a 400D or 30D. And start saving to buy quality glasses!

    I use a Canon 400D, and all the recent cricket photos in my flickr stream are with taken with a borrowed Canon 300mm F2.8 L lens, a professional class lens and is worth something like 4000 dollars! Ouch! The resulting image quality is worth it though!

    Memory cards are quite cheap these days. I paid $80 for a 1GB CF last August and recently I bought a 4GB for just $30!
     
    Henry Wong
    author
    Marshal
    Pie
    Posts: 21114
    78
    C++ Chrome Eclipse IDE Firefox Browser Java jQuery Linux VI Editor Windows
    • Mark post as helpful
    • send pies
    • Quote
    • Report post to moderator
    Memory cards are quite cheap these days. I paid $80 for a 1GB CF last August and recently I bought a 4GB for just $30!


    Agreed. Memory cards are cheap, but if you buy one of the high speed DSLR cameras, don't cheap out. My wife recently bought the Nikon D80, mainly because it can share the same lenses that she uses on her Nikon N90. She doesn't like the newer plastic lenses as much as her older lenses.

    It's blistering fast, she uses the 160x sd cards -- 2GB for about $40. It is not worth saving a few dollars, if you have to wait a 1/2 second between shots. It may not seem like much, but it's the difference between getting and missing an action shot.

    Henry
     
    David O'Meara
    Rancher
    Posts: 13459
    Android Eclipse IDE Ubuntu
    • Mark post as helpful
    • send pies
    • Quote
    • Report post to moderator
    Originally posted by Henry Wong:
    It's blistering fast, she uses the 160x sd cards -- 2GB for about $40. It is not worth saving a few dollars, if you have to wait a 1/2 second between shots. It may not seem like much, but it's the difference between getting and missing an action shot.


    Absolutely. Once you get beyond 6MP cameras the quality doesn't change much for casual users but other features such as start-time and time between shots is much more noticeable. Favour medium size faster cards rather than larger slower ones.
     
    Ashok Mash
    Ranch Hand
    Posts: 1936
    • Mark post as helpful
    • send pies
    • Quote
    • Report post to moderator
    Originally posted by Henry Wong:
    It's blistering fast, she uses the 160x sd cards -- 2GB for about $40. It is not worth saving a few dollars, if you have to wait a 1/2 second between shots. It may not seem like much, but it's the difference between getting and missing an action shot.

    Henry


    Yes and no. I agree, spending money on faster cards is the right thing to do, but from my experience, unless you are a dedicated sports, high speed action shooter, you probably don't need that speed.

    The Canon 400D that I use can do 3 exposures per second, and on RAW format (approx 10MB per picture) it can do 10 - 12 bursts continuously before the internal buffer fills up. I tested the 1GB Sandisk Ultra II (fast) card against 4GB Sandisk (not Ultra, fist generation, slower) card, and even shooting continuous frames at the cricket match to capture bowling actions (thats how I got the shot of Sachin and a few others getting clean bowled, ball making contact to the stumbs, bails flying in the air shots...), I didn't have problem with the time it takes to write buffered images to the slower 4GB card. In fact, when I counted and compared the seconds, it was only about two seconds slower than the faster card, to shed the entire 10 or 12 images from the buffer - about 100MB or data. Downloading from the card to PC is considerably slower though, but you are not usually under any time pressure at that stage.

    For a casual, one snap at a time user, the card speed makes that much of a difference, IMHO.
    [ June 27, 2007: Message edited by: Ashok Mash ]
     
    Devesh H Rao
    Ranch Hand
    Posts: 687
    Hibernate jQuery Spring
    • Mark post as helpful
    • send pies
    • Quote
    • Report post to moderator
    Originally posted by Ashok Mash:


    Yes and no. I agree, spending money on faster cards is the right thing to do, but from my experience, unless you are a dedicated sports, high speed action shooter, you probably don't need that speed.


    [ June 27, 2007: Message edited by: Ashok Mash ]


    Burst mode is also useful in

    1. Capturing a kid in action
    2. Capturing birds in flight
    3. Capturing a sports action as you rightly pointed out.
    4. Capturing a sequence which you want to present in a pictoral fashion later on.
    5. Capturing a frame which is still but you are in a moving object say from a car.

    So I kind of would like to the dedicated to sports comment.

    Speaking from personal experience I normally keep my D80 in burst mode, you never know when a sequence excites you.

    I use a highspeed 2GB sandisk memory card and I guess it was worth the investment
     
    R K Singh
    Ranch Hand
    Posts: 5384
    • Mark post as helpful
    • send pies
    • Quote
    • Report post to moderator
    Originally posted by Ashok Mash:
    Don't know about Sony, but if you are looking for compact cameras, Canon Ixus models are probably one of the best out there.


    Compact camera, generaly have their own custom battery.

    I prefer camera with AA battery.
    So that even if your battery is not charged, you can buy from any near by shop and shoot.
     
    Ashok Mash
    Ranch Hand
    Posts: 1936
    • Mark post as helpful
    • send pies
    • Quote
    • Report post to moderator
    Originally posted by R K Singh:
    ..camera with AA battery. ...buy from any near by shop and shoot.


    Thats a very good point. The only downside with cameras that take AA cells are that they are usually larger than models with their on LI cells. May be tere are cameras out there that takes AAAs?
     
    R K Singh
    Ranch Hand
    Posts: 5384
    • Mark post as helpful
    • send pies
    • Quote
    • Report post to moderator
    Originally posted by Ashok Mash:
    The only downside with cameras that take AA cells are that they are usually larger ..


    very true.. but today I thank my friend who advised this to me.

    becuase I myself had bought batteries 3-4 times. (note: normal AA battery wont work but you have to buy those come with long life)
     
    PRavi kumar
    Ranch Hand
    Posts: 69
    • Mark post as helpful
    • send pies
    • Quote
    • Report post to moderator
    HI Guys,

    Thanks for all you for provide the valuable suggestions. I decide to bye Sony DSC-H9 model.

    Regards,
    Ravi.
     
    Nitin Nigam
    Ranch Hand
    Posts: 129
    • Mark post as helpful
    • send pies
    • Quote
    • Report post to moderator
    Hi Ravi,
    Do share your experience with your camera among us once you get hold of it.
    All the best.
     
    Don't get me started about those stupid light bulbs.
    • Post Reply
    • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
    • New Topic