Buying Advice - NEW Sony Cyber-shot® DSC-T30/B

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Afro1989, May 7, 2006.

  1. Afro1989 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    #1
    Hey people. Now that I've been using my 5 mega pixel camera for a while I have noticed that the quality could better since I'm very interested in taking nature/landscape shots and not just close-up macro shots that I was with my 5 mega pixel Casio.

    What I wanted to know is have any of you heard anything good about this camera? It is a 7.2 mega pixel camera, which is better than my current Casio. I'm pretty sure it's time for me to upgrade. Thanks in advance.

    [​IMG]
     
  2. cloudblood84 macrumors regular

    cloudblood84

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2006
    Location:
    san diego, ca
    #2
    i was about to get this camera, but i heard that 5+ megapixels wont make a difference unless you are doing prints. so i settled for the sony cybershot DCS45 i believe. 2.5 lcd, 3x optical/6x digital for 150. but yeah I would get that if i had the 500 to spend
     
  3. Philberttheduck macrumors 6502a

    Philberttheduck

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2006
    Location:
    HB, CA
    #3
    iono if this'll help, but my dsc-t9s been amazing. $332(USD) for a black one online (pricegrabber it). like the previous poster said, unless you want to get huge prints(monster poster-sized), just get a 5MP camera. of course, if that doesn't satisfy your craving for power, get the 7.2MP T30. I'm getting that thing for my aunt soon (she's gotta settle with a crappy kodak one) because of the HUMONGOUS screen. 3 inches! The red-eye on Sony cameras are a POS, even with supposed red-eye reduction.

    Sum it up: Get it. Chances are it's improved over the T9 in every aspect including quality.
     
  4. ChrisA macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #4
    the number of total pixels don't matter much. What maters is the number of pixels per inch in the final print so when comparing pixel counts compare the number of pixes along the long edge of the frame. So if one camera is 2500x1600 and the other is 2700X1800 compare 2500 to 2700 to get a relistic idea of how the sensors compare.

    What matters a whole lot more then pixels is the quality of the lens. Typical small pocketable camera have not so great optics you want to hunt down the exception
    to this rule.

    One good rule is "Size matters" beter quality images are made with phyically larger CCD sensors (not with one that is more finely divided into pixels) and phyically larger lenses. Have you seen the top of the line Olypus point and shoot?
    Do an Google on olympus sp-350. If image quality is your main concern look check it out. Oly has been building camera maybe 50 years longer than Sony and has a _much_ better reputation for optics
     
  5. Over Achiever macrumors 68000

    Over Achiever

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2002
    Location:
    Toledo, OH, formerly Twin Cities, MN
    #5
    More megapixels is not always better, as CCD manufacturers cram more MP into small space, the more noise you get on the images. This is the "speckled" color dots that can show up on images, especially on high ISO pictures. This can degrade image quality, and more megapixels cannot salvage the loss of detail.

    Keep that in mind as well =)
     

Share This Page