Sony's DSC-F828 Cyber-shot Camera 8 megapixels for $999
sasquatch
across this preorder special for the DSC-F828 at Get a LifeStyle, preorder
price is $999.00:
http://www.getalifestyle.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=260
The DSC-F717 is a great camera, but from what I read about the DSC-F828,
with 8.0 MP and microdrive storage and RAW image format, how can you go
wrong?
David J Taylor
> with 8.0 MP and microdrive storage and RAW image format, how can you go
> wrong?
Weight, operating ergonomics, colour reproduction .... many ways!
Be sure to check the Minolta A1 as a comparison.
Bob Salomon
"sasquatch" <sasq...@thewoods.com> wrote:
I had the 717 and now have the 828. So far - Great Camera.
--
To reply no_ HPMarketing Corp.
John Hughes
Ron Hunter
What one wants, or needs bears strongly on what is 'right' or 'wrong' in
a camera. If one wants a simple camera that will fit in a shirt pocket,
then the F828 certainly is NOT the 'right' camera.
Stewy
"sasquatch" <sasq...@thewoods.com> wrote in message
news:UFCOb.4025$_u4....@nwrdny02.gnilink.net...
Careful - You'll need to spend at least $100 more the moment you buy it.
You'll need another InfoLithium battery. Bigger memory sticks than the
paltry 16mb thing that comes with the camera and if you want to charge the
batteries outside the camera, add around $60 for that.
David J. Littleboy
"Stewy" <anyone4...@lycos.com> wrote:
> "sasquatch" <sasq...@thewoods.com> wrote:
> > I was thinking of purchasing the Sony DSC-F717 for $699.00, but I came
> > across this preorder special for the DSC-F828 at Get a LifeStyle,
preorder
> > price is $999.00:
> >
>
http://www.getalifestyle.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&s
> id=260
> >
> > The DSC-F717 is a great camera, but from what I read about the DSC-F828,
> > with 8.0 MP and microdrive storage and RAW image format, how can you go
> > wrong?
>
> Careful - You'll need to spend at least $100 more the moment you buy it.
> You'll need another InfoLithium battery.
I bought a second battery for my F707 ... and never used it. Unless you have
specific need for a _lot_ of shooting, buying a second InfoLithium battery
is a waste of money.
> Bigger memory sticks than the
> paltry 16mb thing that comes with the camera
The last I checked, up to 256 MB MS Pros weren't that outrageously
expensive, and you can use your CF cards or microdrives if you have any. No
more expensive than any other camera.
> and if you want to charge the
> batteries outside the camera, add around $60 for that.
Charging in the camera works fine. As does using the camera as a charger.
(Well, for the F707. But it's a good bet the F828 is pretty similar.)
The Sony InfoLithium battery really is seriously amazing, and is just one of
the many things that makes using the F707 (and presumably, F828) a pleasure.
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
Bob Salomon
"Stewy" <anyone4...@lycos.com> wrote:
> You'll need another InfoLithium battery. Bigger memory sticks than the
> paltry 16mb thing that comes with the camera and if you want to charge the
> batteries outside the camera, add around $60 for that.
The 828 comes with no memory stick or CF card. I have 2 batteries but
find that the batteries are so efficient I have rarely had to change
batteries while shooting on the 717 or the 828.
Yes they do sell accessory chargers for outside the battery charging.
So 1 out of 3 isn't too bad. Help you make the Hall of Fame if you
constantly average .333 in baseball.
Pretty sloppy though as an average for advice.
Povl H. Pedersen
The F828 is almost blind. At 200 ISO it is about as sensitive as the
Canon EOS 300D at 125 ISO. But allready at 64 ISO the F828 has more
noise in the pictures than the the EOS 300D has at 4-800 ISO.
So it is almost 1 stop slower than other cameras, and 3-4 stops
more noisy.
Albert Nurick
news:bob_salomon-95C8...@news-east.ash.giganews.com:
> I had the 717 and now have the 828. So far - Great Camera.
Bob, how's the shutter lag? That's the one thing I detest about my 707.
--
Albert Nurick
alb...@nurick.com
'97 Honda Pacific Coast
'93 Honda Helix
'87 Honda Helix
Scorpi...@attnospam.net
wrote:
As a huge SOny fan and owner of the S85, F707 and V1, I couldn't wait
for the F828 to come out. When I started seeing the results from test
F828's it gave me pause. Now the camera is in full release and I
still won't buy one. These pictures I'm seeing from F828 are not that
great. So why would I spend ANOTHER 1000 for a camera that doesn't
shoot much better then the last few models? If you have you heart set
on Sony pick up a F707 or F717 and save some money while capturing
better pictures.
Reading the Sony talk forum one must wonder if some of the posters are
delusional. I've learned a lot over there and from Phil Askey, but I
now question their judgement since the F828 came out. Read Phil's
summery on the F828 review. It's like he's giving out a recommend as
a gift based on emotion.
I would love to own a F828 IF Sony can FIX it.
--
Like a game of pick up stick played by fucking lunatics
Bob Salomon
Albert Nurick <alb...@nurick.com> wrote:
> Bob Salomon <bob_s...@mindspring.com> wrote in
> news:bob_salomon-95C8...@news-east.ash.giganews.com:
>
> > I had the 717 and now have the 828. So far - Great Camera.
>
> Bob, how's the shutter lag? That's the one thing I detest about my 707.
It seems much faster then my 717 or any of the Coolpix models I had from
the 950 to the 5700.
Bob Salomon
Scorpi...@attNOSPAM.net wrote:
> I would love to own a F828 IF Sony can FIX it.
I do own one after having the 717 and have no complaints. And, yes, I
have read the reviews. However I have been in the photography business
since the mid 1950s and have learned to test it myself, under the
conditions I will use it and form my own judgement. So far I am very
pleased.
Larry
Scorpi...@attNOSPAM.net says...
> Reading the Sony talk forum one must wonder if some of the posters are
> delusional. I've learned a lot over there and from Phil Askey, but I
> now question their judgement since the F828 came out. Read Phil's
> summery on the F828 review. It's like he's giving out a recommend as
> a gift based on emotion.
>
> I would love to own a F828 IF Sony can FIX it.
>
I have the 717 and the 5mp Mavicam, and LOVE them both. Still, I
wouldn't consider the 828 as a "Replacement" for the 717.
I've been able to do some very profitable work with the 717 and even the
Mavicam, and I MIGHT get an 828 later on AFTER I get a dslr (probably a
Canon, unless Sony comes out with one).
I'de like a chance to play with the color from an 828, but I dont feel a
need for a camera that is basicaly noiser than what Im using.
Larry
Larry
east.ash.giganews.com>, bob_s...@mindspring.com says...
> I do own one after having the 717 and have no complaints. And, yes, I
> have read the reviews. However I have been in the photography business
> since the mid 1950s and have learned to test it myself, under the
> conditions I will use it and form my own judgement. So far I am very
> pleased.
>
> --
> To reply no_ HPMarketing Corp.
>
My only reason for not jumping up to get one right away is simple, I
have a relative who sent me several cdrs of raw images, and some un-
edited jpgs, and I just didn't see a thosand dollars worth of "better"
in them. It takes fine pictures, certainly, but not enough to justify
$999, when I already have the 717 to shoot with.
I got my 717 for a hell of a bargain price (mid $500 range) onsale at
SEARS, of all places!
When they start to carry the 828, and they are having a SALE, then I'll
swoop down on one.
Larry
Scorpi...@attnospam.net
Bob,
I'm glad you are happy with it. Hey if it works for you great. What
type of photography do you do if I may ask? I'm also curious to know
if you feel it is $1000 better then the F717?
I would love to be proven wrong on the F828. I just can't get over
the pictures I've seen posted. I mean, I'm not a professional
photographer, but I know that the pics I've seen are not good.
bmoag
It is a great camera.
Repeat: the Sony 828 is a great camera.
It is not perfect either ergonomically or technically.
What is?
If you want an SLR with interchangeable lenses it is not for you.
If you already have a high quality 5+mp camera it will not give noticeably
better results.
If you are willing to spend $1000 for the best all in one camera on the
market the Sony 828 is it.
The only real problem with noise with this camera comes from people who
don't know what they are talking about.
Rick
> This is the most badmouthed camera since the Sigma foveon.
> It is a great camera.
> Repeat: the Sony 828 is a great camera.
What a troll.
Anyone even thinking of believing this nonsense is invited to
read any of the formal reviews posted about the F828:
"Too much purple fringing for such an expensive camera"
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/sony/dsc_f828-review/index.shtml
"Strong visible chromatic aberrations in backlit or reflections in
bright sunny conditions"
"Higher noise levels than the current crop of five megapixel digital
cameras"
"Potential hue shift on overexposed greens"
"Visible sharpening 'white halo' around black lines"
"Barrel distortion at wide angle"
"Difficult to get good macro performance without barrel distortion"
"Annoying shutter release locking issue where you must wait before
re-pressing"
"No user settings / memories"
And my personal favorite:
"Very small photosite compromising image quality (marketing over
quality)?"
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydscf828/page21.asp
Simply put, the F828 sucks. Unlike the F717, which kept its retail
value for close to a year, look for prices on the F828 to plummet
within a few months. At $1000 it's a royal ripoff, at $500 or $600
one could make a better case for buying one.
> It is not perfect either ergonomically or technically.
> What is?
> If you want an SLR with interchangeable lenses it is not for you.
> If you already have a high quality 5+mp camera it will not give noticeably
> better results.
> If you are willing to spend $1000 for the best all in one camera on the
> market the Sony 828 is it.
> The only real problem with noise with this camera comes from people who
> don't know what they are talking about.
Yeah, people like Phil Askey and Jeff Keller are real noobies.
Sheesh.
Rick
David J Taylor
> The only real problem with noise with this camera comes from people who
> don't know what they are talking about.
How would you view the 828 versus the Minolta A1?
David
Manfred von Richthofen
message news:Y08Pb.4604$7c3.59...@news-text.cableinet.net...
>
> "bmoag" <ae...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:GL%Ob.3469$0v1....@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com...
>
> > The only real problem with noise with this camera comes from people who
> > don't know what they are talking about.
>
Not so. The signal/noise ration is far higher than on a DSLR - that much is
factual.
If you personally find that acceptable, then that is ok. Other people don't,
thats ok too.
Scorpi...@attnospam.net
>The only real problem with noise with this camera comes from people
who
>don't know what they are talking about.
Which would appear to be anyone but you huh?
We're trying to ahve as serious discussion here, please leave the kids
at home.
David Chien
> It is not perfect either ergonomically or technically.
Nope. Silly enough, even on continuous AF mode, when you press the
shutter button down halfway or fully, the AF system still wants to rack
the focus out of focus, then back into focus again before taking the shot.
Now what's the point of that when the subject is already in 100%
focus due to the continous AF mode in play?!? Unfocus a perfectly
focused subject to take a picture?!?
Honestly, the dumbest part of the F828 beyond a doubt!
> What is?
I know of many, many digital cameras with CAF mode that don't do
this, and for $999, you'd expect, no, must have a CAF mode that doesn't
do this.
> If you are willing to spend $1000 for the best all in one camera on the
> market the Sony 828 is it.
Nope. There are quite a few cameras that are better choices, IMO,
and even the E20 would be a better choice. Heck, I could MF myself the
E20 faster than the F828 will lock focus.
> The only real problem with noise with this camera comes from people who
> don't know what they are talking about.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sony828.shtml
Take a look at the noise pictures yourself in this lengthy review.
"By way of comparison with the 6 Megapixel Canon 10D; the Sony and
the 10D are both essentially noise free up to ISO 100. At ISO 400 noise
just starts to become visible on the 10D, though it's not objectionable,
and at ISO 800 it looks like ISO 200 film used to look. ISO 1600 (which
the Sony can't do) is much cleaner than the Sony's top sensitivity of
800, but still needs software help. Overall I'd say that the Sony F828
has about 1.5X more noise at speeds above ISO 100 than the better
current 6MP DSLRs."
Note in particular, the comparison between the F828 and Canon 10D of
the same building and the higher noise leading to a poorer image in this
review:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/images-14/sony298-detail.jpg
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/images-14/canon9634-detail.jpg
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/images-14/sony-fairmont301.jpg
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/images-14/canon-fairmont9637.jpg
The point is why?
Of course, the author agrees, just use it:
"So, should you wait for the F838 and some of the needed fixes. Hell
no — you'd be missing out on one of the most enjoyable digital cameras
yet available. There's always going to be something new on the horizon.
But in the meantime the Sony F828 has found a permanent place in my
camera arsenal— it's the ideal digital travel camera, and I'll be back
here in a few weeks with some real-world illustrations from my Tanzania
Wildlife Workshop and Safari."
But keep in mind this is a guy who has access to tons of digital
cameras for testing, so he doesn't have to worry about picking and
choosing where his money goes - just pickup what's sitting there for
reivew and go. The rest of us, well, not everyday we drop $1000 for a
digital cameras just for the heck of it, and that being the case, I
would vote for something else, even the Canon Rebel.
Noise is noise and it destroys the quality of your original image
data. No matter what filters or programs you use to clean up the noise,
you'll never get back detail or quality lost due to noise in an image.
It's far better to start off with a pristine, clean image than a noisy one.
Fulci Argento
currently own). I feel the 5700 is extremely lacking with low light
(indoors) situations. I have been shooting some indoor non-flash
concerts and really would like something that will focus faster. Any
thoughts?
In article
<bob_salomon-70D0...@news-east.ash.giganews.com>, Bob
[BnH]
F828 can't focus as fast as your hand do I bet.
=bob=
"Fulci Argento" <fu...@spam.net> wrote in message
news:270120040150423460%fu...@spam.net...
David J Taylor
> currently own). I feel the 5700 is extremely lacking with low light
> (indoors) situations. I have been shooting some indoor non-flash
> concerts and really would like something that will focus faster. Any
> thoughts?
Thoughts, rather than experience.
- the A1 will focus faster in low light (the 5700 is widely reported as
having problems, although I've not had difficulties with this myself).
- the A1 has the anti-camera-shake feature, which reportedly will give you
an extra stop or even more in allowing longer exposures.
So I'm not recommending the Sony 828, but the Minolta A1.
Cheers,
David