Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 1, 2003, 9:40 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 13
Default Sony DSC-U20 Or Canon S200

Well folks,

I have narrowed my grewling pocket sized digital camera search to the Sony DSC-U20 and the Canon S200. I come to ask the greatest digicam minds which one produces the better quality pictures and essentially which one I should buy.

Peace...

Triforce
Triforce is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Feb 1, 2003, 10:06 AM   #2
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Well you gain the AAA NiMh rechargeable in the Sony, but lose the popularity of the CF flash of the Canon. However the MemoryStick won't be an issue for you since 128Mb/256Mb will be plenty for a 2Mp camera!

What about zoom do you care? It looks like the Sony is lacking...
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 1, 2003, 11:02 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 430
Default

I walked down the same path and finally opted for the U20--no regrets.

In my case, I valued "pocketability" quite highly. The U20 is slightly smaller (in volume) but more importantly its form-factor is more pocket friendly than the S200.

I also liked the idea of being able to use low cost non-proprietary batts as mentioned by NHL.

Good luck.
jawz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 1, 2003, 12:09 PM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 13
Default

Not sure how important zoom is because I have never owned a camera that had a zoom lens. I am a relative newbie to photography in general and want the camera that produces higher quality images. How much of a difference does the 2x optical zoom on the s200 make over the sony that has no zoom. Also, which camera overall produces higher quality images.
Thanks for the quick and informative responses. I look forward to hearing more advice from you.

Peace...

Triforce
Triforce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 1, 2003, 12:37 PM   #5
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

The zoom on the S200 is about 35 to 70mm, meaning it can cover from a slight wide angle to a short tele. What is means is, if you're shooting from across the table, you can just zoom-in a person's face by seating still. Zoom-out does the reverse ie when you want to take picture of the entire group of people seating in front of you. The digital zoom let you do the same closing in effect digitally albeit at a slight quality loss by magnifying the center area of the picture.

Without a zoom (ie a fixed lens) you have to get up and move closer to capture an up close shot of the same person's face and step back a few steps to take a group shot!
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 1, 2003, 12:43 PM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 13
Default

Thanks for the explanation NHL. Zoom sounds like a good feature to have and would come in handy. I was looking at the sample photos taken by steve for the S200 and the sony. Is it my imagination or does the Sony photos look granier and of less quality than the S200. I am knew to this and would appreciate your opinion on the matter.

Peace...

Triforce
Triforce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 1, 2003, 12:47 PM   #7
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

You can't judge quality of a picture by looking at them on the screen! Download and print them... which is what's count.

The picture has to be sized on-screen with the same level etc... I expect them not to be far from one another in term of quality.
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 1, 2003, 1:01 PM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 13
Default

If you were in my position which one would you get or would you have an entirely different camera that you would select keeping in mind my $300 cap and need for a small pocketable camera.

Peace...

Triforce
Triforce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 1, 2003, 1:24 PM   #9
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

I'll go for the Canon, but I would have picked the A40 which has both CF and AA rechargeable NiMh. It's cheaper, and IMO you'll outgrow them soon enough and keep the saving for the next full feature digicam! :lol:
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 1, 2003, 1:24 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 207
Default

Take a good look at the Fuji 2650. 3X optical zoom, 2mp, & still a pocketable camera. One thing to remember about most point and shoot cameras both film and digital is the built in flash limits how far away your subject should be for best results. On the positive side with digital you can use your computer as your darkroom to enhance photos that don’t have the brightness you hoped for. With film you are pretty much locked in to what the drugstore, Wal-Mart, whatever gives you. Whatever you buy you will enjoy but the Zoom puts a lot of “Fun Factor” in your photographic experience.
rritter is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:10 AM.