Sony's DSC-F828 Cyber-shot Camera 8 megapixels for $999

Discussion in 'Sony' started by sasquatch, Jan 18, 2004.

  1. sasquatch

    sasquatch Guest

    sasquatch, Jan 18, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. The DSC-F717 is a great camera, but from what I read about the DSC-F828,
    Weight, operating ergonomics, colour reproduction .... many ways!

    Be sure to check the Minolta A1 as a comparison.
    David J Taylor, Jan 18, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. sasquatch

    John Hughes Guest

    John Hughes, Jan 18, 2004
  4. sasquatch

    Stewy Guest

    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.
    Stewy, Jan 19, 2004
  5. 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.
    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.
    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
    David J. Littleboy, Jan 19, 2004
  6. 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.
    Povl H. Pedersen, Jan 19, 2004
  7. sasquatch

    ScorpionKing Guest

    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.
    ScorpionKing, Jan 19, 2004
  8. sasquatch

    ScorpionKing Guest


    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.
    ScorpionKing, Jan 19, 2004
  9. sasquatch

    Rick Guest

    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"

    "Strong visible chromatic aberrations in backlit or reflections in
    bright sunny conditions"

    "Higher noise levels than the current crop of five megapixel digital

    "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

    "No user settings / memories"

    And my personal favorite:

    "Very small photosite compromising image quality (marketing over

    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.
    Yeah, people like Phil Askey and Jeff Keller are real noobies.

    Rick, Jan 20, 2004
  10. How would you view the 828 versus the Minolta A1?

    David J Taylor, Jan 20, 2004
  11. Not so. The signal/noise ration is far higher than on a DSLR - that much is

    If you personally find that acceptable, then that is ok. Other people don't,
    thats ok too.
    Manfred von Richthofen, Jan 20, 2004
  12. sasquatch

    ScorpionKing Guest

    Which would appear to be anyone but you huh?

    We're trying to ahve as serious discussion here, please leave the kids
    at home.
    ScorpionKing, Jan 20, 2004
  13. sasquatch

    David Chien Guest

    Repeat: the Sony 828 is a great camera.
    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!
    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.
    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.

    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

    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.
    David Chien, Jan 20, 2004
  14. Tell me the differences between the 828 and the coolpix 5700 (Which I
    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
    Fulci Argento, Jan 27, 2004
  15. sasquatch

    [BnH] Guest

    For $999 .. get an EOS 300D or D70 [+some $ for the lens :) ] soon.

    F828 can't focus as fast as your hand do I bet.

    [BnH], Jan 27, 2004
  16. 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.

    David J Taylor, Jan 27, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.