[Big Mac]

Does anyone have experience with CyberShots? I just got a CyberShot W-90 (because it was free from credit card reward points), and unfortunately I'm seeing very poor quality photos when the flash is on - tons of red noise. It's really, really poor and particularly disappointing to me since my previous point and shoot is the really old 3MP Finepix A303. What's going on here? I know that if I want quality I should go for SLR or near SLR cameras, but I wanted another point and shoot. This is completely unacceptable photo quality. I can't understand how this camera got 4 and a half stars on Amazon with a ton of reviews and was positively reviewed elsewhere. Is there anything I can do, or is it time to box this sucker up and send it back?

[davidflas]

sample photos would be helpful...

[Big Mac]

Water bottle (W-90)


Water bottle (A303)


Tile (W-90)


Tile (A303)

[davidflas]

I think that camera may be the victim of the megapixel arms race.. more pixels being seen as better in the eyes of the average consumer.

Here's a link to a review of your camera's predecessor DCRP Review: Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W80 does anything said there seem relevant? Can you set ISO to a fixed amount, rather than letting the camera do it? Keeping the ISO at a lower number may help..Is the camera set to its highest quality setting? The images you posted seem to be suffering from a lot of compression related artifacts.

[imitchellg5]

My new Fujifilm does the exact same thing... I too think it's a victim of the megapixel race. It's a pity because otherwise it's a great camera.

[Big Mac]

Thank you for your advice, david. I switched the ISO from auto to the first setting, 100. And it has reduced the artifacts to a significant degree, but it's still a good amount noisier thank I think it should be. Should I turn down the resolution setting too? It is on the highest setting currently.

[Big Mac]

So is this compression problem something that RAW mode shooting would remedy on a camera that supports it?

[davidflas]

The main enemy of current point and shoot type cameras..(non-slr) is that their manufacturers feel that more megapixels is better, when in fact cramming more pixels in the tiny sensors that these cameras have actually reduces image quality. Its all about bragging rights... "my camera has 12, yours has only 10", etc.. Shooting in RAW mode eliminates any interference from in-camera processing, and lets the user make the choices, such as sharpening and amount of compression, and white balance, ... In the right hands this approach often leads to better final image quality.

[Big Mac]

I guess I'm happy enough now with the tweaks I made to the defaults (100 ISO, +1 brightness, center brightness, vivid color moe). It's still a little nosier than I'm used to when I zoom in, and these settings may not work is well in the day time. But when reduced in size to the size I care about, the artifacts aren't visible and the extra amount of area and detail shown are superior. Very educational; thank you again for your help.

[GSixZero]

Shooting in RAW can remove compression artifacts but nothing can really reduce ISO noise except shooting at lower ISO. While tools like Noise Ninja can get rid of some of the noise in post processing, it really is a problem with trying to cram too many pixels onto tiny sensors.

[richwig83]

Controversial comment warning.....

you shouldn't have got a sony camera (even tho it was free)!!

Like you all say more MPs doesn't always mean great photos. I get better results from my 4MP canon compact that my gf's 6.1MP fujifilm, the noise is dreadful on those things.

I would send it back! You cant put a price on a good quality camera, plus you'll only keep getting p!$$€d off if you keep it!

Just my 2p

[red rocket]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

It's still a little nosier than I'm used to when I zoom in, and these settings may not work is well in the day time.

Does any point‑and‑shoot camera have a good zoom? The 2x optical zoom on my Canon PowerShot is a complete joke.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by red rocket 

Does any point‑and‑shoot camera have a good zoom? The 2x optical zoom on my Canon PowerShot is a complete joke.

Kodak C875 doesn't seem too bad.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by red rocket 

Does any point‑and‑shoot camera have a good zoom? The 2x optical zoom on my Canon PowerShot is a complete joke.

Canon S5 IS - 12X zoom ~ $350 street

[shifuimam]

Some higher megapixel cameras also actually have lower-resolution CCDs that interpolate to create better photos.

I always, always, always buy Canon digital cameras, and they have not failed me yet in build, function, or picture quality.

However, it was a free camera. I'd give it to the kids to play with, or use it to take pictures for the internets. Or sell it. Or take it apart and make a time machine out of it.

@red rocket: there are a few cameras that are designed around the zoom - my ex has a Panasonic Lumix that has a 12x zoom, and it was only $140 on clearance at Fry's. But the picture quality is shitty compared to every Canon I've owned or used.

<edit>
I wrote this two hours ago and forgot to hit submit. Sorry.
</edit>

[davidflas]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

I guess I'm happy enough now with the tweaks I made to the defaults (100 ISO, +1 brightness, center brightness, vivid color moe). It's still a little nosier than I'm used to when I zoom in, and these settings may not work is well in the day time. But when reduced in size to the size I care about, the artifacts aren't visible and the extra amount of area and detail shown are superior. Very educational; thank you again for your help.

One thing you may want to do is to disable the digital zoom on your camera....this provides a boost over optical zoom range..at the cost of image quality.