Cons: Short Battery life, expensive compared to the DSC-P92
The Bottom Line: If you need professional features with a small and fast camera, this is the camera for you. If you need a fast camera only read about a better alternative.
leisure_larry's Full Review: Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-V1 Digital Camera
This review covers the Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-V1 in comparison to it's smaller sibling the Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-P92.
While I own the DSC-P92, I had the chance to operate both cameras, as a friend of mine owns the V1.
I did quite some research on the web before settling for the DSC-P92, not the least going through the reviews in epinions.
What I was looking for was a FAST camera. Most reviews don't cover the shutter lag, which is the single biggest nuisance to an ambitious photographer, trying to capture the KODAK moment. Shutter lag describes the time that passes between when you want to take the picture (i.e. press the button) and when the camera takes the picture.
The time is used to auto focus and read out the sensor signals.
Some cameras take up to half a second to do that, by then your kid's smile is gone, your dog has left the picture and your family's group picture has turned from a smile to a yawn. Don't even think about taking pictures in sports with such a camera.
Well, my research finally got me to some of the fastest cameras in the market: Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-V1 at 0.16 seconds and Sony DSC-P92 at 0.26 seconds. (This is shutter lag after auto focus and without flash).
These are considerably faster then some of their other Sony siblings (even the DSC-P10, which is the same as the DSC-P92 in a more stylish slimmer body, so beware!), as well as all other major cameras on the market.
Looking at the data sheets and operating the cameras it became quite obvious that the major underlying element, the photosensor is the same.
5 Megapixel is more then a normal family photographer ever needs for a 4x6 print. Even a 6 x10 print looked at from the right viewing distance ( minimum distance from the picture should be it's diagonal, so that the human eye can see the whole picture) one really only needs about 1.5 to 2 megapixel to see it sharp, as the human eye can't resolve more at that distance. So what do you need 5 Megapixel for?
Reserves.
It allows you to crop the picture, zoom and edit and still preserve good resolution.
What is a reasonable resolution?
3 MP will do the job for almost anyone. 5MP for a lot of users will be the equivalent of a race engine used for daily commuting in traffic congested areas. You will burn through a lot of fuel (memory sticks, time for transfer and cost of storage) without ever leveraging the kick it could give you. The only major advantage of a 5 MP camera I can see today is that it actually does make a decent (but short) optical zoom. So these are plenty of pixels, but if you need or want them, this is a SHARP camera!
So we got the cream of the top in terms of sensors. The electronics and the menu structure are pretty much the same and function the same as on the DSC-P92, other then that you have extra options for manual shutter and aperture settings and a connector of extra flash.
If you have an unsteady hand, being able to dial in a faster speed is a very nice feature.
What is different ?
Major component that is different is the lens:
DSC-P92 sports a smaller Sony lens and the DSC-V1 has a big Zeiss lens. Bigger lenses are better as they leave more light through (just like a bigger water faucet) and thereby have more reserves for low light conditions. Bigger lenses are also better as they usually allow for more precise management of light, i.e. giving better resolution, as manufacturing tolerances are easier to keep.
This is also demonstrated in this camera. The V1 has about 1500 LP/BH resolution versus the P-92 with the same sensor at 1.475 LP/BH. The difference is the better lens. So you can see that the industry is at a level where the LENS is limiting sharpness, not the sensor anymore. You can also see that the smaller Sony lens is actually holding up pretty well. The DSC-P92 sports a 3x optical zoom f2.8 - f5.6 (38 mm - 114 mm optical) (35 mm equivalent) , whereas the V1 has f2.8-4.0/ 34-136mm (35mm equivalent) 4x optical, which gives it a slightly wider angle (very desirable for party photographers) and an extended range at a decent exposure. You will notice the f4.0 vs the f5.6 number for the tele lens. Essentially that is about equivalent to half the exposure setting. So where the P92 would yield you 1/100s of a second in a given light condition, the V1 would give you 1/200s exposure time (with a longer zoom as well).
Well sharper is better, so shouldn't you go with the V1 then ? Depends on what you will do with the picture. I have blown up 3.1 MP pictures with this camera to letter size full color prints and you can't see a difference. The picture is razor sharp at the low resolution already. Most digital SLR cameras you can buy feature resolutions in the 900 to 1000 LP/BH with up to 6 MP sensors. Examples are the Canon EOS 300D with 6.3 MP and a resolution of just 885 LP/BH or the Olympus E-1 (at 3000 USD) with a 5.1 MP sensor and 753 LP/BH. The Fuji Finepix 7000 with a 6.3 MP Super CCD sports some 988 LP/Bh. So these Sony's blow away high end 2000 USD cameras that professionals use in sharpness and those cameras were over 10.000 USD some two years ago. Should make any professional burst into tears, that shelled out the money. If these guys can live with resolution around 1000 LP/BH (line pairs/ picture height),feeding magazines and art prints, calendars and photo galleries, are you as an amateur going to notice the difference between 1475 and 1500 LP/BH? You certainly own bragging rights, but believe me you won't see the difference in resolution. You will find differences in other attributes of the picture and camera though that warrant (some of) the steep premiums for the SLR's.
I also finally found the answer to the question at what resolution a sensor will start to compare with film:
The modern films have resolution of about 100 lines/mm in the coating, which is theoretical only as they don't lay flat in the camera and also the lens limits the real resolution to about 50 lines/mm for a VERY good fixed lens (not a zoom lens). The equivalent sensor resolution is effective 8.6 MP resolution which is about 11 MP in reality, as the sensor needs several sensing elements combined for the various colors to achieve the effective resolution. (You have a red, green and blue sensor essentially and some fuzzy math to combine them).
(Source: German computer magazin CT http://www.heise.de/ct/03/13/170/)
So this Sony is at roughly half the theoretically best film cameras with the best lenses in the market. Calculating 1500LP/BH out of the 1.8 inch sensor height, the camera should resolve about 37 lines/mm, which I find somewhat hard to believe as the sensor should give only about 29 lines/mm. Anyone can help me solve this puzzle please post a comment.
In any case this camera is SHARP !!!!
I am still trying to settle for myself where the applications are that I actually NEED 5MP vs. 3 MP. Processing 5 MP (compressed 2.2 MB) slows you down in every step on your computer even if you have a 2 GHz machine with lots of memory. Chances are if you really, really need 5 MP, you also need the versatility of a SLR camera with more choices of lenses, true view finders, higher contrast, better low light reserves, etc. etc.
For any potentially offended Canon and Olympus user: Your sensors are larger and therefore have higher performance when it comes to noise and contrast. Also the Canon sports 0.32s shutter lag INCLUDING auto focus, whereas the 0.16s for the Sony are AFTER auto focus.
Most useful feature I found in 5 MP is the fact that you can use the digital zoom for the 3.1 MP mode and get a total zoom of 3.8x that way with no resolution loss (it crops the picture but only down to 3.1 MP).
So for me the benefit of a larger pixel count is in extending the optical reserves in the camera for a decent 3.1 MP base resolution, which will satisfy most amateurs needs.
So then the decision comes down to the following:
Other features, cost to buy , cost to operate. Field of use.
And here the DSC-P92 shines: About 200 USD cheaper you can get two memory sticks with it until you are up to the V1 price. The camera runs on standard NiMH batteries with an external charger, for which you can get replacement batteries for 6 USD, whereas the V1 needs a special battery that will cost you 64 USD (and you better plan for getting one right away as it doesn't last long enough), that also needs to be loaded while being in the camera. (DSC-P10 has the same issue) This is the major complaint you will find about the V1. Battery life is to short and it is cumbersome and expensive with the second battery.
Finally the prices are moving in the market. Both cameras have come down about 50% in price in 9 month and there is no indication that this will stop.
So which one should you buy ?
Simple: If you are a point and shoot user that prefers automatic go with the DSC-P92. You save tons of money, it is fast and you have low operating costs. The extra resolution and the extra speed provided by the V1 is not warranting the pricing premium for you. The camera is fast enough and resolution is high enough for almost anything you ever want to do.
If you need any one of these features:
- Manual choice of aperture, or shutter speed as well as priority programs
- Extended tele lens capability (i.e. 4x optical zoom)
.. yes, yes I NEED that ! (Really? go back and look at your picture box and count the pictures that you know you took with fully extended zoom. For a decent portrait 100-120 mm equivalent is adequate enough, for the ambitious sports or animal photographer this 136 mm lens won't do the job, you need to go up to 250mm at least possibly 500mm). well...maybe not then...
- Ability to attach external flash light for serious party photographing without red eyes (if you are the party animal the V1 and the P92 have really bright flashes that will give you plenty of light, but you need to determine whether you want to freeze the smiles in peoples faces by red-eye flash strobes (which makes them stare like Madame Tousseau's wax figures) or take a fast flash and manually eliminate the red eyes on your computer (which I prefer)
Both cameras create a sharp shadow behind the object, so you will see the person in front of a wall being framed by a dark spot shadow, which can be disturbing. Only way around that is an external flash on an extra handle (not the top mounted ones). V1 has that capability, P92 doesn't.
Be prepared to pay a hefty sum of money for the compatible Sony flashes.
- Infrared night shot function (you know the IR grainy green spy mode stealth shooting, which does actually turn in nice black and white pictures, which aren't grainy at all but look a bit 'spooky') Personally I don't think it is a killer feature, unless you are prepared to stay motionless in an earth hole for several hours to get a picture of a nocturnal animal, in which case you belong to the 'professional' league of some sort and should look at an SLR camera that gives you better control over your pictures.
- Excellent night focus capability (the V1 sports a Laser guided system that is fast and more accurate then the P92 IR help light mode, which in turn does give you something to see on your camera monitor whereas the V1 stays dark while focussing). Haven't found either mode very useful when you want to use the built in monitor. Best to look through the viewfinder and crop the picture later as the viewfinders of both cameras give you a smaller field of view then the camera takes. The V1 is noticeably faster then the P92 in focussing and produces some cool star wars laser beam patterns on your pray, which it might appreciate or not.
Any one of above features you really need: Go with the V1.
Better buy a second battery right away. And plan for another one 3 years down the road, as these batteries have some limited life time. Also don't weep next Christmas, when this camera will be available for 300 USD instead of the 500 USD you paid this time around, possibly including a 6 MB sensor, a MP3 player, a satelite radio and a travel razor or some other 'must have' feature, that you didn't know you ever needed when you made your decision.
So this Sony is the KING of speed and resolution, whereas the P92 is the QUEEN of speed and resolution (although as always it is just a SMALL difference).
Late addition: Appreciation for a hot shoe
Anyone ever noticed that the low end cameras have no external flash connector anymore? You have to go all the way up into th 600 USD range to get a hotshoe. Well the V1 has come down in price and features a hotshoe as well as manual white balance. Why is that important?
Countless users of old flashes or external slave flashes as used in studios have run into a hardly broadcasted issue: Digital cameras use a tiny preflash before the major flash to generate their white balance, consequently slave flashes fire BEFORE the main flash, thus not contributing to the picture at all. Ahem... manual white balance such as the V1 has guarantees, that you can use your old slave flashes further.
If you'd like to see some more details on the P92 go here:
If you like to learn about the most common misconceptions when buying a digital camera and why this 5 MP camera might actually be a BAD choice for what you want to do, see this link:
Anyone ever thought about a movement stabilizer for shaky hands ? (Don't even THINK the sensor could do it. In vidcams a larger sensor compensates for movements inbetween pictures not in the picture. But how about some floating lenses as are being used in some high end binoculars ?)
Recommended:
Yes
Amount Paid (US$): 540 (tested) This Camera is a Good Choice if You Want Something... Solid Enough for a Professional
5 megapixel sensor (2592 x 1944 pixels) for enlargements up to 20 x 30 inches 4x optical zoom plus 4x digital zoom (16x total) Nightshot infrared feat...More at Amazon Marketplace
Epinions.com periodically updates pricing and product information from third-party sources, so some information may be slightly out-of-date. You should confirm all information before relying on it.
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.