Andy, I thought I post again with a little more detail About the
Sony - with digital photography, it’s difficult to answer the
question “what do you know about this camera?” without replying “it
depends on what you want to do with it!” As I said earlier, I
returned my Sony DSC S75 and bought a Nikon Coolpix. But I had the
Sony for a month, took it on a trip, took a lot of different kinds of
pics with it (including low light museum pics). Here is what I
thought about it:
PROS: Fantastic Carl Zeiss lens, with a better resolution than other
3.3 MP cameras, including the Coolpix. The lens is “fast” (f2.0)
which means you get better detail in the shadows in low light
situations. (My museum pics were amazing - no flash or tripods
allowed - the only lighting was in the glass cases.) The “tonal
range” of the camera is excellent, meaning that you keep detail in
the highlights that other cameras tend to “blow out” (the Nikon is
terrible in this respect). There is a true spot meter, allowing you
to meter on one area specifically, and focus on another. Decent macro
- you can get about 1 1/2" away, with about 3" minimum field of view.
The depth of field with macros is excellent. It has very low
"chromatic aberration", which is a purple fringing that all digitals
have around very bright, high contrast areas. It’s an easy camera to
use, takes fantastic pictures without a lot of bells and whistles. It
was superceded by the S85, so the cost is probably very reasonable
for the quality of the camera.
CONS: The biggest con for me (and the reason I returned the camera)
was that I needed more macro capability. A 3" field of view is fairly
large on a small jewelry scale, if you want to do a close-up of
something. By the time I zoomed in in Photoshop to enlarge an area,
I’d lost the crispness I wanted. The other con was color. Sony is
notorious for having punched up saturated color, especially in the
reds and greens. They have since modified the color balance in
subsequent cameras, but the S75 was especially saturated in the
greens, and pics had a very warm cast in the neutral grays. Great if
you’re traveling and want snapshots; not so great if your work has
subtle color and you want the photos to be accurate. (I’m a color
freak, so you can take this part with a grain of salt if need be!)
Anyway, I hope this is helpful. I still miss the Sony in some
respects. Their Zeiss lenses still get the highest ratings for
sharpness on review sites, and I also miss the low light capabilties.
It depends on what your needs are as to whether it’s the camera for
you.
Rene Roberts