is the photo ("still picture") quality acceptable compared to entry-level 8-9 megapixel digital camera?
1576340
Yes the picture quality is quite acceptable. It works the other way too - a Sony still picture camera with a high resolution image capture takes surprisingly great HD video!
1576341
I have taken at least 100 photos withe Sony CX260V. Daylight photos are acceptable but not the quality I would want if I was using a 8-9 meg pixal camera. Low Light shots are worse than expected. I am working with the camera now to learn how to use the manual features instead of auto features and have been able to make some improvements in picture quality. Even better on the video recording side using the manual feature settings versus auto. Basically - it is a decent HD video camcorder with a camera feature that is nice to have when you do not want to carry two cameras.
1576342
Absolutely, I didn't buy it for that but, during my granddaughters birthday party I unintentionally took a close up of her. It was so good that I had an 8x10 made. It would definitely take the place of an entry level digital camera.
1576343
To me its acceptable now I have only taken pics in the daylight an they show up pretty good but you have to be pretty still when taking them ( tripod ) would help any more ?s feel free to ask
1576344
From the very few still pictures that I took, they look a little less quality than a 8-9 megapixel. But it is still an ok photo
1576345
Yes, i have taken few pictures and it seems good not like other handycams where it seems the picture taken are with 1 or 2 Megapixel ordinary phone go for it if you are concerned about the picture it should live up to your expectation
1576346
I used this camera and the pictures were fantastic and on par with any other camera I used.
1576347
I would agree with most of the assessments on the quality. It isn't bad, but it ain't great! What would really be a great benefit is a strobe flash if they could have provided or would be an accessory to use. Much better for outdoor in full light level photography than for indoor "birthday party" snapshots. AlanW
1813819
Excellent at 1080P at these frame rates:60/50/30/25/24p I am more into still photos than video. Video changes too often (Video film/super8/vhs/digital/full HD and now Quad HD is starting) Still photos last if you back them up. I use video for short films to be combined for children/grandchildren. Image quality depends on the sensor and the lens. The better the lens the better the quality. Technique and your level of competence matter most. Many pros used cheaper cameras, but they knew just how to get the best results.This is a very good mid-level camera. Any model that is more expensive is in the professional category.
1690184
I had this camera for almost a year. I was happy with he shots but the low light quality is terrible. I had a lens with capability of f1.8. In low light the pictures still turned out bad if the iso was above 400. I sold this camera and bought a canon 40D. But if you still haven't decided (which you probably already have since this was from May) I would recommend Nikon's update camera, the d3100.
257777
I agree, this camera looks good for someone like me who wants great pictures from a more user-friendly camera than a bulky DSLR. You can compare it to the S6000 on Fuji's website. The few things I noticed was the weight - 7 ounces lighter - and the dual memory card slot that eliminates the need to buy special cards. It also has mechanical image stabilization that was missing from the S6000. Somebody with experience should check it out and repost what they find.
1802036
That depends on the size of your image. The resolution is 14 megapixel. According to "the worls only digital camera photography chart" (www.unlikelymoose.com) this equals that is about 4200 x 3500 = 14,700 dpi. I hope I did that correct as I don't have a true calculation for that. It is quite good, that I know, and for better results you'd have to spend at least $500 or more with compettive products
1682327
The general rule of thumb (ignoring everything else) is that a full detail photo should be roughly 300 dpi, but can go as low as 150 dpi. Even if the image from this camera were perfect detail at 16 mp, you'd only be looking at a 16.4 x 10.8 inch print @ 300 dpi (or 32.8 x 21.7 inch @ 150 dpi). This is without taking into consideration the particular image quality issues an entry-level camera can have. It sounds like this camera wouldn't fit what you need.
305503
I never use it, but from what I remember, people who reviewed this camera said that still photographs were low quality. They suggest using a dedicated camera for stills.
362753
Hello Gary,I won't be to much help because it was a gift to my son. I did call him he said 1080 p it does take still photos and does not know at this time about the megapixels he was not home at the time to look at the manual. He loves it. Hope some of this helos
2124491
What did you end up getting? I had the same dilemma but choose the 790 for its picture quality. It's a great camera and am very pleased with the results. I had fun with it right out of the box, but must confess I am a manual freak, so I did study it before the camera even came. www.steve-digicams.com posts reviews and sample pictures if you want more info. For me, it's a perfect little P&S; for your pocket.
154199
The quality is fine. It's not a Nikon or an Olympus SLR quality of course. But, it is fine for the picture messaging, and Facebook.
792517
Same question for me. Most reviews seem to prefer the Canon for picture quality, but I'm concerned about the ease of use.
839108
Hi Allison, I think this is a very good DSLR camera, and also the smallest. I love Olympus cameras since they have one of the best algorithms to process light into pixels, thus ensuring excellent picture quality.Regards,Andras Heimann
1159420
I wouldn't catagorize it as a professional camera. It has the look of one and many features, but very user friendly for the everyday photographer.
2110805
It's still a damn good camera. Their update to it is better quality but aimed at the professional market. 5 megapixel photos and its hd video setting should work just fine for you. I wouldn't pay more than $90 for it though. The problem with the c920 the other answerer mentioned is that it doesn't have motorized pan or tilt.
1919425
Hello Leslie, I haven't explored the video capabilities in depth, but just with base settings, I've been pretty happy with the video capabilities. The images come out clear with smooth fps. I guess it depends on what level of quality you're looking for, at a hobby level, it's been awesome and I am able to use the still photos for my professional work.
1397052
I would avoid both if you care about picture quality, other than for a casual snapshot. You could of course swap them out and see for yourself, then exchange again if you find yourself of the same opinion I have. However, given many reviewers like these cameras, it could be that the quality varies.
391683
Thanks for the opinion on the LX3, I think I'll wait for one of the these new Canons. Agree with your point on megapixels too, it's seems like 12mp is probably overkill for these small image sensors, so I expect I'll probably crank mine down to 10 or 8 to see if I get less noise. Digic 4 sounds pretty cool too, hopefully that will help.