Sony's also loosed
upon the world their new
7.2 megapixel H5 and 6
megapixel H2, both featuring 12x optical, 32MB internal memory, and a 3.0 and 2.0-inch display, respectively. These
slightly more expensive suckas will run you $500 and $400 in May and April when they hit the streets.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
yosh @ Feb 25th 2006 11:17PM
think this would be comparable to say, a low-end dSLR? nikon d70..
winston @ Feb 25th 2006 11:21PM
this camera looks very cool!
Adam @ Feb 25th 2006 11:28PM
"think this would be comparable to say, a low-end dSLR? nikon d70.."
Reminds me of the 350D (Canon Digital Rebel)
This isnt a DSLR, its an SLR-Like that is digital :)
Looks promising with the 12x optical, and 7.2mp
I was considering getting a cybershot eairlier, but I think im going to wait for this one.
i.e @ Feb 25th 2006 11:43PM
@ yosh. comparable to a d70? You gotta be kidding me.
Za @ Feb 25th 2006 11:47PM
Na, Yosh, it's a standard EVF, comparable to say, some of the Kodak P line and some of the Panasonic EVFs, such as the FZ7 and FZ30, or some of Sony's earlier cameras, such as the F828. It's a step below the R1, which is far more SLR-like; I mean, you always have to realize that the D70 really isn't all that low-end. The D50 is, and even then, the D50 has interchangeable lenses and far more accessories/options than these cameras do. It is the nature of the SLR body.
yosh @ Feb 26th 2006 12:16AM
Right, that's what I originally thought, though after seeing the R1's excellent performance (It definitely beats a few low-end dSLRs), I thought the same would be true for these. Thanks, Za.
So you're not going to beat a dSLR for image quality/customization then?
Jeff @ Feb 26th 2006 12:40AM
"Reminds me of the 350D (Canon Digital Rebel)
This isnt a DSLR, its an SLR-Like that is digital :)"
Except that the 350D *is* an SLR, so it couldn't remind you of that.
Listen, these "prosumer" cams have been around for a while, and no SLR user would touch them. If someone's in the market for an SLR, buy an SLR. Don't buy one of these.
I still haven't figured out what kind of person these types of cameras is actually good for. They have all of the disadvantages of an SLR (bulky, heavy) with none of the advantages (low noise, interchangeable lenses, TTL viewfinders). I mean, if you want a camera with the capabilities of a pocket camera, buy a pocket camera. If you want a camera with the capabilities of an SLR, buy an SLR. Don't buy a camera that's just got all the worst features of both formats and none of what makes them appealing.
Adam @ Feb 26th 2006 12:43AM
Yosh...
not lense wise anyway. :P
quality should be pretty good on here though, i've been looking for more tech-specs and found some over at DP review, go check it out
Balls @ Feb 26th 2006 12:48AM
"So you're not going to beat a dSLR for image quality/customization then?"
Not really. It's not fair to try and compare a Point and Shoot with an SLR.
Adam @ Feb 26th 2006 12:51AM
Jeff.
its got better features that a "pocket camera" better lense, better zoom, possible higher quality pics.
Easy to use.. for beginner photographers
and its got alot of the featurs of a DSLR, and its very affordable for what your getting.
if you dont want the hassle of paying alot for a real DSLR, and then buying another expensive lense for it, then this is your option...
12x = 432mm if you bought a lense for a DSLR that was around 432mm, it would cost you more that this camera alone probably.
432: Got that from DP review.
balls @ Feb 26th 2006 12:52AM
"Listen, these "prosumer" cams have been around for a while, and no SLR user would touch them. If someone's in the market for an SLR, buy an SLR. Don't buy one of these."
You raise a good point Jeff, but obviously there is a niche for this market, otherwise Sony,Nikon et al would abandon it.
Problem is most entry level DSLR setups run $700-$1000, and thats with the crappy kit-lens. I'm willing to bet that this sony could give my 20D run for its money if I only had a kit lens. Additionally these cameras do make a good stepping stone for people who want to get into more advanced digital photography but dont necessarily want to invest big bucks into a good SLR setup.
Mike @ Feb 26th 2006 1:13AM
I wouldn't mind getting one of these to replace my wonderful Cyber-Shot V1. :D
Matt Hall @ Feb 26th 2006 2:23AM
And what exactly do they expect people to do with that internal memory?
TIMMAH!!! @ Feb 26th 2006 3:11AM
While the inclusion of integrated memory is nice, it's really a pain to use. It always requires you to hook up the camera to your computer (somthing which I rarely do anymore) and there's never any way of copying images from it to removable media.
I guess maybe they're doing it for the in-store demos...
cole @ Feb 26th 2006 3:35AM
sony camera's are crap, actually most sony stuff these days seems to be going down the tubes. get a canon or a nikon, they do camera's and they do them great!!! sony has had some gret stuff in the past but it seems like they are trying to do too much or something. anyways, not meaning to start anything, but you don't see a canon or nikon tv/phone/mp3player/stereo/robot/etc.etc.etc.
CK @ Feb 26th 2006 5:24AM
Yep cole, that would be a good point, except you've missed the part where Sony cameras are getting *better*.
Have a look at DP Review some time. They have all the answers.
CK @ Feb 26th 2006 5:29AM
Jeff: pocket cameras tend to have cheap lenses, smaller CCDs and underpowered flashes. Moving up in the world at the same price gets you the likes of the H series (check out the H1 for some specs), with much better features at the expense of being able to put it in your pocket (well, not without looking like a dork).
TZK @ Feb 26th 2006 9:10AM
FYI: These are DIRECT replacements for KM camera, and are just badge replacements for those Z series, only slightly upgraded.
At least thats what the Gremlins told me.
mihalich @ Feb 26th 2006 9:18AM
I see dead people, sorry - cams - Konika minolta Z5 here
Atanas Boev @ Feb 26th 2006 9:46AM
Same as #19, I see Konica-Minolta Z5 and Z6 here, with carl zeiss optics snaped on. ISO up to 1000 is a plus, but do they shoot on sd-card?
360what? @ Feb 26th 2006 12:36PM
WRONG INFO GUYS.
The H2 LCD should be 2 inch not 2.5 inch.
http://www.dcviews.com/press/Sony-H2-H5.htm
Will @ Feb 26th 2006 6:03PM
"think this would be comparable to say, a low-end dSLR? nikon d70.."
NOT EVEN CLOSE. Different camera class. Like comparing a biplane to a spitfire. Sure they both can have guns, but...
Simon @ Feb 26th 2006 7:15PM
Does anyone else here ever wonder how many people have bought SLR's/DSLR's and never changed the lens from the standard one the camera came with?
I think prosumer cameras like this answer that question.
Andrew @ Feb 27th 2006 10:18AM
I wouldn't buy one, but look at many of the low-end SLRs that were sold before digital got big: The typical "kit" camera--a smallish body with a 28-70 zoom (or maybe a 35-80 or something). How many of those buyers ever bought a second lens? I'll bet a fair number did, but a large number did not. So, what's the difference between having a detachable lens and not to those folks? Nothing. (Sure, some may like the feature, but probably not too many cared that much).
chris @ Feb 27th 2006 10:54AM
Ive owned both the Sony DSC-H2 and the Cannon S2 IS. I'd much rather wait for the Canon S3 IS (Will be released in may), same price range, feature set, and its not a sony product. IMHO Canon makes a far superior Cameras. Im not bashing the Sony, overall they make good products, to me picture quality is key, and was lacking in the last 2 Sony Cams I had. Just my 2 cents.
MC @ Feb 27th 2006 12:14PM
I'm currently using a Sony F-707 which is the great-granddad of these two cameras. While it does have the long barrel, the pictures are fantastic (even at only 5 megapixels). Looks like I might have found my new babies...
Geir E @ Feb 27th 2006 12:33PM
Sony, Where are the dSLR from the Konica-Minolta heritage you inherited?
Oh well, I'm spending my money on a new mountainbike anyways, so I couldn't have afforded it yet. But I'd love to hear it was under way.
Gryzor @ Feb 28th 2006 2:23AM
Errrr, guys, this is NOT supposed to be a prosumer or a low-end dSLR cam, this is only the successor (actually, two of them) of the H1 which was merely a good, high-zoom consumer DSC. Nothing more, nothing less. Comparing it to the R1 (don't really have an opinion on the others) is silly, to say the least...
shailesh g @ Mar 9th 2006 5:20AM
reg this one. H5 . regarding picture quality & pict modes. how this compares with other lesser end dslr s?
other dslr`s wud be having more lens adapatbility, may be more pixels, sturdy body`s . can one rely on this model for not very professional purposes , but a basic level of pro photography which is going to be used by an amateur?
whts minimum time lag bw succesive snaps in all three cams?plz let me know.
Phil @ Mar 13th 2006 2:07PM
Arrgh, enough of the purist approach that every camera has to be a Nikon SLR. I do a lot of sea kayaking and have opportunities for snapping pictures of osprey, eagles, sea otters, etc. but they rarely come out impressive without adequate zoom. The Sony DSC-H1 fits the bill nicely with image stabilized 12X zoom without any changing of lens. I've only held one in a store but its very lite with batteries and has an easy to follow menu system that one doesn't have to squint at. On the deck of a sea kayak, one doesn't have a lot of room or time for a Nikon with all these expensive clunky lenses to change for each application. DSC-H1 does a reasonably good job and is a fun camera to use by some 40 reviews i've read. The rather serious dpreview review of picture quality show that it is as good as the Canon S2. Except that the Canon uses this dinky 1.8" window and tiny menu set while the H1 uses a 2.5" LCD and an easy to read menu, (its H5 successor due in June uses a 3" LCD window). Canon, watch out, Sony is eating your business. An H5 will be mine in three months.
madweazl @ Mar 14th 2006 1:40AM
Seems to be a lot of comments from people who have no desire to use this camera (or one like it). For me it fits the bill. My previous camera (Canon S400) served me well, the picture quality was fine (for me) but the zoom always left me wanting more (3x optical). It also lacked full manual settings and image stabilization which would have been very nice for low light conditions. The last thing I wanted was a better video mode (S400 only allowed 3 minutes at a time) at a max res of 320X.
These cameras (S2/3, H1/2/5, Panasonics etc) addressed all these issues and put them into a package that wasnt to much larger (I have an SLR [not digital] but never use it because of the size mostly). The Canon allows you to zoom while in video mode which is a huge plus for me (hopefully the Sony will as well).
VERSATILITY. Not great at anything but good at everything.
Ron Posner @ Mar 15th 2006 3:58PM
I owned a Nikon 5700 and just purchased a D70S w/kit lens. To me, the main advantages are the camera turns on instantly, faster auto focus, faster manual zoom, better optics, better white balance control and a very important, iTTL flash (SB600 or Metz 54MZ 4i) for fantastic results. DSLRs and D Point-and-Shoots are both tools and you can get great shots out of either. (I also owned many film cameras in the past - Nikon F, F/FTn, F3, F4S, F100, etc.) Read this article! - http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera.htm
Ben @ Mar 18th 2006 8:31PM
I've placed (and lost) several e-bay bids on an H1. Then I heard about the H2 and am glad I lost the auctions. I've yet to read a direct comparison review H1 vs H2, but the improvements I've read about, and for the nearly same price, win me. Except the 2" LCD vs 2.5 on the H1.
And I do like to chuckle when I read writers like #25 (above) that claim to have owned things. Like his H2, which Sony tells me will come out April 15 of this year, not last.
I, too, have film cameras which I'll keep. My Minolta SRT101, purchased 1972 while I was overseas in the infantry, and its 3 lenses, keeps making terrific images. But you gotta want that 432mm equivalant zoom. And the H2 has widened aperture selection to go along with its very fast shutter speed. From a half-depressed shutter button to record is something like .10 seconds. But I do have 2 digital cameras I'd be embarassed to give away, today.
S A DeVito @ Mar 20th 2006 11:37AM
I agree with 31 - My current camera is a Nikon Coolpix 4600. I want more zoom, better pictures in low light, image stabilization, movie clips, and more megapixels. I don't want to deal with changing lenses, or the bigger size and PRICE of SLR's. The H2 has all that, and fits my budget (under $400)! I have researched several Canons, Konicas and Nikons, the only ones that are comparable are $100 more.
So tell me what's the fastest way to get one in my hot little hands - SONYStyle says it will ship on or before 4/14, but their service reviews are terrible. Amazon won't ship until at least 4/20, and I'm going on vaca on 4/22!
DRP @ Mar 21st 2006 12:48AM
The purist is knocking a good thing and they don't even know it. For the most part, the future of SLR's is really limited. The digital SLR's will buy them some time, but they will eventually go the way of the Dodo.
Once the picture quality is comparable to the images created with an SLR, there will be no need to carry around 3 or 4 pounds of photography gear. All that gear will eventually be found in one digital camera, and that camera will be less than 14 ounces. We are not there yet, but another 6 or 7 years will tell the story. SLR fans, your days are numbered, so enjoy them while you can, because a new kid will be coming along in the future that will knock your socks off.
It took a couple generations for the car to replace the horse, but it eventually did. It took a couple of decades for CD's to replace records and 8-track tapes, but they were eventually replaced. SLR's will also eventually be replaced, but only when there performance can be matched. That day is very near, so you SLR purists can keep lugging around your anchors, excuse me I mean lenses and filters.
Innovation replaces everything. Eventually SLR's will be replaced because they will only be able to match the picture quality of a digital camera. That day is not far off.
By the way, I am an amateur photographer. I have used SLR cameras for 25 years, and switched to digital cameras six years ago. I am on my third digital camera and have enjoyed everyone. I carry around 110 the weight I use to carry with my SLR, and I am extremely happy with my results. I usually wait a couple generations before I purchase a new camera, so I don't stay on the bleeding edge, but I keep close enough to enjoy the new innovations being offered.
No one should knock a good thing, but when I read about SLR camera users knocking digital cameras I cannot help from laughing. If you are a professional, then you probably need an SLR, but if you are a hobbyist, a good digital camera will be all you need.
Now, let everyone find fault with what I have said.
Spiritas @ Mar 21st 2006 5:10PM
Well, one thing for sure, the H2/H5 models do not match the image quality of a DSLR, a single look at the size of the sensor matrix is enough. But let's say I do not feel like i'm a profesional photographer, i have better things to do in life rather than spending evenings in a darkened room with the crap i caught on film that day or stare at my oversized image files, then print them and hang on my wall. Futhermore, let's asume that i have my own oppinion on what is beautiful and that sometimes i want to capture something that suites my understanding of beauty. Let's make one more asumption - i do not look fro problems in every single pixel of the image. And the last assumption - i would like to own something that doesn't cost a big bag of money and doesn't take an equally big bag to carry it. Having made these assumptions, let's now think what should i get... A 5000$ DSLR with lenses to suit various situations and a truck to move all that around, or a compact but still quite powerful CyberShot DSC-H5/H2 / Canon S2 IS / whatever? Well I would get a Cybershot. Simply because i have more brain than money and i know my needs. And i bet that not even a single real pro-photographer has posted on this board.
And now to boast a bit i'll say that compact is sh*t and only SLRs with ultra-mega-high quality film are worth existing ;]
Doug Morris @ Mar 30th 2006 8:07AM
I wish Sony would add a hot shoe to their new H2 - H5. I am not a professional but would like a stronger flash for outside / night photos or in large indoor situations where the light is poor. I have been looking at Kodak P-850 only because it has the hot shoe. But, the new Sony H5 may just be the ticket for my needs. Does anyone know anything about adding a flash to those digital camera's?
Doug Morris @ Apr 21st 2006 6:38AM
I am in the insurance claims business and need a reliable camera with a good optical zoom such as the Sony DSC H1, H2 & H5. I too wish they had a hot shoe for night photography or for inside a burned out building where it is dark. Does anyone have valid info on those "slave flash" attachements for the Sony DSC camera's? Thanks.
DRP @ Apr 24th 2006 12:21PM
For "slave flash" units check out the Phoenix D91-BZS Auto Digital Booster Flash. There might be other brands, but this was the first I found.
Hongmedia @ May 1st 2006 11:44PM
This debate over professionals and amateurs seems to ignore that most professionals are collecting still images for newspapers and perhaps the internet. The reproduction quality of both is strictly limited.
Journalists who often double as photographers usually don't want to be worried about carrying a big bag of lenses, developing film, and fiddling with manual controls. They want clean, quick images whichg can be edited on their laptop and squirted home by satellite.
I can remember meeting a group of Khmer Rouge in Cambodia and struggling with sweating fingers to attach a new lens.
Which brings us to packages like the Sony h2 and H5. I have owned a range of Nikon SLRs over the last twenty five years. They still take great photos but they are technical dinosaurs.
What I need to know about the new Sonys is how good is their auto metering, how fast can they take shots, how good is the final product?
dgorsuch @ May 15th 2006 1:22PM
FYI, I am definitely an amateur who just received an H2 for Mother's Day--love it! It replaces a finepix 3800--junk in comparison. It is very user friendly and the internal memory can be copied to the memory stick pro duo. The pictures are beautiful and it has so many features. I used a Canon T80 for many, many years (with extra lenses that I RARELY changed) and was so happy to go digital. Go Sony!
Jorgen Gustafson @ May 29th 2006 4:48PM
Sony have developed and manufactured high end electronic picture gathering for over 30 years: Betacam etc etc. canon, Nikon, Leica is heavy names since the old film days - but this is ccd and digital and of course Sony is as good as anybody else. I think they are one of the top developers in digital picture gathering. Just look at the pro section i broadcasting and you will understand. Some of the heavy shit goes down to the consumer stuff too - HAD for example. And - Zeiss is Zeiss.
Many wants a easy to use cam with good pic quality and a FAT tele - thats why this kind of cameras will sell like butter - and the tele makes it big and bulky compared to the smallest consumer cameras.
I will not buy it. Why? Because it takes only DUO and not regular MS. I have many gigabytes of MS Pro 'cause I have used Sony cams for many years. I say: F***k you, Sony! You lost one buyer here. So stupid, Sony. So stupid. To leave your own memory standard sold in millions and millions.
Steve Henry @ Jun 14th 2006 10:14AM
I'm a professional photographer and these cameras are incredibly impressive. With their image stabilization in use and at the full extended telephoto, their older brother, a Sony DSC-H1, clearly took better photos than my Nikon D200 with a 18 - 200 non VR lens. Some people don't want to spend $3000 on a camera, don't want to have to carry tripods with them downtown London to shoot a photo of Big Ben. These cameras are an excellent choice for many situations and do often bridge the gap between razor type point and shoots and SLRs.
nicky napkins @ Jun 29th 2006 4:51AM
So what should i go for?
Canon s3? sony dsc h2?
Panasonic dmc fz30?
Sony dsc r1?
Samsung pro 815?
Please help...
nicky..
nicky napkins @ Jun 29th 2006 4:52AM
So what should i go for?
Canon s3? sony dsc h2?
Panasonic dmc fz30?
Sony dsc r1?
Samsung pro 815?
Please help...
nicky..
Monique @ Jun 30th 2006 7:41PM
I've read all of the above comments. Now I really feel confused about which digital camera I should buy. I did ask a friend of mine (professional photographer) to help. He recommended me these 3 options :
1)Nikon Coolpix S6
2)Sony Cybershot DSC-H5 and
3)Olympus Stylus 810
I think photo magazines and web site pages should give us (amateurs) information as to which digital camera offers what (giving us, for example, a list of all the options and compare each of the cameras - on the same page).
I think there are lots of people like me who don t know much about taking pictures but who want to buy an "easy to use" digital camera with the best possible quality picture.
Also, where can one get a digital camera and pay less, bying them in a store or on the internet ?
Suresh @ Jul 3rd 2006 2:15AM
Sony Cybershot H5
12 X Optical zoom covering a wide range usable by most amateurs
Image Stabilization (very useful, but I read somewhere that a lady tried to photograph her dogs and the image stabilization was quite poor)
3" Viewing screen (very very useful, gives an excellent preview)
Reasonably Priced comapred to most Makes & Models offering the same specs
Carl Zeiss vario-tessar lens (can't go too wrong)
Good reviews -Highly Recommended- for its predecesors H1 & H2 (recently posted on dpreview.com)
C'mon, Unless you are a Professional Photographer with specific needs, there's enough stuff to go for this camera
Well I am going to buy one when it is available.
Randy @ Jul 4th 2006 10:22AM
I bought the H5B when it hit my local Best Buy store. Great camera. Used it to capture some action shots of my grandaughters softball game. The "sport" setting was able to freeze the action (ball leaving the pitchers hand) in perfect focus! The super steady shot works great as well making long zoom shots (it has a 12x optical zoom) a breeze. There are more settings on this Sony than most anyone will ever use which gives it great versatility. I highly recommend the H5 for anyone looking to take great pics.
JohnnyStew @ Jul 9th 2006 5:26PM
My , My, my, there sure are some real losers and opinionated know it all types whom I seriously doubt know much about photography. These so called bridge/megazoom digicams fit into a niche, if you will. They fill a gap for consumers who do not wish to spend the bucks on a DSLR and lenses. Will the DSLR's produce better photos? Of course the answer is yes, but 99 % of the time it is the eye and talent of the shooter taking the photo, not the equipment. Give a pro a point and shoot, and that said Pro will likely capture better photos than an amateur or 'know-it-all" will with higher end equipment. Get a dammed camera and go out and take some photos! Get real, get a life! peace Johnny
demis @ Aug 5th 2006 6:59AM
thanks for ur personal