Sony's feature-packed Cyber-shot DSC-G1 reviewed

One might wonder if Sony packed a little too much into the relatively compact DSC-G1, but as we'd already seen, even the CNET review crew didn't really think so. The only noticeable digs were the slightly larger-than-usual frame and additional weight added on, and unfortunately, the "slow-going" WiFi wizardry. To its credit, the WiFi features did seem to elicit quite a bit of smiles once the initial kinks were worked out, and while they weren't crazy about the "narrow, slow zoom lens" per se, the image quality seemed on par. Additionally, the digicam's 3.5-inch LCD monitor was dubbed "a television" in an of itself thanks to the impressive resolution, and the 2GB of internal memory along with an additional Memory Stick expansion slot was also highly regarded. Another seemingly minor thumbs-up was given to this unit's ability to accept "drag-and-drop" music file transfers to play back on the built-in media player, which is a much appreciated departure from previous cams that forced users to rely on Sony's SonicStage software. Still, $600 isn't chump change for a pocket-based camera, so be sure and read up on the full skinny before throwing down on the (admittedly flashy) G1.

[Thanks, Antipathy]

[Kev50027 @ May 3rd 2007 10:16AM]

That's awesome! Does it support transferring pics to the computer over wifi? That's almost a good deal for a camera with 2GB built in, wifi, and a large LCD. Way to go, Sony, this camera looks to be the best ultracompact P&S available.

[Josh Warner @ May 3rd 2007 11:53AM]

If you have $600 to spend on a camera, do NOT spend it on a small point-and-shoot. Buy a Nikon D40 or a Canon Digital Rebel XT (neither is the newest, but DSLR megapixels do not matter - see www.kenrockwell.com for why).

All point-and-shoots have terrible noise performance and their features are hard to access. Any DSLR by Nikon or Canon blows every point-and-shoot out of the water - there is no comparison.

That having been said, there is a market for tiny, good quality digicams. Look at Canon's Digital ELPH line for that, or buy an A5xx series and never look back. Canon uses real zoom lenses, not the crappy prism/transverse lens setup that Sony uses to make this kind of thing so small.

Here's why the camera doesn't matter, if anybody is interested (Canon A540 vs. Canon 5D): http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/150-vs-5000-dollar-camera.htm

Disclaimer: I have a Nikon DSLR and a Canon ELPH. I love them both; they each have a place and are appropriately priced for what they deliver. This Sony, like so much from that brand at the moment, is NOT appropriately priced, nor does it have an appropriate niche.

[Castle @ May 3rd 2007 12:15PM]

@Josh

DSLRs are not for everybody, people don't want to carry around a large camera on vacation. For most people that want to "point-and-shoot" there is a market.

There are cheaper PAS-cameras out there, including ones made by Sony. Clearly the main attraction for this is the Touch-screen, 3.5" screen, 2GB internal memory(plus exapandable via flash), and WiFi.

This camera is for people that keep their photos in their camera and want to show it off to people, not for photo-enthusiast

[Dan @ May 3rd 2007 12:33PM]

I like it! This year's line of cameras from Sony is easily the best yet.

[George @ May 3rd 2007 12:45PM]

Josh your statement doesnt even make sense. sure a DSLRs has a better picture quality but they are impractical. most picture taking by the average person is done while on vacation or out and about and most picture taking or at least alot of it is spontaneous. who wants to carry a giant camera around just for better features and picture quality

[mark @ May 3rd 2007 1:48PM]

2gb of internal memory sounds fantastic, but what happens when on the last day of your holiday the camera breaks down with 600 of your most precious photos stuck inside? Give me a removable memory card any day.

[myscrnnm @ May 3rd 2007 10:15PM]

"2gb of internal memory sounds fantastic, but what happens when on the last day of your holiday the camera breaks down with 600 of your most precious photos stuck inside? Give me a removable memory card any day."

The DSC-G1 also has a Memory Stick expansion slot for removable media.

[Kevin @ May 3rd 2007 4:18PM]

Sony is cranking out so many ultracompacts and P+S cameras. It's a pity they're still neglecting the high-end P+S market after the end of the V series.

[Anthony @ May 3rd 2007 5:43PM]

I played w/ one of these during one of my rare outings outside the house. Sun big.

Actually, I found the camera to be too big, the sliding mechanism to be unintuitive & the general ergonomics to be off kilter.

I'm a fan of their T series & hoped to see a "T on EPO", but was disappointed.

Photos may be great, but if I don't have or use the camera for whatever reason then it's a bust.

You may like it- however, this is definitely not one to buy through the lowest cost source.

[mark @ May 4th 2007 1:41PM]

myscrnnm I am aware that the camera has the option to use a memory card, but nearly 20 years experience of selling cameras tells me that if someone can save a penny they will.
That in-built 2gb of memory will just be too tempting for many people and they will not buy a memory card regards less of how cheap it is.
We've been seeing it for years already with cameras have only 16mb of internal memory and the users would rather sacrifice quality and select the lowest resolution on the camera just so they can get 50 pics without having to fork out for a card.

[myscrnnm @ May 4th 2007 7:44PM]

"myscrnnm I am aware that the camera has the option to use a memory card, but nearly 20 years experience of selling cameras tells me that if someone can save a penny they will.
That in-built 2gb of memory will just be too tempting for many people and they will not buy a memory card regards less of how cheap it is.
We've been seeing it for years already with cameras have only 16mb of internal memory and the users would rather sacrifice quality and select the lowest resolution on the camera just so they can get 50 pics without having to fork out for a card."

Right, but that doesn't explain why it's bad to have 2GB of internal memory. By your account, that would mean that this camera would sell well, because people won't be required to buy a memory card and/or select the lowest resolution. And btw, higher resolution doesn't necessarily equal higher quality. We've reached an area where resolutions can become high enough that it's fine. What really determines the image quality is the lenses and the image sensor.

[mark allen @ May 5th 2007 4:36PM]

It's bad because people will lose important photo's.

I'm well aware of what determines image quality in a camera but I regularly see disappointed people who set low resolution (vga) and want a 10x8 print and it looks crap, or their camera has failed and because they only use internal memory they have lost their photos.

There a plenty of people who are using digital cameras that do not own a PC and will allow their internal memory or card hold pictures for months and months before coming into a store like mine and off loading to CD, this is a recipe for disaster as internal memory gets bigger.

[myscrnnm @ May 5th 2007 6:10PM]

"It's bad because people will lose important photo's.

I'm well aware of what determines image quality in a camera but I regularly see disappointed people who set low resolution (vga) and want a 10x8 print and it looks crap, or their camera has failed and because they only use internal memory they have lost their photos.

There a plenty of people who are using digital cameras that do not own a PC and will allow their internal memory or card hold pictures for months and months before coming into a store like mine and off loading to CD, this is a recipe for disaster as internal memory gets bigger."

Okay, but that's kind of their own fault if they didn't buy a reliable camera. I you buy something reliable like a Canon or a Sony, this kind of stuff wouldn't happen. And if the person were in fact to use only the internal storage, then they would also be more likely to upload the pictures to the computer more often, to free up space for later. Unlike those of us who use memory cards, and will regularly swap out cards if they have reached their full capacity.

[Calvin Klein @ May 13th 2007 12:14PM]

"Here's why the camera doesn't matter, if anybody is interested (Canon A540 vs. Canon 5D): http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/150-vs-5000-dollar-camera.htm"

What a STUPID review! A pinhole camera could do well in bright daylight but try shooting a comparison in a dimly lit church. Besides, what kind of professional reviewer uses words like "suckier"?? My 8 yr old could write a review better than Ken Rockwell.

[Calvin Klein @ May 13th 2007 12:14PM]

Does WiFi mean remotes wireless shooting? The article doesn't specify how exactly that would work.

[csmoht @ Jun 16th 2007 8:12PM]

Awesome!

I bet Sony gonna stuff mobile phone capabilites in the camera soon! seriuosly.