Sony intros three new photo frames, adds Bluetooth and HDMI

The boys and girls at Sony are firing on all (or a few) cylinders today, launching not one, but three new digital photo frames for your digital photo-framing pleasure. All the frames in the new lineup contain 800 x 480 WVGA displays with a Bizarro World aspect ratio of 15:9, and are capable of scaling and display pictures up to 48-megapixels in size -- which we're sure you'll be taking advantage of real soon. The 7-inch DPF-V700 and 9-inch DPF-V900 both sport 512MB of internal storage, can communicate via Bluetooth, and have what appears to be a first in digital frames: HDMI outs. The thriftier, 7-inch DPF-D70 halves the memory and nixes the Bluetooth and HDMI, but all three frames are coupled with a remote, and can utilize Memory Stick PRO, Memory Stick PRO Duo, SD, MMC, Compact Flash, Microdrive, and xD-Picture cards. The DPF-V900, DPF-V700 and DPF-D70 digital photo frames will be available for $250, $190 and $140, respectively, and will ship in March.

Gallery: Sony intros three new photo frames, adds Bluetooth and HDMI

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

[Technex @ Jan 30th 2008 2:02PM]

Ugh come on Engadget and there's a nasty logo right at the top :(. Sony... Eww.

[aeo @ Jan 30th 2008 2:03PM]

Nice, reading about this "exciting" release from Sony just nullified my morning caffeine. Thanks a lot Engadget.

[Jason @ Jan 30th 2008 10:15PM]

Like you can see compression artifacts on a tiny 800X480 resolution screen.

Good gawd you people are brainwashed.

[Ty @ Jan 30th 2008 2:08PM]

Do any of these things support TIFF files? I vote no to JPEG compression artifacts.

[jtc970 @ Jan 30th 2008 2:23PM]

No WiFi?

[Chris Aubeck @ Jan 30th 2008 2:25PM]

I'm waiting for the digital frame that incorporates a Qwerty keyboard, an alarm function and a 5 megapixel camera with flash. Otherwise, what's the point?

[Lahma @ Jan 30th 2008 2:42PM]

"The DPF-V900, DPF-V700 and DPF-V700 digital..." TYPO! I believe the last one was supposed to be DPF-D70. Anyways, I don't guess anyone really cares. Thought engadget might though. Pretty nice frames...

[Harry @ Jan 30th 2008 2:47PM]

I don't get this proliferation of "wide screen" photo frames - where are all these 16:9 shootin' digicams??? It's not a frackin' movie, it's a photo, and it comes in 4:3.

Razznfrazzn...

[Geir E @ Jan 30th 2008 4:28PM]

The Sony Alpha 200 and 700 (dslr) takes 16:9 photos. Which is two amazing cameras, 200 beeing entry level and 700 beeing higher end amateur. and 300/350 comes in a couple of days filling in the space between.

[StephenD @ Jan 30th 2008 3:05PM]

A picture would be nice....

[Myshkin @ Jan 30th 2008 3:50PM]

Hey Ictiosapien, I have a Clapper I will sell you for cheap. Having it turn on when you walk by is no good, what if you aren't even looking at it. Either leave it off and only turn it on when you think it will be viewed, or leave it on all the time.

[Allen @ Jan 30th 2008 4:17PM]

I too say no to JPEG... but......

why the hell is there HDMI on this thing? An HDMI OUT of all the weirdness? Did someone screw up the calendar and make everyone at Sony believe this is "April Fools Day?"

What am I going to do with an HDMI out (other than pay more for it), drag an HDMI cable all the way from my photo frames to my TV, so I can display stuff on the frame there? And why the 48 megapixel coverage (is there anything that can even TAKE that picture)? So I can deliver 1920x1080 res photos to that TV via that uber-long HDMI Cable?

To get a cable that will not run right across the carpet and too the TV in most rooms will end up being 30ft+. You'll spend half as much on the cable as the frame...

[xSushi @ Jan 30th 2008 4:26PM]

Because 512MB of Internal Storage is JUST what I need all of my 48-megapixel beauties... wait... it is ISN'T IT?! ;)

[Joe @ Jan 30th 2008 6:52PM]

15:9!! Hahahahahahah!!! I'd love to discover how they made that decision.
I do love the 16:9 option on my Leica D-Lux 3....which is why I'd never pay money for one of these things. Scratch that, a digital photo frame is something I'd never pay money for anyways.

[RAD Moose @ Jan 30th 2008 7:32PM]

Probably using dusplays that have bad pixels in the perimeter. =P

[Max Power @ Jan 30th 2008 7:51PM]

What, no Wireless HDMI yet? P'shah.

I don't mind having the company name on my components...but on a picture frame? Sony should have their name removable from the frame (as should all other manufacturers). I know they need to brand it, but that's a bit much for a photo frame.

I'm surprised they didn't include a headphone jack...seems like they are trying to overload it with everything else.

[Poom @ Jan 31st 2008 8:21AM]

Digital photo frame is probably the only gadget that I don't get the point of... It's like companies are all producing something without a market for... Will anyone tell me other wise?

[Sandy @ Jan 31st 2008 12:24PM]

Big, ugly Sony logo right in the middle......no thanks.

Maybe is the Logo was a bit more subtle.

[ictiosapiens @ Feb 8th 2008 4:05PM]

Just give me a MOTION SENSOR already so I can buy one of these!!!!

Really, am I the only one who thinks that having an LCD on all the time with no one around to see it is a bit, well, watefull?

[Flashpoint @ Jan 30th 2008 1:59PM]

You're right, its extremely "watefall".