Sony's new 8 megapixel camera

Hi everyone,

Since their was some questions to owners about how they liked their Sony cameras underwater. I thought it would be appropriate to start a new thread about Sony’s new digital camera the DSC 828 .

I for one have always been a big fan of most everything Sony makes and have been interested in their 707, and 717 camera’s. I’ve never own either of these two cameras but have seen a lot of pictures taken with them. I frequent Steve”s digital camera news everyday and always look at the picture of the day. I’ve always been taken in with the high quality of the pictures these two cameras make when they were featured . I’ve always wanted one of these cameras but was hesitant to switch to Sony’s memory stick, since I have a big investment in compact flash cards.

But now with Sony’s new replacement for the 717 the DSC 828 and it long list of incredible features. I’ve put my self on the waiting list, it’s due sometime late December or early January.

Some of the features this camera has to offer:

7x (28-200mm) all glass Carl Zeiss f2-2.8 zoom lens with macro

New 2/3 inch 8 megapixel,4 color Super Had CCD Imager

Adjustable TTL flash, hot shoe and connector flash

Now supports Compact flash type 2 as well as Memory stick Pro

Offers Raw Imaging mode

This is the short list, the list goes on with all the other great feature the 717 offers.

I’m willing to take a chance and buy this camera and make a housing for it. Who knows this camera might take excellent pictures underwater with all that great versatility.

Marc

As I know the biggest problem of the 707 & 717 for u/w use was the impossibility to add external WA lens for them, I don’t think that with the new model the problem was solved so I can't see it as suitable P&S camera in our world.

I once tried the 707 with the Amphibico housing since I already owned their 100 degree wide port. I ultimately returned it because of the inadequate support for controls and the questionable strobe support. The image quality with the wide port was promising. The 707 lacked a RAW mode though.

The 828 is intriguing with it's CF support and it's unique CCD technology. The Fathom wide port might make an interesting wide option for a custom housing. I wish you the best and hope the project turns out well.

“As I know the biggest problem of the 707 & 717 for u/w use was the impossibility to add external WA lens for them,”

What’s the problem with using a wide angle lens, Sony makes a couple of lens and their many after market lens available too.

Marc

Perhaps alto's referring to wetmount wideangles like the Inon. Internal ones worked. Are you considering a dome?

Yes, I’ll be using one of my 6" domes, and a separate flat port for macro.

Marc

Does anyone have a firm release date for this camera?

Doug

Not being a wise axx - but why would you want this camera over a digital rebel. It must cost almost as much

I think if you look at the specification of the 828 and compare it to the Rebel it answers the question .

These are some of the advertised prices at this time:

$949.00 at eCOST.com

$1049.94 at buy.com

$949.00 at PC Mall

$929.00 at Tech Depot

$979.00 at ePhotoClub.com

$919.00 at Harmony Computers

I borrow the image from dpreview.com, read their review on Sony’s 828.

Marc

I've read the preview on the 828. I'm just curious what buyers of this camera see as its edge over the canon. At the equivalent price point, the canon comes with an inferior lens, but the lens options make it a clear winner in my book..Particularly for working at the focal length extremes that uw photography demands. On land, for a novice shooting snapshots of the family, I can see why the simplicity of this camera might be attractive, but I believe that the rebel will push the price point of cameras like this down dramatically! Why pay the same for a p&s when you can have an slr?

Another BIG disadvantage of the 828 is that it is still a small chip camera, thus creating distractingly large DOF for portraiture and sports. and the 828 isn't much smaller than a rebel.

When I switched from the E-20, a similar non-interchangeable model but with slr viewing, to the D100, I was blown away by the advantages in image quality, and the glory of true macro/wide angle lenses. Of course my investment has now grown to many times that of the 828, but it has done so over the course of time, and most of that investment will stay with me from camera to camera.

Hi Kasey,

I haven’t sold my Fuji S2 Pro and SB 104 yet, I just miss having a camera that can shoot wide angle and zoom in for the those tight macro shots with out having to changes lens and ports.

I still feel my old Nikon 990 and wide converter lens combination gave me what I just explained. The depth of field was excellent while in the macro mode, far better than my S2 pro using my Nikon 60mm macro or my Tamron 90mm macro. What you feel is “ creating distractingly large DOF ” is exactly what I think you’d want shooting macro, and if you choose to have less DOF try shooting in manual mode and selecting your aperture to suite the situation.

It was the detail with the larger interpolated image size that I was attracted to, and it’s low light capabilities that made Fuji my choice of cameras. It seems to me that you should be getting more information or detail out of a true 8 megapixel chip verses a 6 megapixel interpolated to 12 megapixels, and the optic from Carl Zeiss are world renown for their superior glass and image quality.

This camera looks like a winner to me on paper, but the truth is yet to be seen.

Marc

I still feel my old Nikon 990 and wide converter lens combination gave me what I just explained. The depth of field was excellent while in the macro mode, far better than my S2 pro using my Nikon 60mm macro or my Tamron 90mm macro. What you feel is “ creating distractingly large DOF ” is exactly what I think you’d want shooting macro, and if you choose to have less DOF try shooting in manual mode and selecting your aperture to suite the situation.

Don't get Craig started on the DOF of these cameras with the little chips

We've gone through this in the past. For a given final image resolution, the DOF of the smaller chip camera is actually worst than one with a bigger chip. The reason is you are limited to a lower F-stop because of the pixel size. The higher F-number more than make up the focal length difference in the lens when you are shooting to maximize the depth of field near diffraction limited resolution.

The other reason is image quality. I've been compilling some camera noise results and just posted them here:

http://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=14&t=3740

There's no data for the 828 since it isn't out, but based on pixel size, I expect it to be similar to the Olympus 5050

the optic from Carl Zeiss are world renown for their superior glass and image quality.

Take the sony "carl zeiss" stuff with a grain of salt. They have put this label on almost all of their lenses now - even camcorders. I suspect they have just purchased a license agreement with Carl Zeiss. f2.0 - 2.8 is impressive, though.

The effective resolution of your S2 will blow this camera out of the water!

For someone who is looking for their first consumer digicam, the Sony 828 may be a good choice; or mabye even an upgrade from their 1 megapixel point and shoot (I've got one of those).

I can't imagine someone going from a DSLR to this camera.

1) Megapixel counts can be highly overated. Much depends on your final output. The extra count of the Sony would only come into play with larger print sizes. You won't tell the difference between 3-5 mp and 8 mp on your computer screen or on small prints.

2) They packed the greater number of pixels on the same size chip. It's a zero sum game. Smaller pixels can result in higher noise, less dynamic range and increased digital artifacts.

3) Carl Zeiss designed the lens. Kyocera is a licensed manufacturer of Zeiss designs. Whether it makes any difference as to who manufactured the lens is debatable. The lens is definitely one of the best found on consumer digicams. Is it better than say a quality Canon or Nikon zoom? Doubtful, but it may the critical factor in quality output anyway (see above).

4) DOF gain on macro is far less than on wide angle, due to physical limitations on minumum aperture on the Sony.

5) The quality of wide angle results cannot be determined until the actual wide angle lens is tested on this specific zoom. Results may vary significantly over the range of the zoom.

6) Projected street price may not be inviting, a problem Sony has across its entire consumer electronics division. Add the price of a wide angle add-on and you are pushing the Rebel range with additional lens.

Again, I can't see going from a DSLR to this type of camera. Maybe it makes a good land camera for easy toting, but not as ultimate u/w camera.

Just my opinion.

The 828 offers (will offer) some interesting advances. Sony's pushing the color mosiac as well as the pixel count. The 707 and 717 were regarded as being at the top of the digital P&S category.

Whether it is better for someone than a Rebel is a different matter. It's clear that the Rebel pricing puts an upper limit on P&S prices, but Sony may be able to sell the 828 in successful numbers.

I don't think Marc was suggesting the 828 was better than SLR's but simply that it might be compelling enough to try underwater. It's possible that it could outresolve current 6MP cameras. I don't think it will and noise will be something to look at. I'm still interested in how it works out and it could surprise us.

BTW: The DOF gain in the macro range will eventually become

This debate edges into an area of philosophical approach to underwater photography...an area I recently visited myself.

Each photographer has to decide for himself if he is diving to take photographs or taking photographs of his dive. (Use of male pronouns has historical precedent, and is not meant to leave out female diver/photographers).

I believe Mark is reaching the same decision that I have, which is that a d-SLR takes over the dive. Lens choice demands you shoot in one specific compositional style. The mass of the housing makes it much more of a burden to dive with than a smaller camera. And, perhaps most annoying to me, composition must be through a viewfinder instead of with the LCD screen. I don't want to spend my entire dive with my face mashed up to a viewfinder, trying to maneuver something the size of a Volkswagen into position to take a picture of a subject that fits my lens when something much more interesting (but of a different scale) is on the coral head next door.

We that make this choice applaud you that demand the utmost in imaging quality. We'll take our noisy, little, zoom lens POS cameras and enjoy them and our dives. When all is said and done, I believe that the difference in the quality of the images is marginal. It is a margin I don't mind sacrificing.

I don't want to spend my entire dive with my face mashed up to a viewfinder, trying to maneuver something the size of a Volkswagen into position...

Try it, you might like it. It makes you feel gooood...

Jeff's got some good points. That's why I used to travel with both my film SLR and a P&S digicam. However, the digicam usually got most of my attention due to the ability to change lenses underwater, the ability to frame pictures with the LCD and the smaller size. However, now that I have DSLR, I'm still considering housing it because I think it is a much more useful tool in some situations. Is it worth the added "form factor"? Maybe , because the image quality is better and there is no shutter lag. It is unfortunate that Olympus has taken "another road" in the design of the 5060 that takes away some of the advantages of the 5050 while fixing other problems . . .

I don't want to spend my entire dive with my face mashed up to a viewfinder, trying to maneuver something the size of a Volkswagen into position...

Try it, you might like it. It makes you feel gooood...

I did. It didn't.

It is unfortunate that Olympus has taken "another road" in the design of the 5060 that takes away some of the advantages of the 5050 while fixing other problems . . .

Mike,

I am interesting in knowing more about your outlook on the new 5060 in comparison with the 5050 and why you seem displeased with the new camera. I had the chance to use the camera at DEMA and my first impression of it seemed to rate it at being an improvement over the 5050. More than anything in regards to its auto focus and shutter lag. I didn't thoroughly put the camera through its pace (I haven't even done that with the 5050) but I was impressed.

The biggest concerns I've read about were in regards to the new housing not having the ability to install external lenses and having a limited wide angle range with the built in lens. I think this is an assumption by most as its impossible to notice from the photos if it can be done or not. Worse case scenario.. It doesn't look too tough to swap the threaded lens ring from the flat port on the PT-015 with the PT-020. This is just an assumption though. We'll just have to wait and see.

Maybe we can start a new thread so as not to throw this one off course. Your opinion is valuable to me.