Sony Cyber-shot DSC-T200 (Black)
Cameras Buying Guide
-
September 12, 2007 07:28
3.0/5
I've been waiting for this camera for a while, and bought it the second Best Buy got it one their shelves.
Camera looks great, and the large touch screen is convenient and easy to use--it's very responsive and appropriate for the feature sets.
Biggest flaw is image quality. Images on the computer look as grainy as they do on the LCD screen. I've played around with some settings (ISO, picture type, resolution) and am quite unhappy. I took a lot of great pictures and am disappointed that they are not even good quality for 5x7 prints; most are grainy and blurry. I think that the flash isn't powerful enough, or the image stabilization just doesn't live up to its name.
I probably won't return the camera, but I don't feel that it's worth $400. There are cameras under $300 that are better, just not as sexy. Looks can be deceiving with this Sony, it all depends whether you want to look good holding the camera or whether you want to take good looking pictures. -
September 17, 2007 02:54
Spectacular
2.5/5
I was really looking forward to getting this camera when I pre-ordered a few weeks ago. It looked awesome on the website and the T100 had received great reviews at CNet. I expected the same for the T200. Boy was I wrong!
The biggest issue this camera had was the quality of the indoor pictures. I could never get good color - things seemed to be oversaturated no matter how I tried to adjust white balance or scene modes. Indoor shots tended to be grainy as well -- many pix where taken at ISO 400 while in fully automatic mode.
Outdoors the camera performed much better. I especially liked the continuous shooting mode when in action scene mode. It allowed me to capture my kids and pet like no other sub-compact before.
Another pain point for me was the location of the lens. My finger had a tendency to get in shots unintentionally. I suppose with more use I would get used to holding the camera better. But alas, I returned it after a week of testing. -
October 7, 2007 09:55
4.5/5
The Cybershot T200 is slim & compact feature rich camera that takes great pictures on the fly. If you want the best possible picture quality you need to purchase the larger bulkier models like the H-series or Alpha. I didn't find any of the features "gimmicky" in fact the Smile shutter is simply amazing and works perfectly.
The massive 3.5inch wide touch screen is beautiful and functions with ease. You will not miss having all those extra buttons and wheels. The touch screen makes setting up pictures easy and fast and is a vast improvement over the T100.
The lens of the camera is made by Carl Zeiss (the same German company that worked with NASA developing instruments for the HUBBLE telescope) and it produces beautiful photographs. The camera seems to make dull/low-light areas look lively and vivid which I like a lot. I'm sure there will be issues with graininess in certain low-light pictures because this is a compact camera and the flash isn't as powerful as the larger models, but I have yet to take a picture that I think is not satisfactory.
I have never had so much fun with a camera. It's hard to believe so many features are packed inside such a small case; Face detection, Smile shutter, 5x Optical zoom, slide show, video recording with zoom, in-camera editing (red-eye cropping etc.), image stabilization, painting and stamps with the touch screen... The list goes on and on.
BOTTOM LINE: You can't go wrong if you want a feature-packed digital camera that you can carry in your pocket anywhere you go. For Slim & Compact cameras I give the Sony Cybershot T200 a 9/10. If you want a camera that produces the best quality photo's then you need to look at the larger/bulkier H-series / Alpha (for Sony) or Canon/Nikon's comparable. -
October 11, 2007 04:35
Excellent
2.0/5
I first saw this camera at best buy and like many people, I really like the sleek looks of the camera. I needed a new camera to replace my old sony cyber shot I had bought about 4 years ago. So later that night when I got home I tried to do some research on the camera but I couldn't find any review on this model. Only thing I could find was one for the DSC T100 which has gotten my praise plus editor choice on Cnet. So I just figure I'll take my chances on this on because it's suppose to be the upgrade to T100, so it should be much better right?... wrong. I did a few test shot at night as soon as I got the camera to see how the picture would turn out. I was very disappointed to see how much noise it has. I should've just returned it right then but I didn't because I thought it was me and not the camera. So I tried messing with the settings on it to see if I could get the kind of pictures I would like from a $400 camera. Nothing seems to work. Anti shake sometimes doesn't even work so the pictures still comes out blurry. Colors are often washed out and pictures noise are apparent at just 200 ISO! Don't even try setting it at 800 ISO cause then the pictures start resembling a water color painting. This camera isn't worth the $400 price tag or even half of that. It's just has lots of silly gimicks that doesn't help the picture qualities. Don't buy this camera if you want great pictures to remember precious moments. Buy it if you just want to show off the camera and you don't give a damn about the picture quality. Big regrets. -
September 25, 2007 09:28
Excellent
2.0/5
I bought this camera before it hit the market from the website thinking its SONY so should be good. I have seen the T100 and quality is good but for this one when compared to the price it doesnt stand a chance. The indoor photos are really grainy in the auto mode, even when setting to the PGM mode and trying other options doesnt help much. The graininess comes when you download the photos to the computer and see them on the LCD they appear perfect and sharp. Dissappointly I am returning this to get the T100 or DSC N2 -
October 2, 2007 09:08
4.0/5
I saw this camera during a motorcycle trip and was impressed by the build quality, overall picture quality and ease of use. I was looking for something that was both fun and easy to use.
This camera so far has fit this need, the pictures both on the LCD and my computer are good quality.
Outdoor pictures are incredibly good.
Indoors I have not had the grainy issue reported by others while taking indoor photos, I have however have taken less than 200 pictures. I have used the zoom indoors and was surprised how well the camera rendered colors even though I was shooting at objects beyond the flash range.
The lense placement does make you work initially because it is placed to one side (left) and you find yourself complaining because your fingers are in the way. Five minutes of shooting solves this issue!
The feature set is not very large and that can be a good thing because I am more interested in taking photos without lugging the DSLR around.
I haven't printed any photos yet and I believe the image quality will be similar to what I see on the Computer.
Final note; If you want a camera that will take good pictures, fit in your pocket, easy too use, a large LCD this may be the camera for you.
If you need a lot of settings, viewfinder and more versatility look at other cameras. -
January 2, 2008 12:18
Excellent
2.0/5
I purchased a DSC T-200 as I had very good experience in the bast with a Sony compact model. When I decided to buy a Sub-compact to compliment my DSLR I decided to try a Sony model. It looked nice in store and seemed to be packed with some very nice features. After getting it home and charging the batter that "moment of sad realization" began to creep in. Daylight shots with good lighting came out great, but as the evening progressed the shots taken in lower lighting were soft and grainy. It is obvious that Sony does a lot of "in camera" processing to try to eliminate noise as the darker the setting the softer the images get. Battery life is horrible. Obviously it takes more power than the compact battery can handle to power that 3.5 display. Most of the built in editing features lose they novelty after the first few times you use them. Fun to play with, but no real practical use. The touch screen menus are multiple layered and cumbersome. It is easy to get fingers in the way of the poorly placed lens. Flash is barely adequate.
All in all I probably took 200+ shots over a 4 day period and declared it a failure. It promptly was returned to Costco where I purchased it. Thank goodness for Costco's no questions/no arguments policy. I ordered a Canon 950IS after seeing sample photos from that. Anyone who thinks this Sony model takes great shots hasn't viewed many comparison photos. Carl ZIess lens aside the T-200 couldn't hold a Canon's battery pack. I should have known better having owned a number of Canon DSLR's, but got suckered by the sleek design and cool features. Something to be said for function of design and it is obvious that Sony's emphasis is on design, not function. -
December 26, 2007 10:19
Mediocre
1.0/5
Oops&I just realized CNET has comments for all three color presentations and I entered mine in the less popular: red. That gives me a chance to add a comment following my original comment below.
I've used a DSC T-1 for nearly four years, and Nikon, Minolta, and Canon for four, three and two respectively. I was enamored with the T-1 even for serious pictures. Naturally when the T-1 finally gave in I went for the latest Sony mini, the DSC T-200. I didn't read the reports because of the good experience I've had with the T-1. What a disappointment! The pictures are grainy, noisy and with poor definition. Period, full stop. That is what picture taking is about. At first I couldn't believe it so I placed the pictures next to old ones from the T-1, the Nikon, Minolta and Canon. Not even close. Then I read other reports. Almost half of the new users report the same problem. And as if it isn't expensive enough, you still have to spend extra for basic attachments like a stand to charge the battery while in the camera! Oh why, tell why Sony did you throw out the window such a good reputation, and with an otherwise well designed product? As soon as the Xmas return rush slows down I'll be taking mine back. That is very disappointing because I had come to rely heavily on the DSC's macro amplification mode; indeed, that is one reason I bought this new model.
I noticed that the graininess, noise and lack of definition are not as pronounced when the main subject is predominantly blue. That makes me wonder whether the problem is one of so-called chromatic aberration, either in the lens or in the internal processing of the picture. Whatever the problem, someone at Sony made a ghastly mistake. -
November 15, 2007 12:55
4.5/5
Sony T200 is a best buy. I have owned several Canon A series and SD series cameras up from 3MP, and I like Canon camera very much. T200 is the first Sony camera I bought, so here is my opinion comparing Sony T200 against Canon ones.
1) Adjustable flash intensity: T200 offers three levels of internal flash intensity: soft, normal and strong, user selectable. I haven't seen it on my Canon yet. Soft flash is particularly useful for taking pictures on my kids. Their eyes are so precious to protect. Canon has a scene mode for kids, which might set to soft flash(not sure), but not user selectable for sure.
2) Smile face scene mode: Sony innovation. No Canon has this yet. It makes life easy when picturing my little kids. With other cameras, I have to shoot 10+ pictures in high speed mode and hope that one of them would come out with that beautiful natural smile. Definitely Sony advantage.
3) 3.5" LCD touch screen: another Sony innovation on camera, (only Apple iPod Touch has a similar size). As I measured, 3.5" is the screen horizontal dimension, corner to corner is about 3.75", no Canon has this LCD size at this moment. Bright, clear and beautiful. LCD surface has special coating, so no light reflection like those found on most other cameras. Plain fun to frame a picture and review photos with this Large LCD. Touch screen replaced those many traditional tiny navigation/select buttons, very nice to me. Big Sony advantage.
4) 5X optical lens: most Canon SD series cameras have 3X or 4X lens, but Sony T200 has 5X. Lens quality is very good, the pictures are sharp and clear. Sony advantage.
5) Anti-vibration: Sony uses Super Steadyshot feature which is a sensor based floating feature to compensate for vibration. Canon SD870IS uses lens based stabilization feature. They are both quite effective on this kind of compact cameras. I don't see much difference on pictures.
6) Face detection: both Sony T200 and Canon digit III have this new feature, very good for taking portraits alike. Sony and Canon equal.
7) Simple, easy to use menu: without even looking at the user manual, I can touch through the menus and start taking pictures in minutes. Canon has a good menu system too, I don't see either superior than the other however.
8) Battery: Sony T200 has a relative small 680mAH battery and is rated for 250 shots, it does run down fairly quickly. Canon SD870IS cameras is rated for 270 shots, not any better. Generally speaking, compact cameras using LITHIUM ION rechargeable battery requires frequent charging because their tiny size has usually less than 1000mAH in capacity. If you are looking for cameras with long lasting battery, buy a Canon A series which uses AA NiMH battery with 2500+mAH capacity, you may then totally forget about charging issues. It's bulkier though.
9) Picture quality: nothing above is important if the pictures doesn't turn out great. In side by side comparison, Sony natural color mode is close to Canon vivid color mode. Sony color saturation are great and close to life. Canon pictures is more earth and natural. I personally prefer Sony rich color tones for most of family pictures and sightseeing pictures.
10) Picture noise: outdoors, both Sony and Canon did a good job, no visible noise. Indoors, Canon does a better job in noise reduction than Sony. Canon indoor pictures may be printed directly without noticeable noise. Sony is slightly worse than Canon, although much better than Panasonic FX9 which produced horrible noise. However, T200 doesn't bother me, as I have Neat Image software to filter out the noise. After filtering, Sony T200 pictures turn out to be even better than Canon unprocessed pictures, noise is completely gone.
11) Video: Sony uses MPEG codec while Canon uses motion JPEG codec. For same time duration and 640x480 fine mode, Sony video file is half size of a Canon video file, so memory card may store twice the videos on Sony because of the MPEG codec. This is Sony advantage. In outdoor environment, video quality between Sony and Canon are comparable. Indoors low light, Sony seems to automatically switch to higher ISO to keep higher shuttle speed, the good side is the higher shuttle speed the better image quality (less ghosting like on Canon), the bad side is the higher ISO the slightly more image noise than Canon. Nevertheless, none of Canon or Sony camera-based video can match to an average camcorder. They are both good for day-to-day quick life snap, for best video quality, go for a camcorder.
12) Some reviewer complains about Sony T200 auto mode performance at indoor low light shots. It is true, but this is not just Sony. Like all other cameras, including Canon, auto mode is only suitable for outdoor shots or well lite area, unless you don't care of the picture quality. Tips: for good indoors shots, use T200 program mode where there are more choices in ISO setting, white balance etc for fine tuning to get a good picture.
Overall, I am satisfied with Sony T200, and didn't regret to switch from Canon to Sony. -
November 13, 2007 07:23
4.5/5
Very fast speed to make the camera ready. I like the touch screen and it can avoid multi-functions solid buttons. 5x zoom is enough for normal photo. ISO 3200 works well and it can cover most situations even no flash. In the ISO 3200 the pixel noise is totally acceptable. I am a photography freelance and have canon 20D and several Lens. I think it's excellent as a card digital camera. And I really like the cool back with a big touch screen. The red color is very sharp with stylish shape.
