Sony Cybershot W220 (with 8 test pictures)

[TimSummers]

Hi,

Firstly, let me admit that I'm not 100% what I'm looking for by posting this thread, I just wanted to stick some pictures out there, let some other people look at them, and then hopefully get some feedback.

I must add, that these are just (very) random pictures that I took whilst walking my son to school this morning, they are by no means posted to show my photography style, or such, they are just random photos taken when I had the chance.

You see, basically I'm not happy at all with the quality of the images that it produced, they are nowhere near as good as the photo's my digi-camera takes (granted, it's more expensive), and was just wondering if 1) if it's the camera choise or 2) that's just what they're like whilst using a £120 camera so get used to it.

Hope that kinda makes sense? Now for a little bit of background.

Last week I bought my Mrs a new digital camera, wanted something cheap and small that she could take out with her etc, you know, the standard down the pub for facebook type, when she's out at the park with the little'un, and other general photo's.

I admit, that I could have taken a bit more time choosing the camera, but eventually I decided on the Sony Cybershot W220. She liked what it looked like, so that's the bottom line really in her eyes.

She took some photo's, yeah so-so. She took them on the 'fully automatic' setting, I got home, downloaded them onto the computer, and was very underwhelmed by them!

This morning, being the 'tsch, she doesn't know what she's doing with it' type of person, I took it whilst walking to school with my son.

Below are a sample of pictures that it took (I've resized them as they'd have been huge):

Are these the kind of quality that you'd expect from this camera price range?

All these were taken with the 'auto' setting where the camera automatically detects the surrounding and sets it to what it feels is correct.

Is there something that maybe I should do (settings wise) to get better quality pictures.

Saying all this though, looking at them here, at this size, they don't actually look all that bad, so I'm supposing that if I were to get them actually as a photo they'd look kind of similar. It's just when they are full sized, and I'm trying to crop certain bits from the origional image they tend to get a little pixalated and generally look a bit rubbish.

I can always post up the direct image at full size if that would make things easier to play around with?

Comments if anyone has any.

Thanks

[Pirate!!]

I think this needs to be in the photo sharing forum ?!?

[TimSummers]

Thanks

[weetsie]

Originally Posted by TimSummers

Is there something that maybe I should do (settings wise) to get better quality pictures.

in good light e.g daylight force the iso to its minimum of 100. for some reason P&S cameras like to whack up the iso in good light. i was in spain a few weeks ago and in broad daylight the auto was choosing to expose at 200ISO and 1/500th shutter speed when the camera can go as low as 64ISO.