1. Join Now

    AVForums.com uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Sony DSC-W1 vs DSC-L1

Discussion in 'Photography Forums' started by Funky, Nov 16, 2004.

  1. Funky

    Funky
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2004
    Messages:
    114
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings:
    +5
    I saw both of these cameras in Black. One is 4.1 MP (Sony Cybershot DSC-L1) and the other is 5.1 MP (Sony DSC-W1). The size of DSC-L1 is smaller than a candy bar which is tempting. I am not a proessional potographer by any means, but I am looking to take some great pictures. Size is my main concern, I looked at both reviews and seems both of them have some positive feedback. Any opinions or suggestions. The price difference is about $20 with the W1 being less. I alsp looked at a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX7, but I thought the Sony's Carl Ziss lens will give me a better quality picture. Any opinions or Suggestion. THanks
     
  2. Mango Bob

    Mango Bob
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    513
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    London
    Ratings:
    +0
    I've got a W1 and absolutely love it...I don't know the L1 but it's got a smaller lcd - the 2.5" on the W1 takes up half the back of the camera and makes a big difference in composing and reviewing shots.

    Try 'em both in a camera shop, just snap off a couple of shots with each. I preferred the 'classic' shape to candybar as it fits your hand better...less likely to blur shots accidentally.
     
  3. Funky

    Funky
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2004
    Messages:
    114
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings:
    +5
    Do you think the LCD of W1 is a high quality one? I try the W1 in a camera shop, and find its LCD has excellent colors and quite sharp too. Overall its one of the better LCD's I've seen. Comparing to my old camera, the LCD of the W1 is lightyears ahead.
     
  4. seany

    seany
    Banned

    Joined:
    May 1, 2003
    Messages:
    2,987
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    61
    Location:
    Manchester city
    Ratings:
    +1
  5. Funky

    Funky
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2004
    Messages:
    114
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings:
    +5
  6. seany

    seany
    Banned

    Joined:
    May 1, 2003
    Messages:
    2,987
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    61
    Location:
    Manchester city
    Ratings:
    +1
    It's a drawback not having one. It's always better to frame a shot with a view finder rarther then the screen, for a start the camera is more steady close against the body. We all know how hard it cam be to even see an lcd screen in daylight at times. Lcds are best for reviewing rather then taking photos on the hole
     
  7. jeebas

    jeebas
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I have to agree with that one. I haven't been able to keep my hands steady when taking a shot with the LCD. One time, I had my W1 at the football and took a photo of a penalty shot and the result was a white streak the entire length of the photo. Fastest damn penalty I've ever seen. LOL

    Things I would class as important:
    Optics used (stay away from CMOS)
    Larger optical zoom
    Option of manual controls
    Image resolution (better to have a top quality 3 or 4 Megapixel photo than a poor quality 5 or 6+ Megapixel one)

    And when I got my DSC-W1, I was happy with the choice as it gave me a good mix of the above features. And when used with a good quality tri-pod, the results can be very good (just remember if youlike a picure enough that you want to reproduce the effects, take note of the setting).
     

Share This Page

Loading...