Customer Reviews

Sony Cybershot DSCS90 4.1 MP Digital Camera with 3x Optical Zoom

5 star:		(35)
4 star:		(21)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

After much deliberation and research, given I was about to shell out over 300 bucks, I went with the Sony DSC-S90. I won't go on and on about specifications since you can read them for yourselves. But after using this camera for almost one week, I have found it to be very easy to use, it gives you great looking pictures (thanks to Carl Zeiss and 4.1 megapixels), and it even takes MPEG movies. The HUGE 2.5 inch LCD screen is bright and clear, and you're given the option to use the optical viewfinder. A handy feature in bright sunlight.

The only reason I didn't give it 5 stars was because of the lackluster design of the data/video/audio cable. It plugs into the bottom of the camera, which means you have to lay it on it's back (the LCD side, ouch!) or its front (the lens side, double ouch!!). I'd hate to damage or scratch either of these, although in all fairness, the lens is closed during file transfer process.

I'd recommend this beauty, but get yourself at least a 256 Meg Memory Stick Pro, a small carrying case, and add those to the price. ENJOY!!

I work in the Camera department at Best Buy. I personally own a Sony camera, last year's DSC-P73, which was the 4-megapixel "little brother" to the 5-megapixel DSC-P93. The P73 and P93 have been replaced with this year's models, the DSC-S60 and DSC-S90. This time around, they're both shooting at a 4-megapixel resolution.

The DSC-S90 offers an excellent starter package, including the rechargable batteries (the midline S60 no longer ships with rechargable batteries like my P73 did).

So if I love this camera so much, what prevents it from getting 5 stars?

It lost one star for the batteries. Sony's higher end models use lithium ion battery packs, which offer longer battery life and allow for a smaller camera. The difference in potential size was most pronounced last year - compare the DSC-P93 and DSC-P100, which were essentially the same camera except for the P100 shipping with a Carl Zeiss Vario Tessar lens and a lithium battery pack. The P100, while the same overall shape, was much slimmer due to the small rectangular battery pack.

The other star? Value. Working in retail, value is a concept you find is very important to customers. The price of the DSC-S90 averages (among several retailers) about $40 to $50 higher than the DSC-S60. The two models differ in only two respects: 1) the larger screen on the DSC-S90 and 2) the inclusion of NiMH AA batteries and a charging unit with the DSC-S90. However, Sony sells an accessory kit which includes the same batteries and charger as the DSC-S90, plus a Sony carrying case, for $40. Due to the smaller size of the DSC-S60's LCD, the same batteries will last longer... so for the same price, you get a camera which doesn't drain batteries as quickly and which comes with a carrying case... as long as you can stand the 2" instead of 2.5" screen. Most people can.

This Camera is one of the best in its price range. It takes beautiful clear pictures and can be used right out of the box, but its worth learning all its features. The included memory holds about 20-25 pictures so I upgraded to 128mb. I reccomend getting a 128mb card and the Sony camera case. Not only is this one of the best cameras in its class it includes decent software and rechargeable batteries that are at least a 20$ value.
HIGHLY reccomend over canon,kodak, and fuji. One more thing this camera has CARL Zeiss lens (if you dont know, great lens) all the competetors have generic lens.

I agree with the user regarding is comments from Don Cambridge. Don's review appears to be from a person that is not experienced with camera's. The quality of the pictures will only come out as good as the ability of the user's knowledge to adjust the settings. I have taken pictures indoors without flash and they come out excellent but this required manual changes. The camera even has a shutter speed of 30 seconds which is awesome because most cameras out there only have anywhere from 4-15 seconds. 30 seconds will allow anyone to take pictures at 80 ISO and capture any type of light. For any person looking to purchase this camera, I highly recommend that you read the online "professional reviews" from camera review sites. This camera is highly recommended and is a serious competitor against Canon's A520 which this camera was more than likely made to compete against. You will not find any other camera out there for this price that offers manual controls, 2.5" display, AF light and excellent picture quality.

Although this is my first digital camera, I did a fair amount of research and shopping to decide on this camera. I am a "techie" and "gadget guy" by nature, but this camera is very easy to use right out of the box. A primary reason I bought this camera was for its ease of use for my wife and children.

My decision came down to two cameras: this and the Canon Powershot A520. They have very similar specifications. However, for the same price, the Sony came with rechargeable batteries and charger and has a WHOPPING 2.5 inch LCD screen!

I am very pleased with my purchase and how the camera performs so far.

I got this camera for Christmas and have already taken about 50 pictures with it. Love the big screen on this camera and it has a lot of great features that the average user probably won't ever use, but I hope to. My only complaint so far is that the cable you use to download the pictures to your PC is not your standard USB cable. It's a combo cable with outs to video and USB. Sounds convenient, until you lose the cable. I'll be guarding this cable with my life.

this camera is a 5 star camera. it has a very big LCD screen which can be very helpful and gives you a much clearer picture then most digital cameras would. the picture it takes is execptional; very crisp and has a good picture taking time, not too much of a delay (unless the flash is on). the only thing is a can't seem to find a 'sport' mode or one with a lot of movement. but over all its a great camera that i would recommend to anyone. it's easy to use and many differnet settings to use and also the cable for hooking it up to the tv is great.

I bought the Sony DSC-S90 after much research. On paper it looked great, with the huge lcd and great movie mode making it stand out from its competitors (I also looked at Canons and Kodaks in this price range). BUT...

After receiving the camera, I started taking pics of my kids around the house, and the results were terrible. The subject in front of the camera was far too bright, and the background far too dark. Red eye was quite bad, several pics were inexplicably blurry (in auto flash mode, not in any manual setting!) and to top it off, the pictures had a yellowish tint, almost as if taken in sepia, though they were not.

Granted, these pics were taken at night under indoor lighting, not ideal conditions. So I did a comparison with our old camera, 4-year-old, 2MP, Kodak DX3600, taking several flash photos of people under the same conditions. And lo and behold, the cluncky old Kodak gave much more pleasing results than the shiny new Sony, with better colors, less blur, less red-eye, and a more balanced exposure of subject and background.

So this camera's going back. I haven't even tried it outdoors in daytime, since I take quite of few of my pics indoors and need a camera that can turn in a decent performance under those conditions.

A few other somewhat annoying things:
1. camera size is a little small for me and it did not feel very solid in my hands.
2. There is a "red-eye reduction" flash mode, but to turn it on or off you have to cycle through a whole bunch of menus, rather than have it available at the touch of a button, as (again) it is on our old Kodak. And when you do finally turn it on, you sometimes still get red-eye.
3. The USB cable connects to the bottom of the camera (!) meaning that as you transfer pics to the PC you have to lay it down either on the lens side or on the lcd side, and it's quite awkward. Presumably it's down there so it can also connect to the Sony cradle (sold separately). But again, the old Kodak does a better job, since it has BOTH a connector on the bottom if you have the cradle, and also one on the side, if you don't.

In short, there's less to this camera than meets the eye, and I'm back to the drawing board.

Above , a customer Cambridge Don, complaint that this camera is awful for taking pictures with flash.....and gave this camera two stars
well obviously he doesn't know how to take pictures with digital cameras This camera as well as any of its kind example Canon Powershot "do not need" any flash for even very low lighting conditions and the pictures come out awesome....In fact indoors is better just "not to use flash" at all...
So first learn how to take a picture before giving a bad rating....

I was given this camera for Christmas in 2005, and have never been happier. It not only takes great pictures, but the battery holds a charge for a really long time. It is compact enough to stick in my purse and take anywhere I want to go, and I never have to worry if the batteries are charged -- they always are! One feature that seems more and more difficult to find in digital cameras is the date stamp on the photo. I love this feature and accidentially purchased an Olympus digital camera that didn't have it. I owned a Sony digial camera before this one and loved it, but this one is even better.