2023 Weekly Challenge Week 25 - Sony DSC-T300

Early smartphones such as the Palm Treo and Blackberry devices had digital cameras on them, but digital phone photography was not really considered a valid thing till 2007 when the iPhone was released, and this forced pocket camera mfg to re-think their strategy of how they would build and market their devices as still being better or more valid then an iPhone.

The iPhone original was the first "Smartphone with a camera" that really grabbed the attention of the public who wanted to have an "all in one" device for everything in their daily lives.  Prior to this one wouldn't leave the house without a pocket camera if they wanted to take photos.

However, Phone Cameras in the late 2000s and early 2010s were still very low quality in compared to what pocket cameras could get. Phone camera sensors maxed out around 5-8mp and had extremely low color bit depth. On top of this early camera phones had crude primitive lenses by today's smartphone standards and made very soft images with blurring distortion as if someone was shooting through a layer of tape, vasoline or plastic wrap.

Because of this quality difference the masses were not fully absorbed into the smartphone photography world at this time.  However some companies such as Sony saw that Smartphone photography was the future and where the casual digital photography market was headed, and they made some cameras that were in essence a "between step between a phone and a pocket camera".

As such pocket cameras would hold on for a little bit longer until the mid 2010s when Smartphone cameras became "good enough" for most people and Smartphone MFG saw this trend and spent billions of dollars in marketing aimed at getting the average consumer to ditch their pocket camera in favor of the newest and greatest smartphone.  But this has already been covered by me in another rant so let's just continue with focusing on the review of this El Camino of pocket cameras.

During this transition era Sony and a few other camera mfg made "Easy to use pocket cameras that felt like using a phone" and they are very strange cameras indeed. 

Sony designated these cameras as their T and TX series; thin and compact pocket cameras with an extremely large rear Touchscreen LCD, no extending lens and a lack of physical buttons other then the shutter and power button and in some cases a zoom rocker. I happen to own one of these (albeit mine is in really rough condition) the Sony DSC-T300:

Released just a year after the iPhone in 2008 it's pretty clear that Sony was making a pocket camera to compete with the iPhone and other Camera capable phones at the time. The DSC-T300 was a dedicated camera that operated like a phone but produced higher quality images with a 10mp 1/2.3" CCD sensor as opposed to the 1/3.2" 2mp sensor on the iPhone.  

My particular T300 has been dropped a number of times by a previous owner. Much like my a37 and a99 it has "issues" but I could still use it well enough for this review. The IBIS on my particular camera is broken, but unlike the a99 it still tries to engage at times on startup it which will shake the whole camera and cause un-useable photos when it kicks on (even when I have it set to off). After a few power cycles it will no longer try and use IBIS for awhile and I can shoot it and get useable photos.

Eventually I'll get a replacement for this camera or a similar T series camera; but its not a high priority considering my thoughts on it which I will get into shortly.

The T300 has a slide cover over the lens which is probably the best thing this camera has going for it. Slide the cover down, take the shot, slide it back up and the camera turns off ready to be stashed in a pocket. This slide cover is more durable then the mechanism used on earlier cameras with this concept such as the Canon Powershot S40 which were a lot more prone to breaking.

Battery life was slightly above average for a camera of this type, and as such I was able to use it for my weekly review on a single charge, casual useage for a full week without having a spare battery or recharging the battery.

It takes the proprietary Sony Memory Stick DUO as did most Sony pocket cameras made before 2011. This is a slight irritation but I do have a card reader that does Sony Memory Stick so its not a huge deal.  However if I was buying this camera in 2008 I likely would have opted for something that took the much more common SD memory card format instead.

It's quick and responsive enough with shooting that I am not frustrated with it; there is no noticeable shutter delay and the shut down and startup times are quick. This makes the T300 certainly fast enough to take a shot and quickly stow in a pocket or camera pouch.

In terms of controls and ergonomics however hands down this is the absolute worst camera I own.  It was the most frustrating camera I have in my collection to shoot not because its slow or unresponsive when taking a shot or takes terrible quality photos like the GE camera for example; but the lack of physical buttons and a non-responsive touchscreen that drives everything has even someone like me asking "Why don't I just take out my phone instead" in 2023 which says something.

On top of this the lens of is at a very strange place off to the upper corner of the camera rather then the center (just like a few of my waterproof cameras which I have not reviewed yet but will likely run into the same frustration).  

This means that when shooting this camera two handed to help support and better frame the photo a finger on my left hand was often blocking part of the lens, showing up on the photo taken with it. It's meant for one handed shooting but with the lack of a front grip its often awkard to shoot it one handed.

So for ergonomics this camera scores a 1 out of 10.  Responsiveness is fine and the Picture Quality is actually really good.  It has a sharp, crisp high contrast CCD sensor which got me some really nice photos in spite of having to throw out a lot because of my finger or the IBIS throwing a tantrum.  

As such I can't rate it the worst camera in my collection, not even close.  I have plenty of cameras I haven't reviewed yet that I am really dreading (such as the Coleman waterproof camera and Kodak easyshare 5mp that will be saved for a week I'm feeling extremely patient).

Since the DSC-T300 was frustrating to hold and control from a usability and ergonomics perspective I don't expect myself shooting it that much at all and it will not be chosen for a re-review next year (though a different T series camera may be tested/reviewed later this year should I come across one for a reasonable price)

This said, the photos that did turn out off of this camera are really nice with wild almost dreamy colors even for a CCD sensor. As such I could see where this camera is a great alternative to an early smartphone and even to this day would produce some different colors and contrast a modern smartphone isn't going to get without applying a filter to the image in Post:

DigiCam Reflections

Yesterday and today I've had some random musings and chats with a few other people about camera equipment, which made me decide to do something other then one of my weekly reviews and reflect and rant some about some conceptions and misconceptions when it comes to camera equipment and digital photography.

Before I go too far into this Rant, I digress that yes doing Digital Photography on a $8,000 camera kit or an iPhone is perfectly valid! You can get some good shots on both and the most important thing about Photography is that the Photographer is pleased with their own Photos; not what others think about them.  

The most important part of Photography is that you enjoy and have a passion for it regardless of what tool(s) you use.  Those who lose sight of this will find their photos to be un-inspired and will even lose interest in doing photography as a whole; finding it either as a chore or something to do mindlessly with no enjoyment of it. But that's a topic for another post.

With that said, let's move onto the Rant and let me geek out about why shooting more then just the "same $5000 camera or my Smartphone" for everything brings me a lot of Joy to a world that is otherwise quite depressing:

To start off we will establish that a DigiCam enthusiast like myself is fighting two mainstream photography "absolutes".  These absolutes are very much on the polar opposite ends of the spectrum.

The first Absolute of many Photographers is "The Most Expensive Equipment is the Best and will make you The Best".  This is the one that has always rubbed me the wrong way; whether it would be would-be "pros" with this mentality or people who do it because "they can" and don't mind flaunting their money.

But first I digress, there is a lot of cameras and lenses in a wide arrangement of prices, so some of the cameras in my collection where I "Only" paid $400-1000 for may be out of someone else's budget and look just as intimidating to them.

So yes, to a point I am slightly Hypocritical when I go off on really high end value cameras as some of the stuff I shoot is still an investment even if its less so. Or it becomes the same investment but spread out in an entire room full of cameras instead, the biggest difference of course is these were purchased over years of collecting vs dropping $5,000-10,000 all at once. 

I am still driving a point home from a prospective of that you don't need expensive gear to take good photos.  Some of my best shots ever were taken on a $100 camera with a $30 lens.  

Even if I still do on occasion take out gear worth slightly more then this I'm also just as happy to find joy in shooting something I found at a thrift store for $20. For me it all comes down to value; as one of my "High End" $800 camera kits is still an incredible bargain over an $8000 one.

It often feels pretty intimidating when someone pulls out their $4000 flagship MICL camera with a $3500 lens and half the time they are just doing it for attention. "Look at how much I spent on my Camera! Isn't it a great camera!?" Is the first thing that comes to mind any time I see someone wield a Sony a9, Canon R3 or Nikon Z9/Z8.  I won't even get into what the few Digital Medium Format shooters out there come across as at first glance to me.

Put in another perspective, here are some recentish photos of some of my camera collection, noting that a few of these cameras I may no longer have and it doesn't include a good portion of my collection (The photos cut off a good portion of my lenses as well as some of the more recent acquisitions such as my working ZS100 and ZS50 pocket cameras and Canon Rebel T2i DSLR)  

This gives you an idea of what I have to play with and I'll point out that every camera in these photos put together in these photos is worth LESS then a "Gear Chaser" full on pro body and "Professional Lens" alone; and this should clarify my perspective on this post:

A DigiCam collector like myself turns away from the "Less is More" mentality of many photographers. Why would I want one camera and 2 lenses when I could have 10 cameras and 20 lenses for the same price???  Our Thrifty nature decries that if we had $3000 we'd rather own 30 $100 cameras vs one $3000 camera body; we feel this would be a better Value to us. 

An enthusiast would see a collection like this and understand that the photos from every one of these cameras is going to look different then the other and that's what we pride ourselves on.

Since I'm a seasoned and experienced photographer I know how to pick up and use almost any (and I do say almost any as a few of these cameras are indeed absolutely terrible and far beyond saving) of these cameras and get some really amazing shots that are just as good or in some cases exceed shots taken with a camera that costs 10-20x more.  A skilled photography veteran will take better photos with a 20 year old DSLR then handing a random person who has never used an advanced camera before a Flagship Mirrorless Camera kit that's worth 40 times more.

I could (and may) someday do an entire argument on "Crop vs APS C" which would tie into this; but suffice it to say there are also old Full Frame DSLRs out there that now fall into the "Bargin Range" of a DigiCam enthusiast, so I can't be hard on that technology just for the sake of arguing sensor sizes.  

To that point there is indeed one Full Frame camera hiding out in this collection (an original Sony a99); but on a good day this camera is only worth about half to a third of what a brand new Entry-Level Full Frame camera would cost to acquire. The Sony a99 also has some unique quirks and flaws which give it the personality I seek (which I will mention when I review it later this year).

---------------------------------

The Second "Absolute" to Digital Photography is Smartphone Photography. Using your phone for photography stems from the adage that the "Best camera is the one you have on you". This is often a Core value of a DigiCam shooter that Smartphone companies have used to Zombify the public at large into accepting that their phone is the only camera they will ever want or need.

In the 2010s Smartphone manufacturers preyed on the people who believe that the only cameras that exist are huge full frame luggable DSLRs or a smartphone. During this time a lot of people were made to believe cameras like a Sony RX100, Canon Powershot G9x or Panasonic ZS100 were "Antiquities of the past that haven't been made in 20 years and my Phone is Better anyway!" without a second thought of considering a pocket camera as a viable alternative for everyday photography.

To a DigiCam enthusiast the answer to "The Best Camera is the one you have on you" is to pull out that Canon Powershot S100 we had tucked into a pocket alongside our smartphone.  This might be a shock to the public at large of why we would do this, but we have learned of a greater truth that many people are now starting to wake up to.

Marketing of Smartphone cameras in the late 2010s was insane.  Smartphone manufacturers made big claims about their phones such as "This Smartphone has a 48 megapixel sensor! Hey that's more then this Professional DSLR which Only has 24 MP!  See the Phone is Better!!!!" to ads depicting misleading impossibly clean photos that were either shot with a full on Pro end Camera and then claimed to have "Been shot with an iPhone! Honest!  We have no way to prove it but you have to believe me this was taken with an iPhone!!!" or used AI and hours worth of Photoshop edits to re-render a blurry smartphone shot into something way better then the phone camera could have possibly captured on its own.

As a result of this constant marketing onslaught of driving people away from standalone digital cameras by 2018 Smartphones had dwindled down the Digital Camera market to the point where serious camera review sites and magazines were starting to use the words "Is this the End for Dedicated Digital Cameras?" and the answer to that was thankfully, No.

In the early 2020s Digital Photography started to bloom on the heels of the Pandemic; and in doing so also started a Renaissance for "Non Smartphone Digital Photography" and the "DigiCam Revolution".  

A substantial amount of people started to wake up from the haze put over them by Smartphone Marketing. They started to look at photos taken from dedicated digital cameras from years past and realize "Hey these photos look different and better then what I can get on my phone!!" and thus the DigiCam revolution was born.

Old digital cameras that were discarded as E-Waste in the late 2010s were suddenly sought after.  Cameras that sold for $5 at garage sales and thrift stores a few years earlier were now popping up for $150 on E-Bay. 

I held out against the swarms of Cellphone shooters with my pocket cameras in the 2010s, and I'm glad I did.  Because I found something cool before the rest of society started to view it as cool.  I was a DigiCam Rebel long before the DigiCam revolution began.  

Even in 2018 I was fighting the good fight against both the $5000 DSLR and the newest iPhone because god damn was it so much more fun and interesting shooting with a collection of  old and weird cameras vs carrying a camera that costs as much as a decent used car or a non-dedicated device that is super awkward to take photos with as my primary camera.

To wrap up this wall of text thought dump I've got two mottos to share: Long Live the dedicated Digital Camera!  Long Live the DigiCam Revolution!

2023 Weekly Challenge Week 24- Sony a290

 The Sony a290 comes from a very short period of time where Sony manufactured traditional DSLR cameras.  While Canon, Nikon and Pentax (the latter has made a statement that they would not switch to Mirrorless) would make DSLRs for years to come and only recently start whispering about ending the long tradition of producing high-end mirror flipper cameras; Sony would be among the early adopters of a "Mirrorless" style system alongside Olympus and Panasonic and become the biggest force to gradually steer the photography industry away from DSLR cameras as "The Standard" for professional imaging.

But for the first 4 years of Sony's "Professional" camera division from 2006 to 2010 Sony did indeed make DSLR cameras just like everyone else.  The interesting thing is however, that Sony would continue to produce and support APS-C CCD sensors right up until the very end of their true DSLR line (as the SLT cameras which replaced them was not an actual DSLR camera) intermixed with CMOS sensor cameras. Sony continued development on CCD sensors a full year after Nikon abandoned CCD technology in 2009 with the low-end consumer D3000 which re-used the same sensor developed in 2006 for the Nikon D60, D80 and D40x.

I only own one Sony DSLR and it is one of the most barebones DSLRs Sony ever made. The direct competitor to the Canon Rebel TX lines or Nikon D3xxx bodies; a Sony a290:

Released in 2010 the Sony a290 would be one of the last DSLRs Sony made alongside the a390 (same body with a tilt screen and live view) a450 and a580 (which were slightly higher end models with the CMOS sensor).  It also had the last CCD APS C sized sensor ever used in a large camera brand, a 14mp APS C sized CCD sensor; and this is what really makes this camera shine and worth holding onto inspite of the lack of features and somewhat mediocre AF system and write buffer.

The other quality that makes this camera unique and fun to use outside of the CCD sensor is the Sony a Mount; which allows you to use Rock Solid vintage Minolta lenses with full Auto Focus and electronic aperture control.  Combine these together and you get some absolutely dreamy photos out of this camera.

The Sony a290 is not going to be a camera I rely on at an event.  Like the Nikon D200 I reviewed earlier ISO noise is pretty terrible above 800 which limits this camera, as with many older cameras in my collection to a sunlight shooter only.

It has a slow burst rate and a fairly terrible buffer (unlike the D200) as I could hit the maximum number of shots per burst and have to stop shooting often even with just doing casual street photography.  

That said it has a fast write speed and can support higher speed SDHC cards meaning the camera could shoot RAW files easily and dump its small buffer to card in a second or two. The pause in shooting between bursts as the buffer filled therefore was quite manageable and I never ran into the camera having to wait to write files to the card before I could power it down unlike a lot of my older CF based DSLRs.

This is a great camera for someone who wants to go "back to basics" with Digital Photography and honestly feel like they are shooting a more modern film DSLR with the convivence of shooting digitally. There is no live view nor video mode so you have to be comfortable shooting through the viewfinder at all times.  

As someone who started on a Canon Rebel XTi (a camera which I own but have yet to review) this mindset is comfortable for me and shooting cameras like this that have no LiveView shooting option brings me back to my roots in Digital Photography. It's refreshing for the times I need to slow down and re-think my approach to Photography.

And now I'll let the sample images I took this week speak for themselves of why I won't ever trade or sell the Sony a290 from my collection (Unless it was to upgrade to the a390); even if I had considered doing so in the past:

2023 Weekly Challenge Week 23- Canon Powershot Pro1

The Early/Mid 2000's was the golden age for the Bridge Camera; a larger point and shoot design that offered the ergonomics and controls/feel of a DSLR with the ease of use of a pocket camera.  

Bridge cameras are still made today (I reviewed a more recent one in a previous post) but are in a much more niche market then they were in the 2000s. Most modern bridge cameras like the Nikon P1000 offer a very wide range of optical zoom in a more compact body then what a comparable sized lens for a DSLR or MICL camera would need to obtain the same focal range.

During the early 2000's however bridge cameras were extremely popular and fell squarely into the Prosumer market; offering some features that were otherwise only on a DSLR while having a more attractive price to a consumer and easier to use. The term "Bridge Camera" came from this prosumer adage; they were the "bridge" between a cheap consumer point and shoot pocket camera and a full blown Professional DSLR. 

These cameras also offered video which at the time was considered to be a consumer only feature and not something professionals would want in a non-dedicated video camera, boy have times changed.  This week we look at the first of three of my 2000's era bridge cameras the Canon Powershot Pro1.

Like a number of bridge cameras of this era this camera used a 3/4" CCD sensor.  This sensor size is uncommon in anything but early 2000s bridge cameras but was the "larger sensor size smaller then APS C but bigger then a typical pocket camera" sensor that the 1" and MFT sensors fill today.

Released in 2004 the Canon Powershot Pro1 has an 8mp CCD sensor with a very limited ISO range (50-400). At the time, small sensors rarely could go beyond ISO 400 or 800 so having a max ISO of only 400 was not a deal breaker and actually pretty common for digital cameras in the early 2000s.

The Canon Powershot Pro1 touts a fairly "Average" 7x optical zoom.  Which is a good range for Street Photography but falls a little short for being useful for Nature photography unless its a subject you can get really close to it, IE the turtle I got photos of in the example photos at the end of this review.

As a Prosumer camera this camera had a lot of features one would expect in a more pro/prosumer camera including RAW shooting, Priority Modes and full Manual shooting along with an EVF, tilting rear screen and a secondary display above the grip which gave basic information such as the aperture, shutter speed, drive mode, remaining shots and battery life.  It also included a hotshoe so it could use external flashguns and sync controllers.

In the mid 2000's the Canon Powershot Pro1 was in a crowded market for 8mp 3/4" sensor Bridge Cameras. During this time companies often used buzzwords and highlighted "features" to make their camera stand out in a crowded prosumer camera market.  The Pro1 did this by having "Pro" in the name and claiming to have the first (and only) Canon L series "professional" grade lens on a non-interchangeable lens camera.  

In reality the Powershot Pro1 was not any better then its competition and suffered from a lot of issues such as a variable max aperture and severe chromatic aberration (which I did not run into during this test but have encountered with this camera in the past)

Overall the Canon Powershot Pro1 along with other early bridge cameras such as the Sony f828 and Minolta DiMage A2 (which will be reviewed at a later week) are a lot of fun to use because they feel and operate a lot differently from modern cameras.  This was during a time where camera mfg were not afraid to experiment with wild designs and features instead of being a lot closer to the same offerings as they are today.

However, the Canon Powershot Pro1 requires a lot of patience to use and as such would never be one of my daily shooters (or likely on my list of cameras to re-review).  Its optical zoom is frustratingly slow to zoom in and out, you really need to know what focal length you want to use before framing the shot as otherwise it will be hard to adjust and re-frame before your subject moves.

The touted "Ultrasonic High Speed Focus motor" is a blatant lie as the AF speed and accuracy of the Powershot Pro1 is frustratingly slow. It is about on par with other bridge cameras it was competing with however.

As mentioned before the max ISO of this camera is 400.  And its noisy above 200.  I locked my ISO to 100 for my test shots so that I wouldn't run into said noise which limited me to using it outdoors during ideal lighting conditions (luckily in early June these ideal conditions are common).

Another common "flaw" with early 2000's bridge cameras the Canon Powershot Pro1 shares is how slow its write speed of RAW files to card was. Unless you want to wait 10-15 seconds between shots (yes it really takes that long to write a single RAW file to the card) you are best sticking to JPEG mode, which is what I did. 

I'd expect to repeat a lot of this review when I get to the Minolta DiMage A2 and Sony f828 on the camera operation.  But the cool thing about old bridge cameras is the ergonomics are all different so there will be a different "feel" to shooting the other two classic digicam bridge cams I own when I get to those cameras and make it different enough to warrant a review.  Of these cameras the Canon Powershot Pro1 feels the most "neutral" and "modern" from an ergonomic and aesthetic point of view.

That all said, the strength common to these 2/3" CCD bridge cameras is their unique sensor. Sure, they lack the ability to do low light but they have amazing color rendition and contrast.  If you are patient enough with this camera and shoot it in lighting conditions that it likes it can produce some of the best looking "classic DigiCam" quality photos you can expect to get.  

2023 Weekly Challenge Week 22: Canon Powershot A510

 A few weeks ago I reviewed the Canon Powershot A410, and this week I borrowed one of my GF's other Digicams (this one without having the story of regret of "purchasing" it as it was her Father's) a Canon A510.

The Canon A510 is a more upgraded version from the same era as the A410 with better ergonomics and more controls including the ability to do Priority and even Manual shooting modes. It also has a more compact less brick-like form factor and ergonomically is a lot more comfortable to shoot.  But before I go too far into this camera let's show some product photos from my phone:

Another difference between the A410 and the A510 is the sensor. While they are both 3.2mp CCD chips the A510 is a 1/2.7" (which is a fairly standard pocket camera sensor size) and the A410 has a Tiny 1/3.2" sensor instead; a sensor about the size of what was used in the very first cellphones with cameras.

As with almost all early pocket cameras the ISO range is very limited, in this case 400.  So you are stuck to "Film Like" ISO sensitivities, making the A510 an outdoor only shooter unless you can get up close and personal with its small xenon flash.

As you can see the A510 has the more atypical Canon Mode Dial which includes some creative modes along with the PASM modes. It also has a 4 way control function pad on the back, though my copy has a broken sensor on the right button of this Pad.  Therefore I could not operate this camera in Manual Modes (as I could not adjust any settings up) so I left it at Auto ISO in P mode with -1/3 exposure (which I cannot raise back up) and it still shot pretty consistently at these settings.

The A510 is still a clunky camera and is frustrating to use. Like many early 2000's digicams its slow to focus, often misfocuses and has a little bit of a shutter lag but its not the worst I've reviewed.  It was an enjoyable enough experience doing Street Photography with this thing, improved over the A410 for sure, and I only wished the right menu button would have worked so I could have set the correct date or played with the Manual and Priority modes.

This camera also had a few accessory lenses which could be mounted on a filter adapter that clipped onto the accessory ring.  My GF owns the adapter and two of the lens adapter (the Telephoto and Macro one) but I didn't unfortunately have a chance to use them.

Overall this is a good entry camera for those wanting the early/mid 2000's era "Digicam" look and feel.  The Canon CCD is sharp and extremely vibrant. The 3.2mp sensor is just big enough for Social Media posts (they work out to be 2048 x X which is a pretty standard size for Flickr/Facebook/Instagram etc) so long as you don't crop them.  As such none of my sample photos from the camera are cropped, and it really challenges you to look at composition as you shoot the photo as you don't have the wiggle room to crop it in POST like you do with more modern Digital cameras.

If you want to slow down and go to the very basics of a Digital Camera and learn about improving your Composition and being insanely patient with taking a photo the Canon A510 could be just right for you.  If you want to shoot Nature Photography or your child's Soccer Game you should probably look for something a bit more advanced and less pokey to respond.