I am a semi pro photographer and I own a Canon 7D with 2 primes (50mm f/1.4 and 100mm f/2.8L IS) and 2 zoom lenses (16-35mm f/2.8L and 70-200mm f/4L IS). I believe if you are a photographer or a picture lover, you HAVE to have your camera with you at all times. But practically, I miss hundreds of pictures when I don't have any of my cameras with me. The 7D is an excellent camera in every regard, but its size makes it impossible to carry it in my pocket right? So, a point and shoot is ideal for that.
I have a wonderful Sony DSC-H3 point and shoot I bought about 5 years ago or so. I am very happy with it, but its battery recently died. I did my research for a new camera, since why pay almost 60 bucks for a new battery when for 200 or 300 I can get a brand new more advanced camera? So, I found the Sony NEX-5 as a great replacement, but I did not want to deal with the bulkiness of those lenses that comes with. My second option was this Sony DSCHX9V. I read amazing reviews about its video capabilities. And yes, 60fps was my deciding point. My wife tapes me when I play soccer with my buddies and I thought, it'll be cool to perhaps slow down my ultra quick awesome soccer moves with more clarity at 60fps. Plus, the DSCHX9V uses the same battery as my beloved DSC-H3 ( Sony InfoLITHIUM G Rechargeable Lithium-Ion Battery NP-FG1 ). I thought: 'Cool, I can have a better 'video' camera and a battery I can use with both cameras!' Great deal right? (and since the DSCHX9V does not come with an external battery charger [you have to charge it with the battery inside the camera], I could use the DSC-H3's charger with my 'new' battery).
Well, I forgot to remember I disregarded the negative comments I read about the picture quality. And after trying it out for about a week, I gotta tell ya; the picture quality is not great. IMHO, not better than even my beloved and older DSC-H3. Let me explain you what I mean. You take a picture with the DSCHX9V and it looks FAN TAS TIC on your little camera's 3 inches screen. But, go ahead and zoom in on those pictures. They are ALL smudged. Guess what will happen if you print them? Well, depending what you are using to print them and where you print them. It might be just fine for most pictures but definitely not good for professionals. I understand this is not a professional camera, but it is definitely not for me. I edit my pictures with Lightroom and Photoshop CS5, and when I zoom in on those pictures... boy they look bad. The panorama feature is so cool, but zoom in on those pictures too. It looks like they been captured by video mode instead of still camera mode.
I believe or at least like to believe it is a software issue. As I zoom in, it feels to me that in order for the camera's software to reduce or eliminate noise, it compromises the quality and sharpness of the picture.
That is actually what happens when you reduce noise with Lightroom or Photoshop. And then is up to you to decide where's the sweet spot between reducing noise or reducing detail and/or sharpness. You can mask those details out of the noise reduction section in Photoshop (background noise for instance), but again that is up to you. If you use a general noise reduction recipe for every single picture, most likely most pictures will come out out of that sweet spot. And yes, like somebody else already said; when you zoom in, they look 'plasticy'.
Back to the roots, this camera makes wonderful HD video, but at least in my case; I am looking for a still photography camera that also does video but not a full 'video' camera. So, if you are looking for a cheap 'video' camera that also takes pictures; this might be the camera for you. If you are looking for a great still photography camera that also does video, I would recommend you keep looking. Unless you don't care about the picture details I mentioned above. If so, you might be better suited with an even cheaper camera. Sony, also has the CSWX9 and the CSH70 for around or under 200 bucks.
I finally returned it and got a Canon SX230HS. I wanted a Canon S95 mainly because of being able to take RAW files. But, it is 'just a bit' older at the moment, then the 230's zoom (14x optical) and Full HD video (1080p), convinced me over the S95's 3.8x optical zoom and standard HD video (720p). I read the S95 is getting a predecessor soon. If it happens to have a better zoom, Full HD and RAW files and it is within the 30 days of my 230 purchase, I might return my 230 and get 'that' camera.
