I'm looking for a compact camera, and trying to figure out which of these 2 cameras to get. I can't decide which one is better.
*I couldn't post the Sony Style links.. because I'm a new user to Stack Photo..
Asked
Active
Viewed 902 times
2 Answers
0
I would choose the DSC-WX5 over the DSC-HX5 for these reasons:
- It's newer
- It's cheaper
- It has a faster aperture
- It has a better flash
However it is important to notice that the HX5 has a 'better' focal range, 25-250mm versus the WX5's 24-120mm. If you feel you need this added zoom, then the HX5 is definitely the one to get. They both have a digital zoom feature as well but it's best advised to not use this as it just zooms into the image that's already there (i.g It's like opening a photo on your computer and zooming in on it past its resolution). Another thing I noticed with the HX5 is that it has GPS which may be useful for geotagging your photos if you're into that.
When choosing a point and shoot camera I generally go for whatever is cheapest since the cameras contain similar sensors. But don't just listen to me. Look for features you'll actually use.
This is really all about what you're going to use the camera for and how you're going to use it.
P.S Don't worry too much about the cameras' megapixels (resolution) you'll be able to get very large photos from both of these.
Ava Gailliot
- 166
- 4
-
I chose the HX5 over the WX5 for exactly those reasons: GPS and better zoom are more important to me than newer/cheaper/better flash. Which only reinforces your point: it depends on what you want out of your camera. – Matt Bishop Dec 10 '10 at 17:41
-
Cheaper is always good! I was leaning towards the WX5. I wanted to get some options from other people. – DjFarout Dec 10 '10 at 18:37
0
This might not help you tell which is better, but (my site) Snapsort can give you a break down of the differences between the HX5 and WX5.
waterlooalex
- 1,060
- 5
- 11
-
2Just an aside: I think you're seriously misusing the DXOmark overall sensor scores by labeling them as "image quality". The sensor score number is actually only a technical reading of a few of the factors that go into image quality. And,since it is a composite of the factors they measure, you double-count by also including their individual measurements (like dynamic range). And your presentation of color depth is egregiously misleading, with, for example 22.7 bits vs 22.6 bits being described as "Distinguishes around 10% more colors". – mattdm Dec 10 '10 at 18:26
-
I once went into a tourist-destination cave, and like all such caves, something had to be the most something-est in the world. With this one, it was "the cave with the most different colors in its rock formations!" Once we got inside, it quickly became clear that all of the different colors were shades of grayish-brown. – mattdm Dec 10 '10 at 18:28
-
Thanks for the feedback. Yes, in the 'reasons to consider' I see what you mean. The actual scoring/ranking does not double count though (re image quality and dynamic range etc). Color depth - how would you suggest we present it? The site calculate # of colors (2^n). Re the sensor score being image quality, are you thinking we should name it something closer to "sensor score"? I agree, it doesn't take into account sharpness and other image quality metrics. – waterlooalex Dec 10 '10 at 18:31
-
Hopefully your camera captures good color depth, so you could fully capture the shades of grayish-brown :) – waterlooalex Dec 10 '10 at 18:39
-
-
@DjFarout - awesome thx! You might also like my other new site: http://lenshero.com – waterlooalex Dec 10 '10 at 23:26
-
@Alex -- mind if I turn that into its own question for this site? (Or you could — I already have an answer in mind, but maybe others have helpful suggestions too.) – mattdm Dec 11 '10 at 01:12
-