Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W380 specs

By Cliff Smith

Reviewed:

specs
Quick Glance
Camera type Ultra Compact
Optical Zoom 5
Megapixels 14.1
Physical Specifications
Dimensions Width 91.7
Depth 51.9
Weight (body only) 124g including battery and memory card
Features
Camera type Ultra Compact
Optical Zoom 5
Megapixels 14.1
Image Sensor 1/2.3-inch Super HAD CCD
Optical focal length 4.25 to 21.3mm
Viewfinder N/A
Shutter speed 2 secs to 1/6000
Auto focus 9-point TTL: Multi-zone, centre zone, spot
Manual focus N/A
Video (max res/format) 1280x720 at 30fps
Max output resolution 4320x3240
Other resolutions 4320x2432, 3648x2736, 2592x1944, 2048x1536, 1920x1080, 640x480
Focus range Wide 10 to infinity, Tele 50cm to infinity
Exposure metering Multi-pattern, Centre-weighted, Spot
Image Stabilisation Optical
ISO settings Auto, 80, 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200
LCD Monitor 2.7-inch, 230k dots
Flash range 0.2-4.8m (wide) 0.5m -2m (tele)
Flash modes Auto, Forced Flash, Slow Syncro, No Flash
White balance modes Auto, Daylighy, Cloudy, Fluorescent1,2,3, Incandescent, Flash, Underwater
Drive modes Single shot, Continuous, Auto bracketing
Image formats Still images, JPEG, Video: MPEG4
Picture adjustments None
Movie length Card capacity
Self timer 2/10 secs
Memory card slot data) Memory Stick Duo/PRO Duo/Pro-HG Duo/SD/SDHC
Supplied memory 45MB built-in
Batteries supplied 630mAh Li-ion
Charger supplied Yes
A/V output PAL/NTSC
Charging/Computer Connection USB 2.0
AV Out Yes
Manual 27-page printed basic manual, 137 page PDF manual on CD

ruthless

July 23, 2010, 3:00 pm

Excellent review as ever Cliff. I've been looking for a compact around that price that performs really well in low-light conditions. Seems like this could be it.

Jazzyboy

July 23, 2010, 4:42 pm

This camera was also reviewed earlier this year by Mark Goldstein on another site. According to him IQ is disappointing and he posted sample pictures to prove his point.


These pictures were shot mostly under a grey sky. So that may be the difference; or is it sample variaton?

the near side

July 23, 2010, 5:54 pm

Thanks for yet another review. I'm thinking of buying a Sony Wx1 or W380. A modest price difference between these two cameras is not important to me. What are the relative strengths and weaknesses?





Thanks for all the info and entertainment!

cliche

July 23, 2010, 6:20 pm

@ruthless - my Fuju F31FD is remarkable is low light. Old now but is still a legend in photo circles for low light

FordPrefect

July 23, 2010, 6:23 pm

The reviewer on Pocket-lint complained that the camera has a plastic case and poor build quality as well as poor video quality and excessive noise due to the 14.1 mega-pixel sensor. Was he even looking at the same camera? Picture noise is something that all reviewers seem to complain about as manufacturers cram more pixels into their sensors. Is the Sony better or worse than the competition as this camera might finally tempt me into replacing my ageing Fuji.

Steve 12

July 23, 2010, 8:37 pm

@FordPrefect


Their review is indeed very different, but their link to purchase the camera (for an amazing £119.99) is actually the W320. So maybe they are reviewing that one with the wrong photo set ? Looking at the sony website does not help in identifying whether the W320 is plastic or not though

snap happy 1

July 25, 2010, 2:01 am

The main difference between the WX1 and W380 is in the sensor. The WX1 has a backlit sensor (Exmor R CMOS) which should help the camera perform better in lowlight. Other features on the WX1 like Handheld Twilight and Anti Motion Blur are also meant to give lower noise and sharper images in low light conditions. Also, the WX1 has a brighter lens at F2.4, which also should help in low light photography.

Money

July 25, 2010, 3:51 am

Great review Cliff, I am usually be the one that criticised Sony for producing inferior cameras, but this time, I think Sony is on the right track.


Especialy the G-Lens, it is an amazing quality glass that produces excellent images; however the sensor is still too small for a 14 megapixel camera, as result in some compression artifacts.


Nevertheless, it is a good effort from Sony.





If Sony decided to put a 1/1.6 sensor on a similar camera with metal body, and supports RAW file format - it would be an awsome combination, and it may even rivals Panasonic LX3.

noham

July 27, 2010, 9:03 pm

I have the same question regarding the wx1 vs 380 - saw people saying wx1 got issues with flash at 24mm - do you guys confirm? also trusted reveiw seems to say picture quality of wx1 is inferior to 380 - however wx1 features looks better (cmos and other options) - any thoughts ?

snap happy 1

August 6, 2010, 5:22 pm

My preference is WX1 as I think the backlit sensor helps in low light photography. If you're not in a hurry to purchase, Sony is about to launch the WX5 in September, which is the newer version of WX1.

Cake600

September 24, 2011, 12:18 am

If you get a good price on the W380 take it. A phenomenol camera the size of a bank card that in good daylight not only matches the LX5 and S95 in many areas but can go head to head with APS dSLRs for sheer detail capturing power. The f2.4 24mm wide angle lens is superb - with only a tad of softness at the corners. Super fast focussing in any light (or not light even) but with a slow shot-to-shot time which may be a limiting factor for some. I shoot with the 16:9 format which gives 11 megapixel resolution - files that make terrific 14" wide prints and even look pretty good at 19". The build quality is top drawer and the sleek design is smart. All in all something quite amazing in a form factor this small.

comments powered by Disqus