Do you know any bad or good things on sony cybershot T9 (6MP)digicam. It looks so amazingly beautiful despite lacking an optical viewfinder. If you have one and aware of any drawbacks, plizz post ur comments.

Too slim for me. Easy to drop.

here'z the beauty

here'z da back view

Go for Canon SD 400. Very cute looking with 5 MP and 3X optical zoom. It rocks...

One more

saajan555, go for Panasonic FX9. Thought I myslef am a Sony user, I don't really like it. Beide memory sticks are x too.

This one not bad. It has got anti shock function.

Ok to go for a camera because of its look is moronic. I have owned two sony cyber shots and my experience has been not that great. It takes mediocre pictures. It seems to take great pictures as long as you are outdoors during the day. Soon as you take pictures indoors and nights, its awful. I think the compact design comprises picture quality too. My suggestion is to go for a larger built camera with good reputation. I think canon beats sony by far in camera category.

Cybershot T9 can be shot at up to ISO 640 (an advantage over most of its rivals)
Higher the ISO, less the light is needed to get a picture. Therefore it is suitable for taking pics in setting where the available light is insufficient like for example not so well lit indoors settings, night shots etc.

Typically most Point-n-Shoot(PnS) cameras come with ISO sensitivity of ISO 400.
Here is a table that shows how ISO sensitivity works with any camera( both digital and film):
At ISO 1600 you need only half as much light as at ISO 800 to get a picture.
At ISO 800 you need only half as much light as at ISO 400
At ISO 400 you need only half as much light as at ISO 200
At ISO 200 you need only half as much light as at ISO 100
At ISO 100 you need only half as much light as at ISO 50
And so on.

Bro, don't forget when you incraese your ISO, u r also inviting noise.

T9 also features "Anti-shake" image stablization feature. This "anti shake" feature was first introduced by Konica-Minolta in its MAXXUM 7D digital SLR camera. Now Konica-Minolta has sold its camera making operation to Sony Corporation therefore it is well logical to say that Sony migrated this "anti shake" feature of MAXXUM 7D DSLR into Sony's Cybershot T9 Point-n-Shoot Camera.

Getting higer ISO sensitivity and "Anti-shake" image stablization feature at the same time like getting not only one advantage but getting two advantages at the same time.
Higer ISO sensitivity means getting brighter pictures than its rivals(with ISO 400) and Image Stablization features means sharper pictures (less motion blurrs).

I dont use point-n-shoot camera so I can overcome these ISO sensitivity and image stablization issues by using my DSLR(and film SLR) in a manual mode.

Given the choice, I would go for FX9, memory stick is too x and I don't like a camera which is easy to slip off ( drop).

Wow !! You must be loaded, you own a DSLR cmaera. So do you happen to be a pro or just got started into photography ?

In digital cameras "digital artifacts" or "noise" is similar to "film grain" on film.

The down side of using higher ISO is that higer ISO tends to show "noise". The noise becomes an issue when the picture is enlarged.

Digital camers try to overcome this issue of "noise" by applying "noise suppressing" filter, therfore when a ditigal camera detects higer ISO the "noise supressing" filter kicks in.
The downside of "noise supressing" filter is that it tends to chip out sharpness out of the picture (to hide the noise) therefore you get rid of the "noise" at the cost of sharpness.

Digital SLRs comes with an option to turn on and off the noise suppressing filter. I have no idea if point-n-shoot camers offer this option.

Thats is why I shoot with only ISO 64 and 100 for all my photos with my Sony DSC F828.

i_nepali
I just bought my DSLR (Nikon D70s) yet I still love to shoot with film as well (Nikon F80).
I can interchange lenses between these two cameras.

There are areas where digital does better than film and there are areas where film does a lot better than digital so I use whichever is appropriate.

No pro-photographer in the world will claim that expensive equipments will ensure you of great looking pics because photography is not about expensive equipments, therfore
expensive expensive equipments can ensure great convenience not great photographs.

For those who might be interested to do photography more seriously. I'll never suggest them to go straight to digital because they'll miss out a lot.

i_nepali
if you only shoot at ISO 64 and ISO 100 then you are limited only to daylight shooting I guess or you use dedicated speedlight(flash) for low light shots or something ?

Yap,I have to totally agree with what you said.

lets say I successfully graduated from film SLR to digital SLR (in terms of convenience)...ha haha

Interesting... Khaobaadi... can I borrow ur camera? ;)