I suggest you know a bit more about cameras before you make an outrageous claim like that... its not even possible to be serious.yes, sonys have crap for picture quality, but i really love there smaller cameras as far as ease of use and quick start up time goes.... but i wont turn this into a camera debate thread
My sony has excellent picture quality. I wouldnt change it for anything. I dont know what sonys you have used, but mine does very well. Sony may not be great when it comes to car audio, but when it comes to cameras, and tvs, it doesnt get much better. I also see plenty news crews using them, so they cant be that bad, now can they. Hell half the movies you watch more than likely uses a sony camera, not in the same little cameras that we are talking about, but you get the drift.you have got to be kidding me... you think that carl zeiss lens means anything? i assure you the quality on the smaller sonys, or even most sonys for that matter is subpar, great lens, they play the numbers game, but when it comes to compressing the image.... they just can't play game my canon and nikon do a much better job.. night and day
EDIT: spelling
My My (ha).... your a first class dumbass, you can have the best lens in the world, but if your cameras ccd can't take advantage of it its worthless. and i bought my camera from wolfes camera. i dont care what your dad prefers, sonys are known for their lacklustre image quality. yes the lens is a great one, i said that. but if you weren’t as ignorant as you are you'd acknowledge the facts.
anyway this thread is not about that, you shouldve just shut your mouth in the first place before you started blabbering without having the knowledge or experience to back it up... please just stop posting about the sony until you have something to actually say.