Thanks for the review Terry!
Received mine yesterday from USA. Feels great and the initial photos are impressive.
The North America version requires a US/Aust power adaptor as the power pins are built into it (non-North American versions use a conventional power-cord).
Now I have to go out and take some photos.

Looks good. I like it.

Dear Terry!

I follow your review comments with close interest.
Thus, a question: how would you rate the Sony W300 vv your past favourite Canon Ixus 800is?

And then this from a reader/user at dpreview
""""
Opinion
I've purchased a new Sony DSC-W300 camera just a few days ago. I mostly take pictures of landscapes and architecture so I wanted some higher-resolution upgrade for my current Sony DSC-T100 camera to be able to take more details of each scene.

Sony states that T100 is an 8 MP camera and I believe it is not less, but definitely not more than 8 MP. It is important, because having read many critical reviews on the W300's predecessor - DSC-W200 I was concerned about the actual picture quality of the new W300 and did some comparative testing altogether with my current T100 camera.

My first impression on W300 - nicely looking well built ultra-compact P&S camera in a dark-grey titanium body which seems to deserve $350 I paid for it. Because the main reason to buy this camera was to have those 13.6 MP resolution, my further review is mostly based on that criteria.

Positives:

Looks and feels like a real Sony high-quality product. Has a good 2.7" display which you can still use even in a direct sunlight, however with less visibility than the T100's one in the same light condition. An optical viewfinder is a big plus - it is tiny and cuts a significant bottom part of the picture but might be very helpful on a bright sunny day and especially for the beach photos. The menus organized as the same way as in T100 plus several new features like the ability to choose the noise reduction level, to invoke the picture's dynamic range compression so you can have more details in shadows on the highly contrast scenes, contrast and sharpness adjustments, etc. The colors are great - as the same as provided by T100 but with slightly more saturation. I read many enthusiastic reviews on the Kodak cameras especially regarding their colors quality, so about a month ago I purchased their new 12 MP V1273 still camera with HD video feature. V1273 really could take the real 720p HD video, but the colors on still photos were far away from that Sony's level, so I just returned back that camera to Kodak. To be consistent I have to say, that the poster-size printing I ordered from Kodak Easyshare web-site of some pictures taken by my T100 camera were of a very good quality. The movies taken by W300 are almost the same good VGA quality as of T100 but with remarkable lower noise which comes at the cost of slightly less sharpness. The sensor of Sony's W300 camera seems to have the stated 13.6 MP resolution, but you can not really see that because of the low lens quality and here is where most of the problems come.

Problems:

The biggest issue of the new DSC-W300 camera is its poor lens which is a root cause of all its quality problems. The thing is - you can not take a full-size 13.6 MP pictures. At most wide lens angle (1X) the actual picture's resolution is not equal from side to side: it is high in the center with a big degradation to the edges in both directions. Imaging a circle in the middle of your picture with the diameter approximately 60 percent of the picture's width. The actual resolution inside that circle is remarkably higher than on the same picture taken by T100, so I believe it is around 12-14 MP, but everywhere outside that circle the resolution gradually degrades and near the edges it is noticeably less than of my T100 with its 8 MP so I could estimate it as dropped down to 5-6 MP. If you are to take a shot of a group of people occupying the whole width of your frame then I guess those on the sides would not be happy with their blurred faces in comparison with the ones in the center. On the other hand, if you take a full-body portrait of someone with the vertical frame orientation, then most probably his/she's face would happen to be in that relatively blurred area. When you apply the full zoom (3X) but NOT the digital one, the image resolution becomes equal across the frame and everywhere is lower than provided by my T100, so it looks like 5-6 MP on the whole picture. I'm not sure if it's exactly the zoom or maybe AF problem, but it is the same on different photos. And one more thing: when you apply zoom on T100 you can set any gradation you wish, but on W300 when you release the zoom button it does not stop immediately and continues changing on its own for a while so it hard to get the zoom degree you want. It is not mentioned in the camera description, but unlike T100 in W300 you can not use zoom while capturing movies. I would assume if Sony provided an appropriate lens like the T100's one then W300 might be one of the best P&S cameras because that picture resolution issue was one and only I experienced while everything else was very good.

If most of the time you take pictures of your family and friends, your kids and pets (not a big group) who are next to you (zoom less than 2X) and place them into the middle of your photos then kindly disregard the above mentioned issue - it will not bother you, and just enjoy the incredible picture colors and clarity provided by this Sony camera.

"""""

Intrigued!

David: I would rate the Sony a little better than the Canon.

As for the user review you spotted on dpreview -- so did I. I have no idea what he is on about. I have never read such confusing stuff in all my life. I really don't think he understands digital cameras, even though it is obvious that he thinks he does.

I would highly recommend the Sony W300. I am truly astonished that such an over-pixelled camera can deliver such results. I would still prefer 5 clean megapixels over 13 over-processed mps -- but we don't have that choice any more. And Sony seems to have come up with some pretty impressive noise reduction processing.

Terry

Hi Terry,

Interesting news on this camera. I've been eyeing it for a potential buy.

I was hoping you could help me with a question I got about it. What I'd like to know is how it well it focuses in poor light conditions without flash?

A lot of the time I take pictures at parties that are indoors with artificial lighting that tends to trip up a lot of cameras as well as in dark places like bars and clubs.

Personally I try to avoid the flash when I can since blinding people with flashes are usually the best way to make enemies.

Is it true that you cannot zoom with the video mode ?
How fast is it from one click to the next ? In 13.6 mode.
How do prints at say 10 x 8 look ?
Is there any real comparison quality wise with the canon g9 ?
Looked on the net but cant see many images by the w300. Can someone point me to a decent gallery.?
Want a new camera like the look of the w300.

Jon: the video mode on the Sony is not all that good. If video is important to you then I would look elsewhere. The Sony cannot handle sudden changes in scene brightness -- exposure goes haywire.

How fast from click to click? Fast. It is very responsive.

10 by 8 prints look excellent.

The Canon G9 is a different sort of camera -- more a transition between point and shoot and DSLR. It has far more accessible user controls than the Sony. You might say it is a more "serious" camera. It is also much bigger -- which I happen to like because it is easier to get a grip on it and ergonomics are better.

The Sony is strictly a compact camera. It has a decent set of user controls but it is built on the assumption that most users will leave it on Auto and hope for the best.

You can see one sample image here... http://tinyurl.com/68qdpc

It won't tell you much but at least you can pixel peep and check noise etc.