H7 or H9

sure2talk PRO 9:19pm, 21 May 2007
I went out today to try out several cameras I'm interested in and have almost certainly decided on one of the Sony's - the H7 or H9. Does anyone have any strong views on which is better? I'm undecided as to whether I'll make use of the night shot feature and whether the extra screen resolution, size and tilt make it worth the extra cash!
The build quality seems excellent and it's certainly fast! There seemed to be virtually no shutter lag at all. Any teething problems with either of them? Also, where online (in the UK) is best to buy from and where to avoid?
Thanks for any help any of you can give.
gin soak 11 years ago
Hi there

I can only really comment on the H9. Very new to photography - the H9 is my first camera, and only got it about 10 days ago - and I absolutely love it. Still learning but am really pleased with the results so far - no teething problems. The night shot is fun, but by no means essential :)

The tilting screen made it worth the extra money for me - it lets you get a really clear image of something at a strange angle - but if that's not important to you, then the H7 seems like an equally excellent choice. Battery life is pretty good - probably between 200-300 shots on a full charge.

Hope that helps - enjoy whichever one you go for!
Honzie 11 years ago
They're the same camera. The only difference is that the H9 has a swivel screen which is bigger than the H7 and it also has nightvision, making it more expensive.
sure2talk PRO 11 years ago
I've made my decision and have ordered the H7. I'm really looking foward to having lots of fun experimenting and learning with it.
P F C 2 Posted 11 years ago. Edited by P F C 2 (member) 11 years ago
I'm having issues with the image quality on my H9.
My previous SONY was the wonderful V3 - for a 7.2 megapixel camera it had great clarity & was easy to use - even the manual features. I assumed that a more recently built SONY with a higher megapixel would result in bigger images but equally clear.
Not so.
The average file size for my V3 was over 3mb - the average for the H9 is just over 2mb!. There is a serious jpeg compression happening with the H9 , H7 & the T100. You cannot override this, there is no 'Fine' or 'RAW' setting.
Try having a look at H9 pics at 'All Sizes' mode if the photographer has allowed it - there things begin to come undone.
If you're just happy to only make 6x4 prints & don't do any 'pixel peeping' - then this is a wonderful camera - so fast & responsive, great big LCD tilting screen, 15x zoom which will take your eyes to places you can't imagine. The macro is also amazing.
I've noticed that so far a lot of the H9 images posted are macro images, hardly anyone has posted a shot showing skin tones taken with a flash at night. There the 'water-colour' effect comes into play - an awful side effect of the high jpeg compression - smearing out detail in skin & hair - unless the subject is really close.
Something really needs to be done about this. I really love my SONY gadgets - from my in-car MiniDisc player to the VAIO that I'm typing this on. But on the H9, SONY has dropped the ball.
Good luck with your choice. I hope you're able to get better results out of the camera.
*SHESHELL* 11 years ago
You are right. I love my Sony DSC H9, but, you have the reason. I was thinking it was my fault, but, I see it is the camera. Anyway, I have got some good shots, I will add some to this group. Feel free to comment what you want, I will be thankful for them.
Joe Pemberton 11 years ago
I had a Panasonic LX2 - great camera, but very, very slow. I got the H7 because it's as fast as an SLR without the price tag. But I don't like the compression, I'm spoiled by the LX2's RAW mode.

Are there any ways to avoid the JPG compression? I notice in some of the outdoor, landscape shots in full daylight look like there is almost no visible compression. Is this a function of the outdoor lighting conditions?
Joe Pemberton Posted 11 years ago. Edited by Joe Pemberton (member) 11 years ago
In this shot, you can see the compression is not a problem. At full resolution, you can start to see it...

Joe Pemberton 11 years ago
In this shot, the artifacting is a lot worse. Is this because the ISO is set too high? Is it just because it's dusk and the lighting is bad?

Madeline, Claire, Kate, Jill
Honzie 11 years ago
That second photo looks like ISO may be turned up too high. Just set it at ISO80 all the time unless you really need it to be up there. Also, have the anti-shake mode turned off too because that can add to the graininess of pictures at times...
Joe Pemberton 11 years ago
Honzie, is the "anti-shake" accomplished in camera with extra JPG blurring (blurring usually means more compression)? Why would it add graininess? Curious.

Thanks for the tips.
Honzie 11 years ago
Well, most anti-shake modes work the same way and each time you use it, it doesn't take effect immediately. The first couple of shots you take may still be unsharp because this mode may take a while to set itself. It is also not always dependable when you're needing that quick spontaneous shot. But I do know that each time you use anti-shake mode, you are giving up image quality, and graininess has the possibility of occuring. How?...I couldn't say. Anti-shake mode does not, however, stop objects in motion from moving.

As for ISO, if you're going to use a high ISO, you can do one of three things to reduce grain....use flash, increase aperture size, or increase shutter speed. Using any of those correctly in correspondence with high ISO modes should compensate for the noise in the picture. The higher the ISO, the more sensitive your camera is to light so when you turn it up, it will detect more light than you may desire, thus leaving you with spotty light grains mostly visible in dark areas of the photo. High ISO is unneccessary anyway unless you really need it for something.
Rob Ruiz 11 years ago
H9 is great for budding photographers (although H7 is great to, minus the tilting LCD and the night shot).

One thing i've noticed about H9 is that it compresses the images greatly. An 8 MP image is only 1.8~2.2 MB! That is super compressed which makes me feel uncomfortable with how much details *might* be lost in the compression process. The "rule" is 500kb for every 1MP. So, I was expecting around 4MB per image.

Another one is the battery. No it isn't bad -- but it isn't great -- at all! Which makes me just keeps on using the EVF instead of the 3" LCD.

It also doesn't have bulb mode. This isn't a big factor, but its worth mentioning.

Other than that, H7 is just the same with H9 in terms of performance (I think H7's batt last longer), and image quality.

It has a nice software too bundled too, but it doesn't have a panorama stitcher.

I've been an H9 user for 2 weeks now and I'm really loving this camera!
dr1432 11 years ago
I've had my H9 fo about 6mos now and I love it!! Though I don't have a ton of expierience with different cameras. I have adapted my shooting based on what I know about this cameras performance.

There have been some disappointing shots but overall I am really pleased with the H9.
Greenbiar 11 years ago
I think there are 2 reasons behind the loss of detail: 1) the high level of compression that you cannot control as in some other cameas
2) the agressive in-camera noise reduction that you also cannot control
That's why in higher ISO (like 400 and above) you see less noise than other cameras but also less details...Whereas in day light the ISO is set automatically to 100 or around it, and the noise reduction is minimal (but still visible compared to other cameras!)

Thank you all
Dixon Marshall PRO 11 years ago
I had the H9 for two weeks, and I have owned the fantastic H2 now for about 13 months. I don't see the H9 as an upgrade. It had less battery life, the images were over-compressed, and quite a bit of barrel distortion compared to my H2.

Also, my H2 fits in my SLR bag with the adaptor and hood on. What is the deal with that gigantic adaptor and hood for the H9???? And the big movable LCD is not relevant to me, since I like to use the viewfinder anyway.

Most importantly, Images from my H2 are much crisper, especially when printed at 8x10, even though only 6 megapixels in size.

I took the H9 back, and I am planning on getting a Canon EOS 40D next week. I can't afford a large lens collection for that right now, so I will be keeping my H2 for macro and telephoto shots, where it does a stunning job. The Canon will be for everything else, especially for low light shots and sports.

The H2 is so good at macro and tele shots that it will be as if I already own the Canon macro and tele lenses, but at a very small fraction of the cost.

deanna515 Posted 10 years ago. Edited by deanna515 (member) 10 years ago
After my H2 broke, we began comparing the pros and cons of the H7 & H9, and decided to order the H7 and should arrive today! I loved my H2, but as I was told they have discontinued the H2. :(
inc0gn1t0uk 10 years ago
the H7 and the H9 are identical body just the h9 has a few extra functions on it
lalowilson 10 years ago
extra functions
H9 has a larger (3.0 inch), higher-resolution tilting screen (H7: 2.5-inch non-articulated)
H9 has external buttons for metering and continuous shooting modes, H7 doesn't
H9 is around 32g (1.1 oz) heavier
H9 has NightShot function, H7 doesn't.
Dixon Marshall PRO 10 years ago
I would hold off for the H50, which should be a much better camera than the H7 or H9. My H2 takes sharper pictures than my co-worker's H7.
guchi guchi 10 years ago
I got my H9 4 days ago and i love it. I never really liked sony but i'm impressed with the results i'm getting.

Still a lot of room for improvement though, and still need to learn a lot about photography but at least i have a very good equipment to learn with.
α is for äpΩL † Posted 10 years ago. Edited by α is for äpΩL † (member) 10 years ago
guys i need your help. i have an inquiry... i bought an original sony telephoto and wide angle lens last week. i'm just wondering if i'd still need to purchase an adapter for it or will it fit directly (since it's also from sony)

these are the two lenses i bought: and

need your advise, my relatives in the US already has it and i'd like to know if i need to purchase a separate adapter for the two.

flipkeat PRO Posted 10 years ago. Edited by flipkeat (member) 10 years ago
honestly for the money I'm very happy with the results from my H7..(I've had it long now and have changed my mind from my earlier comment lol)
.I've been wanting a DSLR for some time..but at the moment I'm very pleased with this little camera. I've seen some $$$$$ Nikon's that haven't taken as good a tell you the truth..Honestly, I even bought the tele-conversion lens 1.7 x as I like to "shoot" birds on a regular basis and it's been an awesome addition to the camera as well..I love using it. It's been awesome even with my shots of Niagara Falls..awesome ...really good..Have a look at my stream and see.........for yourself the results I've been getting with the H7.
Groups Beta