Great Style, Good Size, Good Price, So-so/Poor Image Quality
359743
I bought this camera for my 6 grader daughter to replace her old Kodak 6MP camera. It is very small and stylish. The price is very good too. Actually, it is one of the least expensive brand name digital cameras on the market. (I never understand why those professional or serious photographers would buy this bottom cheap camera, and expect great image quality from it.)

On the paper, this camera is great. It is one of the world's smallest cameras. It has 10MP resolution. All-metal case should be very solid. It also has a surprising range of features. It can even detect the smile and blink!

The real world image quality is a different story. The picture is soft and lack of details. (I did many test shoots comparing S220 to other point-n-shoot cameras, NOT SLRs.) The corner softness is out of control. And the Barrel Distortion is crazy. (The camera has an option to correct the Barrel Distortion though.)

However, the image color is very good, which will give the user a good first impression. Not all users are Pixel-Peeper. So for average normal users who want style and portability, and normally view the pictures on computer screen or print 4x6s, S220 is not a bad choice at all.
3546658
I bought two of these for a dual monitor setup.  The picture is great, very vivid and responsive.  The bezel is a little larger than the preview images would have you believe, but not too bad compared to other monitors.

The build quality on one of the monitors was excellent - the other, not so much.  There were scuffs, rough plastic trim, and it sat about 1/16th of inch lower than the other.
784713
First of all -- this is a set  of rather good images.  (Possibly)  Unreasonably close up, the  images do not show what I want to see from a large format film image.  To be fair, no presentation was made as to  the image quality.  To be realistic -- from a nomal viewing distance -- this is a rather attractive calendar.  Is it worth buying?  YES.  Maybe I am too fussy.  In reality, only if you (unreasonably) scrutinize the images when your nose is on top of them will make my comments any sense.  Buy it!
4047471
Good Bokeh and outstanding image quality.
The body is flimsy though...
1775795
First the good stuff - this camera is the slimmest one I've ever owned.  It's thinner than my phone when I throw it in my pocket, which makes it easy to take with you wherever you go.

Now the minuses - picture quality is good, not great.  Compared to my Canon camera, which was only 3 megapixels, picture quality and lens on this thing is not as sharp.  The photos look fine, but they are noticeably not as crisp.  Also for some reason, I can't figure out how to take a timed photo with this.  It has some neat auto-photo capabilities (like, it takes a photo only when subjects smile), but where's the regular old timer, Casio?
946582
Image quality is terrible for some reason.  I compared it shot for shot with an older Powershot model.  My older model focused better, and gave truer color.

This newer model is lighter, faster, and easy to use, which are the reasons (plus wifi) why I purchased it, but in the end, I really want great picture quality.  It's being returned.
4460193
As others have stated, pretty poor image quality. You can find clearer images online.
683720
After doing a lot of research online I decided to buy this monitor from my local Costco. My intent was to use it mostly as a monitor and occasionally as a TV. My first impression was that the resolution of the screen wasn't very good. This was probably because I am coming from using a macbook pro with retina display, and therefore the screen looked extra grainy to me. This has annoyed me A LOT, and I hope I get used to it because it is a decent monitor, considering the price.

When spending 150 dollars on a monitor I don't think one can expect much in regards to its quality, and this product definitely does have its flaws. Other than the grainy display, I have found the structure of the monitor to not be very stable. The product comes in 3 pieces that all snap into each other, and this allows multiple areas for the monitor to "shake" around at the lightest touch. In addition, I would have appreciated a smaller border of plastic around the screen. Samsung's 24" monitor features this "screen to the edge" characteristic and I wish it was implemented here.

However, the functionality of the TV/monitor is great. It has a variety of input options, and my favorite feature is the ability to plug in a USB key to play media files without a connection to the computer. The remote that it comes with is very well designed and is very light.

I'm giving this product 3 stars, but an argument could be made that when the sale price of 150 is taken into consideration that it might deserve 4 stars.
4388776
My 10-year-old 42" LCD TV in the family room finally died.  4K and curved screens were tempting, but this isn't my entertainment center TV.  It's just for the news and an occasional sitcom or ball game.

The picture is exactly what I expected - clear and crisp - but nowhere near as smooth as my 5-year-old Plasma.  I looked at the other options in a store and couldn't distinguish picture differences between the Sony and comparably priced LG and Sharp models.  My wife liked the styling of this one better.

I ran the system update and the Netfilx button works just fine, which is a feature that makes my kids happy.  The stand is kind of cheap but does the job.  The internal speakers are terrible but I usually use a receiver and external speakers.
4775498
The screen is gorgeous, very bright and high quality. It plays videos and MP3s as well!
It has a 16:9 aspect ratio, so make sure any videos you add are widescreen or HD. It will automatically zoom photos to fit the screen if need be, but does not do this to video.
The power cable is a shorter than expected, making it difficult to place on, for example, a coffee table in a large living room. Seems intended more for a desk or office?
The wooden clip-on frame looks great! Wish it had glass over the screen like regular picture frames, I may do this myself.
The built-in speakers are pretty good, adequate for playing music in a small room.
Major gripes are the cheap remote (seems very fragile and too small) and it takes a long time to bring up a picture if it is high resolution (1200x1000, for example).

I'd say buy this, the screen alone makes it a great deal. It doesn't cost much more than the no-name brands I see at stores like CVS and Walmart, but photos look far better on this.
4044836
I was given this monitor as a gift, and in general I am pretty happy with it.  It is a good size for most folks to be able to see what they are doing, with a small footprint and decent enough screen quality for most people.

My only real problem with this monitor is that it does not produce very good quality blacks. In fact, if you are sitting close enough to it, you can see that the blacks seem to be dithered with a hazy purple outline as viewed on.a white background.  No amount of playing with the settings seems to help this problem, which is bad enough to render it pretty much useless for Digital Image editing.  Minus 1 star for this - it would have been 2 but for the low price and the fact that the problem only appears to be a problem for certain specific  applications.  If all you are doing with it is browsing, light gaming, and office productivity, it probably won't be an issue.
4458715
I just purchased a pair of these yesterday. I thought..."Wow, a 24" 1080 LED!!!" I have numerous flat screen 1080 TV's and numerous computer monitors for viewing television, computer work, video work, graphic design, recording studio, and the list goes on. So I thought these would be perfect for my office desk and one for the baby room. I can ASSURE YOU that this TV only looks "GOOD." It's definitely better than some older 720p TV's I've owned; but it's nowhere near as good as other 1080's I own at all. I can see pixelation rather easily in a lot of places. So...all in all, it looks like a very good 720p but a very poor 1080p. Still deciding whether to return them or not. But...for under $200, it's a (decent) value.
942642
I was very optimistic about this camera, but like several other reviewers, I'm returning it soon after receiving it.  I made a direct comparison between this camera and the one I've had for 4 years (Olympus C-750UZ, 10x, 4MP).  The P80 certainly had better zoom range on both ends, was very user-friendly, and faster than my other camera.  Noise in low light was a bit better on the P80, which also had faster shutter speed to help prevent blurring.  However, my Olympus outperformed this camera in a very important area:  image quality.  All of the images from the P80 appear "soft" (except very close-up in macro mode, which turned out quite nicely).  Despite its age and lower MPs, my old camera clearly outperforms the P80 in this regard.  Online research indicates that other 18-20x cameras have a similar problem with image quality.  Maybe the technology just hasn't advanced far enough (yet) to produce quality output in such a compact package that includes a telephoto lens.

Other than the image quality (which may be just fine for someone who's not making a direct comparison with something they're already very happy with), this is clearly a quality camera.  Aside from the image quality I would certainly give it 5 stars (but unfortunately that is my priority, worth two stars to me).  If you have your heart set on getting a super-ultra-zoom, this could still be the camera for you.  Personally, if I do decide to upgrade in the near future, I will probably go with something less ambitious in terms of zoom power.  I love to take full-frame pictures of birds and other wildlife (which you usually need a decent zoom for!) but I'd rather have a great image with some extra margin than a merely fairly good full-frame image... which is what you get with the P80.
2167502
1st day review:
Delivers a good (7/10) picture quality and resolution within 3.5 m. of distance. Do not expect any HD but, to me, it looked better than a movie at the theater. The brightness is good enough if you run the device even in a dimmed room.

Its fan makes considerable noise, however, it gets suppressed as you turn on the volume. The sound quality is poor (3/10). Using external speakers will much enhance your experience.

A good choice for its price!
3102959
I'm a bit disappointed in the quality of the image. Other wired Ethernet cameras I've used near the same price point have a higher picture quality. However, it's hard to find good WiFi cameras at this price point, and this camera fits the bill when I need to use it in areas that I can't run a wire to.
4562648
Good size, but can't get over the poor quality. Nothing but bricks and pixels
4554966
Great compact size but I should have known that the low light capability would be poor.  I used it indoors this week to video an award ceremony at an elementary school.  The video was so grainy you could hardly recognize the kids.  Of course, you can't expect this camera to take videos anywhere near the quality of a camcorder costing several hundred dollars.  I won't be using this camera indoors in the future.  Later in the week I used a Panasonic PV-300 that is a few years old for a similar indoor school event and video quality was excellent.

Update:  Used the camera this weekend at a soccer game.  Bright sun.  The quality of the pictures (fuzzy, weak color) was certainly not impressive.