Reasons to choose Eye-Q Go Wireless
Released in 2003, Eye-Q Go Wireless has about 38 mm² of sensor area, 2 MP effective resolution, and a 105 g body. Use these values to narrow the field, not as an overall image-quality score.
Side-by-side comparison
Concord Eye-Q Go Wireless
vs Sanyo VPC MZ1
VS
Sensor area
38 mm²
Eye-Q Go Wireless38 mm²
VPC MZ1- Area ratio
- 1:1
- Absolute difference
- 0 mm²
- Relative difference
- 0%
The Eye-Q Go Wireless and VPC MZ1 have the same sensor area. Compare pixel density, sensor architecture, and release generation to understand likely image-quality differences.
These cameras were released 2 years apart. Consider sensor generation when comparing pixel metrics.
Key specification differences
Eye-Q Go WirelessMetricVPC MZ1
2 MPEffective pixels2.11 MP
7.11 × 5.33Sensor7.11 × 5.33
4.35 µmPixel pitch4.24 µm
18.95 µm²Pixel area17.96 µm²
5.28 MP/cm²Pixel density5.57 MP/cm²
4.87Crop factor4.87
—Maximum video—
105 gWeight280 g
Secure DigitalStorageCompactFlash type I, CompactFlash type II, Microdrive
1x CR123 LithiumBattery2x AA
Amber marks the value that is generally preferable in this comparison context. It is not an overall camera score.
How to choose between these cameras
The Eye-Q Go Wireless and VPC MZ1 have the same sensor area. The Eye-Q Go Wireless has the lighter body. The VPC MZ1 has the higher effective resolution. The Eye-Q Go Wireless is the newer release. Also consider the lens system and subjects you shoot.
Reasons to choose VPC MZ1
Released in 2001, VPC MZ1 has about 38 mm² of sensor area, 2.11 MP effective resolution, and a 280 g body. Use these values to narrow the field, not as an overall image-quality score.