cgarrard: HX90 needs 12mp sensor and raw to be more interesting
@cainn24 I dunno. Even if what you say is true sometimes, with a basically low-image quality compact, how often do you need to be enlarging enough to see 18MP resolution? Never. All the intermediate sizes you commonly view are much better served by larger pixels. I'm going to say 95% of users are viewing on their computer or 2MP TV or tablet (8MP if 4K). 18MP is pointless IMO.
Beckler8: HX90 looks v. nice but still. Why do they continue doing this. In this type of camera nobody needs 30x zoom and 20MP. I think 15x/12MP/larger sensor would make many more people happy. Fire all their marketing idiots, I would say...
@cainn24 Yes but that would make it a specialty camera then. Why would they want their top mainstream compact to be such? A small factor of practicality then but primarily marketing and Sony (and others) are a bunch of clueless idiots for it. They don't make the very best stuff they can and hope it will sell due to it, rather they plan products and features based on which ones think have the most psychological or advertising impact. As I say, idiotic.
HX90 looks v. nice but still. Why do they continue doing this. In this type of camera nobody needs 30x zoom and 20MP. I think 15x/12MP/larger sensor would make many more people happy. Fire all their marketing idiots, I would say...
SRHEdD: I have the RX100 and the WX350. I find I can crop the larger sensor to my desired image and get a better result than using the zoom on the WX350 to compose. Just the diff between the 1" and 1/2.3" sensors I guess. You can find the original RX100 for less than either of these now, AND it shoots RAW. That might be better money spent.
I have seen images to that effect and it's quite dramatic. It doesn't apply to video however and that makes rx100 extremely limiting depending on one's use.
Beckler8: Consider this a poor man's RX10. Constant f/2.8 is nice. But personally I can't consider larger cameras like this that don't have 4K - something that will very soon be as standard as 1080p.
@aramgrg You're joking right? If not, then you heard it here first folks on an internet comments section: 4k is dead.
BTW what an idiotic comment system, where you can't even reply to a specific comment properly.
Consider this a poor man's RX10. Constant f/2.8 is nice. But personally I can't consider larger cameras like this that don't have 4K - something that will very soon be as standard as 1080p.
So no IS at all in 4K or just no 5-axis? But either way, *why*?!
mpgxsvcd: I really thought that this was going to be a very interesting camera until I saw the price. $2500 for a 1 inch sensor 12 megapixel camera? No Thanks.
It has some nice features but there are so many better ways to spend $2500. They also never mention when this is going to be released. If it is like all of their other announcements lately then we can expect to see this camera on shelves by September or October at the latest. There will probably be new Sony and Panasonic products that compete with this that are announced and ship before then.
It's a tiny camera and has 10x zoom. Enough with the constant small-sensor talk.
Looks v. nice and represents some innovation. Would like to know what LCD resolution is. Also how can it be considered a real camcorder without a standard power zoom control which it doesn't seem to have - and which every single camcorder ever made does have, because it's necessary.
Nikon compact cameras, some at least, have a video problem where they can't even do AE smoothly (you see the steps clearly). I saw it even on a recent camera. I'd have to be sure that (and AF problems) are gone before I'd even consider Nikon at all for non-slr.
Btw I consider it very telling that I've never seen mention of that (or much of any other video considerations, really) in DPR reviews. It's because they have no idea what they're doing (i.e. clueless).
Homam: What good is 4k at 15 fps!!??
No good at all. The only way to look at it is it's better than not having it, which is the case with 99% of cameras today.
" ...4K support, though at a piddling 15 fps." It's clear why you don't mention this at the beginning because many people would have ceased caring about this camera at that exact point.
Beckler8: I'm disappointed the 24-240 isn't a power zoom lens. This reduces its versatility as a video lens.
But it would still have the manual zoom ring. Like the beautiful 28-135 power zoom I see Sony has (it's $3k unfortunately!)
I'm disappointed the 24-240 isn't a power zoom lens. This reduces its versatility as a video lens.
Beckler8: Enough with the stupid minimalist design now. It has no place *anywhere* in my opinion but certainly not on cameras designed to be used by fingered humans.
@zorgon Except it's not. The push is toward minimalism across the board; it's an undeniable trend and it's absurd. Look at the Sony a7ii, rx100. High end cameras that have minimal physical controls. There's no reason not to have extra buttons on enthusiast cameras - unless one considers themselves so inept they can't learn an efficient layout. There's a reason SLR's, designed for maximum usability, have been littered with controls for the last 50 years. It's obvious.
Enough with the stupid minimalist design now. It has no place *anywhere* in my opinion but certainly not on cameras designed to be used by fingered humans.
I wonder if they've omitted power zoom on the 24-240; probably. Just like there's no zoom control on the a7 body which makes no sense. But then there aren't many controls on the body at all because they're going for some ridiculous minimalist style, which has no place in *functional* product design meant for serious users.
Obies1: I personally rate the Nikon P7700 as the best compact camera I have ever had. The zoom range is what I would consider a perfect choice for combining camera size and versatility. The lens is the sharpest I have found in my own comparisons with cameras like the G15, XZ2, etc. Its "usability" is great. It is easy to make quick adjustments with the various buttons and dials that can be customized. It does have some weaknesses, but that is exactly why I would readily pay for an upgraded version. I would love to have a 1-inch sensor in the same package. That alone would probably be sufficient for me to pay $500 to $600 for the new version. I am not a professional photographer, but I have done well in photo contests. An upgraded P7700 camera with a sharp, 28-200mm lens and a 1-inch sensor is the type of tool that could make more great photograpy possible by making a versatile camera handy (to capture photos at any time) and delivering (by capturing great photos).
I was waiting for an upgrade as well. It was a unique class because no ILC with this zoom will be as portable. But apparently not enough people agreed because judging by the nikon.com lineup and no announcement here, it seems it's the end of the line for Pxxxx. :(
However I would have the 7800 right now except I notice problems with video in all Nikon P&S, such as jittery AE. Sony seems much better for video IMO.
I sort of wish people would stop babbling on about sensor size here. Not everyone can afford an RX100 and also may not want its nearly useless zoom. These are $2-300 range cameras and a larger sensor is still an upgrade feature.
Anyway I think the S9900 is interesting with its LCD.
Michael Ma: Does it do 4K video?