Soon to be, R.I.P Kodak photography.
As bulky as a entry level Dslr or wrose and only 1/2.3" cmos and a short zoom compared to the Coolpix P510 and some others that it probably are about to struggle to compete successfully with. Pentax are out to make fun of themselves again it seems like. Maybe Pentax should have focused on something that might make better sense like small pancakes to that mirrorless Q, which was another mistake from their side.
Lol at all no-viewfinder-whiners. These so called viewfinders in compact cameras are next to useless anyway like the one in Fujifilm X10 wiht only 85% coverage. SO, nothing to miss really...My old 2mp Coolpix 700 from 1999 had a good viewfinder to be in a digital compact and also the Powershot G1. But in general for newer cameras, it is and remains crap.Between. Dropping the tilt-up screen for the new flip out is something of a mistake. Shooting comfortably from belly-level in SP is quite nice.
To call this update a J2 is a bit strange. J1.5 would have been more fair.Even though the Nikon 1 has its nice features which can be very useful for candid and streetphotography. Though I still not quite see how this concept are going to be a real success, trying to sell it to professionals.I can swear that even these want smaller and lighter gear to lug a around and probably not smaller sensor-size than Aps-c or 4/3 as worst.
Olympus for example never quite managed to break through and challenge the big boys, like Canon and Nikon, when the major part of the DSLR war still was going on. That although them initially used nice Kodak-ccds and had a reputation of having some great lenses.
onlooker: So what happened in 2000 after Coolpix 990 was released? Someone at Nikon said, "Nah, this is way too cool"? Nikon apparently agreed, since 990 was the last Nikon compact that justified its "Coolpix" name.
For the benefit of those who do not remember the 990:
Actually the Coolpix-downhill began or had already begun when the 990 camera came. The jpeg engine is rather bad compared to it's predecessor, the 950. Default sharpening is too high and I found the need to set it to low to get a better, more natural look. The colors also comes out weird too often. I spent a lot of time trying to tweak the in-camera parameters so that the 990 would perform as well as it might if the jpeg-engine had been what it should be. Between these two, I would reach for the 950 any day. I actually have one and it is not only as a retro-compact as it can be quite capable if one know how to use it to get the best from it.The 950's "brother" the Coolpix 700 which uses the same ccd are also a good performer. These two belongs to an era before Nikon began to fumble around with their Coolpixes. I had the Coolpix 5400 for a short while but disliked the obvious digital look which is far less present in the pictures I take with 950. Oh, and it is also awfully slow...
To offer such a small and seemingly nice lens only to Canon and Nikon-mounts are a mistake. Being so short, almost like a real pancake it would definitely make sense to make it available for Fujifilm X-moun, Sony NEX and Samsung NX also. 42mm which the focal length would still be very usable
They've got it right with the close-focus distance 22cm/0.2m, which makes better sense than the so often common 30cm which I often found less useful.
IcyVeins: Are these travel zoom compacts ever going to have good IQ?
Yes. But unfortunately only the Canon Powershot SX240, SX260 and also the Fujifilm Finepix 770EXR when the later is used in Raw. The jpeg output is ok but not splendid.Having already had a look at many full size images before these tests began to drop in.Pentax Optio VS20 are also trash like this HX20V at full size and so are the Olympus SZ-31 MR iHS.The first full-size samples from Samsung WB850 is not promising either with smudging going on.Ricoh CX6 is merely ok. Default NR could be lower and can be set to Off. I'm just not sure how much it helps to pull out the details. CX4 have lower default NR than CX5 and CX6.
Anonymous Gerbil: I find 28mm to be too wide already, 24mm sounds awful. Does anyone know if this or competing cameras allows a "default startup focal length" to be specified? That would be a convenient feature for me.
Or maybe he want a compact camera for low-light shooting. Something that most super-zooms can't handle very well, with even smaller sensors and usually slow f3.3 or 3.5 apertures at the wide end of the zoom.
Francis Sawyer: Built-in time-lapse? FINALLY! Someone other than Nikon pulls their head out of their ass. Wait: The article says it has time-lapse, but the specs say "no."
And hopefully they don't mean a useless time-lapse function in the camera's video mode.
If they reduced the size of the sensor, they should've reduced the pixel count. Give us a CLEAN 6 or 8 MP instead of noise-riddled crap.
Ricoh has had timeplaplse for quite some years by now. As a standard feature in their compact cameras.
Professor999: 9 page Review of nikon coolpix S9300, nikon coolpix P510,nikon coolpix P310 in July alone but no review for Ricoh GRD IV, which seriouscompacts.com compares favourably with the Fuji X10, Olympus XZ-1,
Photographyblog says is Highly Recommended.
Review also available at DC camera resource.HMMM.
GRDIV is hardly anything new but a refreshed revision of the GRDIII which could be called GRD 3.5The major improvements are. sensor-shift Image stabilisation and the return of Phase Detection AF. The last one which the original GRDI had but which was removed with GRDII and left it with sluggish AF performance compared to GRDI. The PD AF should not have been remove in the first place so that's hardly anything 'new' but trying to make up for a unneeded mistake.Still the GRDIV have same lens as GRDIII so not anything new there. Also I don't like the NR in GRDIV which can be set to off. The problem is just that it is definitely not the same as real NR Off. And it has been like that since the GRDII...But I hope that we'll see a review of the GRD V whenever it becomes available. But there is some time until then.
Sergey Borachev: Over the years, I have read many reviews. I found that the name "Coolpix" just means an average camera and have ignored such camera. Unlike some other similar cameras, Nikon seems happy to continue to offer bland and uninteresting cameras (in terms of what enthusiasts want) rin this range, not particular small, good in IQ, fast in aperture, fast AF, good looking, or anything. The P510 may have 1000mm equiv FL but otherwise still not so interesting due to other faults. Olympus has the XZ-1, Sony the RX100 and NEXes, Canon the S100, Fuji the X10, and so on, all with something special. Nikon small cameras are so uninteresting.
While I still agree about the Coolpixes I've to say that the Coolpix P7000 and P7100 are 'decent' compared its direct competitors, mainly the Canon Powershot G11 and G12.Also the P510 seems to be very competitive. Surely the default sharpening is slightly aggressive and not give the best possible look I think, but back it off one stop and also set the NR to Low and the P510 should perform well.
magneto shot: seriously 1/2.3 sensor? sure someone brought up pentax Q...but...is that really sellable at all? come on, guys, lets not fool with physics. The days of 1/2.3 sensor compacts being anything serious are gone. even camera phone (808 pureview nokia) have much bigger sensor.
Unfortunately the 1/2.3" are the facto standard among small super-zoom compact cameras, with Fujifilm Finepix 770EXR and some of its predecessors as the only exceptions I know about.This is because it probably is more simply to fit a smaller cmos or ccd to the back of a super-zoom and it also benefits from the bigger crop/multiplier compared to marginally bigger 1/1.7" sensors.
Thinking about the sensor-size and missed raw. I wouldn't say that S100 is the direct competitor for the P300 and now P310. The specs are closer to the Canon Elph 500HS / Ixus 310 http://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/compacts/canon_ixus310hsFor Nikon this remain something of a missed opportunity as them unfortunately aimed too low imo.
50mm on Aps-c equals 75mm. A focal length which I not found much use for when I had the Nikkor AF 50mm 1.8D and used it with the D1H.Wonder if this Pentax 50mm 1.8 might cover a future Pentax with FF. Probably not, so the question is how bad the corner falloff and vignetting is going to be like.
Sean Nelson: I find it frustrating that your reviews of AA-powered cameras never properly explain the battery options:
- Alkalines are for emergency use because they can be bought anywhere and retain their charge for decades. But they drain quickly during actual use in high current devices such as digital cameras and you should never use them as a "normal" choice for your camera.
- Lithium batteries (the non-rechargeable ones) have extremely long shelf life and a very high capacity. My experience is that you can get a couple of thousand shots out of them. They're expensive, but perfect if you're going on a trip where recharging opportunities won't be available.
(continued next post...)
To benefit from Hybrid batteries like Sanyo Eneloop one also needs a good charger which support discharging to keep the Nimhs in good condition over time.
tessl8d: These reviews are just a bit of grease for the corporate wheels. I been looking for a Ricoh GRD4 review and found one yesterday posted by an enthusiast.G great info and amazing samples.Pays to look around. DPR's previews and samples are pretty ordinary.
Since when is the GRD4 relevant here? It is another compact, definitely not a super-zoom. By the way, the GRD4 is very much of a raw only compact. It may have NR off but as many users of Ricoh-compacts know, that is not real NR off.But I agree that Dpreview should spend more time to review the real intersting models instead for this 'me too' super zoom. Especially since the SX240 and SX260 have been around for some time and have very good image quality compared to most of their main competitors.
I fail to see why Dpreview bothered to review this Canon-model when there is an other, more interesting, SX240 or Sx260 with an even longer zoom.
Actually this camera might be good after all. The XP30 which was slammed in the waterproof group-test last year had lower NR than, if not all, so at least most of the competing cameras but the thick protection glass eventually let it down image-quality wise.Some real Full-size sample images from a test with the XP150 indicates that it is a good step in the right direction with a not so thick protection glass this time.http://www.trustedreviews.com/fujifilm-xp150_Digital-Camera_photos_20time in the waterproof group-test which is to be expected at some time during the summer or better, before the summer begin.So I dont think Fujifuilm is gonna finish last another time.If they do, then it would be something of an infamous hat trick because in the first two tests of waterproof compacts, the Fujifilm-compacts have finished last so far. The Pentax WG-2 have turned out to be trash image-quality wise and also three of the new Olympus TG seems to be worse as well.
If Fujifilm announced a waterproof camera with EXR-sensor and a slightly faster zoom. Then we might have something to talk about. Oh, and also drop that useless 9 cm macro.
markcaff: Schaki:... Just Looking at random Photos from these cameras...is not going to work!... It’s to hard to tell? You need to see the same shot... same lighting, iso and all other conditions and then those shots magnified it to see the real differences. Look at the last four images and enlarge.
That's just controlled studio-tests. In real life pictures, landscape, disclosured the the waterpaintings which the Panasonic ZS20 is up to. I had already seen that in the Dpreview samples and here is another which you seem to have missed. http://www.dcresource.com/sites/default/files/galleries/panasonic-lumix-dmc-zs15-photo-gallery/P1010166.Jpg
You are a trollin Panny-fanboy with only two posts so. So, I'll not feed the troll but rather disclosure it ;)