ukrbearcat

ukrbearcat

Joined on Jun 23, 2012

Comments

Total: 8, showing: 1 – 8
On Just Posted: Nikon Coolpix P310 review article (156 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: OK, I don't get it.

Clearly, the older P300 has better image quality.
The side by side comparisons clearly prove it.

And Amazon probably knows this too, since they are selling the new P310 for $20 less than the older P300. And the joke of the day is that Amazon will sell you a brand new Pen EPL1 (with lens) for less money than a P310.

So where is the upgrade? You come back a year later, spend more money, get 4 more MP, and end up a camera with the same specs and body but with worse image quality.

All you really get in this new model is the ability to capture photos at a truly horrid ISO 6400 setting, rather than a truly horrid ISO 3200. This is a nice little pocket camera for snapshots, but there really isn't much point of using it over base ISO. And yes, despite these shortcomings, it still beats the pants off a camera phone. If the target market even cares.

And considering the similarity with last year's P300, this upgrade is totally unnecessary.

>No change in the NR can save the P310 a I see it.
Very questionable! And it is not just my point of view.

Check
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1007&message=41148417

I have already pointed out that with the low NR settings the pictures of P310 are better than the ones of P300 (on P300 you can't change the NR settings). The problem with the comparison tool is that the pictures of P300 and P310 have been taken with default (very aggressive) NR settings.

The math is simple: "the sensor" + 4 mp on p310 produces more noise than "the sensor" on P300. Clearly that in this case the same aggressive NR will kill more details on the picture produced by P310 compared to the picture produced by P300.
I am simply saying that P310 with low NR (less aggressive NR) gives some noise but produces more details than P300 with standard NR (you can't change the level of NR on P300).

Direct link | Posted on Jun 25, 2012 at 02:49 UTC
On Just Posted: Nikon Coolpix P310 review article (156 comments in total)
In reply to:

JesperMP: After checking the comparison tool, I have to agree with what others have already said.
P310 has markedly poorer IQ than P300.

>After checking the comparison tool, I have to agree with what others have already said.
>P310 has markedly poorer IQ than P300.
Very questionable! And it is not just my point of view.

Check
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1007&message=41148417

I have already pointed out that with the low NR settings the pictures of P310 are better than the ones of P300 (on P300 you can't change the NR settings). The problem with the comparison tool is that the pictures of P300 and P310 have been taken with default (very aggressive) NR settings.

The math is simple: "the sensor" + 4 mp on p310 produces more noise than "the sensor" on P300. Clearly that in this case the same aggressive NR will kill more details on the picture produced by P310 compared to the picture produced by P300.
I am simply saying that P310 with low NR (less aggressive NR) gives some noise but produces more details than P300 with standard NR (you can't change the level of NR on P300).

Direct link | Posted on Jun 25, 2012 at 02:47 UTC
On Just Posted: Nikon Coolpix P310 review article (156 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: OK, I don't get it.

Clearly, the older P300 has better image quality.
The side by side comparisons clearly prove it.

And Amazon probably knows this too, since they are selling the new P310 for $20 less than the older P300. And the joke of the day is that Amazon will sell you a brand new Pen EPL1 (with lens) for less money than a P310.

So where is the upgrade? You come back a year later, spend more money, get 4 more MP, and end up a camera with the same specs and body but with worse image quality.

All you really get in this new model is the ability to capture photos at a truly horrid ISO 6400 setting, rather than a truly horrid ISO 3200. This is a nice little pocket camera for snapshots, but there really isn't much point of using it over base ISO. And yes, despite these shortcomings, it still beats the pants off a camera phone. If the target market even cares.

And considering the similarity with last year's P300, this upgrade is totally unnecessary.

to Hachu21: My bad ... I simply don't like touch screen interface on digital cameras. But if you add f1.8 to my question, then the answer is "no".

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2012 at 06:00 UTC
On Just Posted: Nikon Coolpix P310 review article (156 comments in total)
In reply to:

wy2lam: A very nice compact, too bad ISO 800 is crap.

What do you shoot with ISO 800?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2012 at 02:37 UTC
On Just Posted: Nikon Coolpix P310 review article (156 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jonathan F/2: People buy a P&S camera to shoot raw? Why?

Well, it is good to know that the NR can be controlled on P310 (and can't on p300). You can't completely get rid of NR, but you can at least use a low NR option.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2012 at 02:34 UTC
On Just Posted: Nikon Coolpix P310 review article (156 comments in total)
In reply to:

LJohnK2: ....another lackluster P&S offering from Nikon, very disappointing....not sure why a company that makes such great DSLR's can't make a decent compact

2chadley_chad:
>Who on earth (who could appreciate the small benefits of this >camera (f1.8) is gonna buy it???????
The one who is on a tight budget and doesn't want to pay 370$ instead of 270$. The one who wants some relatively cheap camera with good image quality and manual controls!

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2012 at 02:32 UTC
On Just Posted: Nikon Coolpix P310 review article (156 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: OK, I don't get it.

Clearly, the older P300 has better image quality.
The side by side comparisons clearly prove it.

And Amazon probably knows this too, since they are selling the new P310 for $20 less than the older P300. And the joke of the day is that Amazon will sell you a brand new Pen EPL1 (with lens) for less money than a P310.

So where is the upgrade? You come back a year later, spend more money, get 4 more MP, and end up a camera with the same specs and body but with worse image quality.

All you really get in this new model is the ability to capture photos at a truly horrid ISO 6400 setting, rather than a truly horrid ISO 3200. This is a nice little pocket camera for snapshots, but there really isn't much point of using it over base ISO. And yes, despite these shortcomings, it still beats the pants off a camera phone. If the target market even cares.

And considering the similarity with last year's P300, this upgrade is totally unnecessary.

>Clearly, the older P300 has better image quality.
>The side by side comparisons clearly prove it.
LOL! Too many "clearly" does not make things right. The picture quality of P310 is better than of P300. One of the reasons is that you can control the level of noise reduction of P310. NR in P300 is too high and with P310 on low NR you can get much better pictures.
Regarding the price tag, these days you can buy P310 for 265$, say on Abes of Maine. For the fast compact with manual controls, very decent pics with ISO <=400 it is a reasonable price. Any other compact with full manual controls and price < 270$?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2012 at 15:08 UTC
On Just Posted: Nikon Coolpix P310 review article (156 comments in total)

The review looks a bit ridiculous. Who uses ISO 3200 on a compact camera? It is clear that this camera is not for astrophotography. Also, everyone compares it to the cameras which are at least 1/3 more expensive. I would say that this is the best camera with a price below 300$. The pictures are sharp. The colors are quite accurate. The lens is quite bright and fast. The screen is the best I have seen on compacts, much better than the screen of Canon S100. By the way, I am a Pentax K20 user.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2012 at 02:18 UTC as 41st comment
Total: 8, showing: 1 – 8