Previous news story    Next news story

Just Posted: Nikon CoolPix P7100 preview samples gallery

By dpreview staff on Aug 25, 2011 at 04:43 GMT

Updated: Nikon CoolPix P7100 hands-preview with image samples. Following the launch of the Nikon CoolPix P7100 yesterday, we've updated our hands-on preview with a small gallery of image samples. These pictures were taken in the brief time that we spent with a late pre-production P7100, prior to its announcement. We're expecting a production sample soon, and we will update this gallery with more images at the earliest possible opportunity.

Click here to see our 20-image Nikon P7100 preview samples gallery

61
I own it
26
I want it
15
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 46
pratul biswas
By pratul biswas (Sep 8, 2011)

I have been waiting for an more wider lense ( 24MM) with a larger
sensor, but disappointed !

0 upvotes
Arijit Ray
By Arijit Ray (Sep 7, 2011)

Dear Debankur,

I am from Kolkata too, Can you tell me the time taken for saving image, which card r u using? Any particular cons you might come across or faced.There is a significant price drop and thinking of getting one - Arijit

0 upvotes
Debankur Mukherjee
By Debankur Mukherjee (Sep 1, 2011)

I have recently purchased the P7000 and after using it for quiet sometime I am to say that it will take a very long time for the Industry to produce a 1/1.7” sensor camera with an IQ and image quality of a low end DSLR. Hope the P7100 will bring some improvement.

Can we have the IQ/ AF and Image Quality of D40/60 in a compact camera from Nikon?

0 upvotes
Ron007
By Ron007 (Aug 31, 2011)

After seeing the preview samples I have to admit that that the output looks cleaner than that from G12. Per pixel sharpness is better as well. But where my G12 excels is the color saturation and JPEG processing. OOC JPEG from G12 has more pop.

0 upvotes
james s. kennedy
By james s. kennedy (Aug 29, 2011)

Is this an admission that the P7000 was a failure? My rule of thumb is go with Nikon for DSLRs and Canon Powershot for P&S. I have owned and passed on to relatives the Canon A80, A95, and A620 and I currently use the A650IS. All have viewfinders, flexible LCDs and use 4 AA batteries. Use lithium batteries and you are set for over a year. I have installed freeware CHDK on the 650 and now produce raw as well as JPG. I have a live histogram in record mode. The only thing I miss is not having a wider lens than 35 mm (equiv).

0 upvotes
JayJackson
By JayJackson (Aug 28, 2011)

I don't think there is anything wrong with the samples gallery although yes if they are all ISO 100 it's difficult to judge confidently. Howver from what I can see this camera seems to produces very sharp images with accurate colours. Why all the hating on Nikon? BTW I'm not a Nikon fanboy I don't even own a Nikon just judging on merits. If I was looking at getting a premium compact I would look elsewhere but that's not to say this camera is rubbish.

0 upvotes
JoesPhotoDrivel
By JoesPhotoDrivel (Aug 27, 2011)

I thought to myself how bland the photo samples were. Like they were taken on a cloudy day, with unsaturated colors and little dynamic range. I would like to like this model but I need to find some other samples.

0 upvotes
IEBA1
By IEBA1 (Aug 27, 2011)

With the buzz that this camera has, I expected to be knocked out by the samples. Maybe it's just my monitor (uncalibrated, but I see all the shades of grey) but the samples just seemed bla. Sharp, no CA tha I could see, a bit of highlight leakage into foliage, overall okay sharpness, but I expected some "zing" and I didn't see any. Is it just me?

1 upvote
D L Miller
By D L Miller (Aug 27, 2011)

Will Nikon ever address the low light focus problems of the P7000?
I say they won't now that the P7100 is about to be released. History says I am correct...

0 upvotes
Tord S Eriksson
By Tord S Eriksson (Aug 26, 2011)

The G12 have few happy customers, if any, and so it is with the P7000/P7100 I imagine, which all try to eke out too much out of a physically small sensor.

The size-wise comparable Olympus XZ-1 is better in low light (due to its fairly big sensor, and fast lens), than either of those.

0 upvotes
Tigadee
By Tigadee (Aug 25, 2011)

There are absolutely no changes to the sensor or lens, so I can't imagine that the P7100 would be any different from the P7000 IQ-wise. Therefore, there won't be any differences in the P7100's high ISO images and the P7000's so why worry about the lack of high ISO samples? Looks like it's only improvements in the firmware or internal hardware (processor perhaps?) to resolve the AF and operational speed issues we'll see (plus the new screen, of course). Small but nice touches... If only Nikon would offer the firmware and speed improvements tp P7000 owners like me. How about it, Nikon?!

0 upvotes
JoesPhotoDrivel
By JoesPhotoDrivel (Aug 27, 2011)

I believe I read that noise reduction efforts have been made.

0 upvotes
DennisLogue
By DennisLogue (Sep 8, 2011)

My experience with Nikon so far (D70, D2X, S8000, etc) is that they do retroactively pass down all the improvements they can. Obviously a firmware update can't make the new jog wheel appear on the front but we can probably expect upgrades that share many of the upgrades with the P7000 as long as they aren't particular to the new processor and mechanical interface. Meanwhile, the P7000 is a tremendous carry along, especially since they updated the firmware last winter.

0 upvotes
eyedo
By eyedo (Aug 25, 2011)

On the Fuji x100 I was able to get ISO 3200 that looked better than the Nikon D7000 at ISO 400.
I had even good usable results at ISO 5000.

The Canon s95 looks good at ISO 800. I've not gone beyond that.

Fast 2.0 lens on it which is nice.

I'm disappointed in Nikon's compact offerings. Which it would work-would love to use all of my SB-900's in commander mode with them without using my Pockets Wizard's when I'm on a trip.
I like to travel light. :-)

0 upvotes
magneto shot
By magneto shot (Aug 25, 2011)

thats delusional. the fuji x100 sensor is not superior to D7000's which is based on sony's 16 mp much improved sensor with industry leading high iso.
whatever ur smoking, keep it low

1 upvote
eyedo
By eyedo (Aug 26, 2011)

Not smoking anything.Pro photos 25 plus years,net high 6 figures as a pro photographer.
The Nikon D7000 is not the be all end all. The Fuji is better in low light..
Neither can compare to the D700 or D3x of course..
D7000 is soft/mushy...5th camera body,my 3 assistants took theirs back after a few weeks of using.

0 upvotes
Mike Oo
By Mike Oo (Aug 27, 2011)

Well you're obviously snorting something then if you think "net high 6 figures as a pro photographer" means you know what you're talking about. You're lying. If you're not, post a link to your website or at least your real name so we can google all the images you sell.

0 upvotes
proshooter_melbourne_AU
By proshooter_melbourne_AU (Aug 31, 2011)

Hey eyedo- your post refers to the D7000 am I reading it correct? It is with the "D"7000 in mind that I write this. I too am in a similar position to you, career-wise. You have nailed it with your comments about the D7000 being soft and mushy. Somewhere on this site long ago, I mentioned that the D90 seemed to give more pleasing results than the D7000 ( I own both, in addition to my fx workhorses ). We make our assessments based on print resolution of large prints, A1 and up, not on computer monitor pixel peep. In relation to P7000, the enthusiasts compact- apart from being slower than a snail with a broken leg- our P7000 yields beautiful images when used within the optimum operating parameters of the camera, which amazingly aren't too constricting at all. We have enlarged some to 48x32 inch, they are about as good as a D200 from a few years bag. Outstanding tonality ands sharpness, corner to corner at 28mm f.2.8. Cheers for the post. ProShooter

0 upvotes
DennisLogue
By DennisLogue (Sep 8, 2011)

Wow, I've never seen so many testy responses on this site.

First: If you're a comedian that has to explain your jokes, you're not a very good comedian. If you're a photographer that has to tell how much you make to justify your pictures ... Well, I suppose you get the drift here.

Second: If we're trying to compare the x100 with the "D7000" the D7000 is in a completely different class than the P7000. I think this review is about the P7000.

Third: the x100 is a fixed (Prime) lens and while prime lenses are cool, it's comparing apples and kangaroos ( I put that in there for our Aussie friend ... I Love Melbourne!).

Fourth: The x100 is not a "Compact", it's a retro range-finder form factor. [Not that the P7000 is terribly compact itself but it's lots smaller]

Fifth: For Proshooter... Make sure you are running firmware 1.1 on the P7000. It fixes a lot of the slow performance that was found on the first production run. It became a completely different camera after the firmware update.

0 upvotes
schaki
By schaki (Aug 25, 2011)

Doh.. only low iso. lmost any compact within this group that the P7100 belongs to can produce just about fine at iso 100. It would have been of interest to at least see SOME iso 400 and higher. Do it again and do it right, Dpreview.

1 upvote
flektogon
By flektogon (Aug 25, 2011)

For the first time Nikon beats Canon. Pictures taken with this newest P7100 are definitely better than pictures from Canon S90/95/G11/G12. Because of the same sensor I think that the difference is due to better (finer) JPEG compression. Canon, provide us a new F/W with improved JPEG compression, otherwise, at least my next camera will be NIKON!!!

1 upvote
magneto shot
By magneto shot (Aug 25, 2011)

pointless is more likely. u can get exponentially better images with 4/3rd that are coming in smaller bodies, why bother with obsolete compacts.

0 upvotes
eyedo
By eyedo (Aug 25, 2011)

I've been with Nikon(again) since last year started with them in the 1970s,switched to Canon and back with Nikon--all pro gear.
For compact cameras,this year I purchased and returned,Leica X1,Lumix Lux 5,Fuji x100,Panny Pen camera w/20mm pancake,Canon G12 and lastly Olympux xz1.

The other day I received the Canon s95 and out of all of the above cameras,this is my favorite as far as IQ,speed of focus and ease of use.

Fuji x100 took great photos,however it missed focus on certain occasions.

I was counting on this Nikon being 'purse worthy' but it sounds like a 'we just fixed the Nikon P7000! '
The P7000 is on my stock photo agencies 'Unacceptable camera list' so the P7100 may or may end up there as well.

0 upvotes
Ron007
By Ron007 (Aug 31, 2011)

You are surely good at cracking jokes. I suggest you take up stand up comedy as career. You can make more than you claim you do with photography.

0 upvotes
EvanZ
By EvanZ (Aug 25, 2011)

This is the very definition of a consumer camera, a money grab if you will. I'm just not sure this is where the money is. Panasonic is probably making more money selling the LX5 to the enthusiast/prosumer crowd. Nikon, wake up!

0 upvotes
Richard Murdey
By Richard Murdey (Aug 25, 2011)

I guess for Nikon having a camera like the P7100 is better than leaving the market entirely to the G12.

The LX-5 is a slightly different machine, one I agree has a more compelling mix of features, but Canon has sold a heck of a lot of G series cams so it makes sense for Nikon to target it.

I wish they had gone with a faster lens at the expense of zoom range, rather than the other way around... but let's face it, I'm not interested in paying that kind of money for a small sensor compact anyway.

0 upvotes
Louis Dallara
By Louis Dallara (Aug 25, 2011)

Well, First I'm a Nikon fan boy, and I have 20k DLSR's to prove it..
so what do I use for a P&S ? My story.. I sold my CP5700 and started shopping, bough a CoolPix S8100, but sold it, no raw, couldn't live without raw. The S8100 was big anointment, looked at the P7000 held it shot with it, tried Canon S95, nice camera.. But tied of waiting for Nikon and went with The LX5 it wasn't first love and need some TLC from a Panny Pro, with one email from Dez he shot with the LX3-5 for years I was set. I really happy with camera and sometimes chose it over my D700, so I not sure whats up with Nikon, are they sleeping? I wonder if it got a another new NEF format.

0 upvotes
EvanZ
By EvanZ (Aug 25, 2011)

Louis, see my post below. You nailed it exactly. (I'm a Nikon guy too.)

0 upvotes
psandham
By psandham (Aug 25, 2011)

EvanZ - you're right about the LX5 which is why I'm really disappointed about the latest Nikon releases. I just don't get a slow 28mm lens on something new...

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Aug 25, 2011)

It's a trade-off: Nikon has decided they'd be better-off providing greater range on the zoom, rather than wider-angle or wider apertures. Given you're trying to design to a cost and a size, these things have to be balanced. Panasonic and Nikon clearly disagree about what that balance should be.

0 upvotes
EvanZ
By EvanZ (Aug 25, 2011)

My guess is that for most consumers, 28-200 looks a lot better than 24-100, but most enthusiasts would probably rather have the latter, because of the true wide angle.

My two most important lenses are 24 mm and 105 mm fast primes. If I'm bringing a third lens, it's a 300 mm, and even more rarely a 50 mm normal lens. 28 mm and 200 mm are two of the least useful focal lengths, as far as I'm concerned.

0 upvotes
EvanZ
By EvanZ (Aug 25, 2011)

It's really strange to me this market segment. There is only 1 camera in the dpreview database that has the following two features:

1/1.7" or larger sensor
24-90 zoom range

That camera is the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5. It's also quite fast (F2.0-F3.3). Nikon and others hamstring these compacts by giving too small a sensor and not quite a wide enough wide angle. Judging from the over 200 reviews averaging 4.5 stars on Amazon, the LX5 is clearly doing something right. You'd think Nikon would want to actually compete with them.

0 upvotes
OliverGlass
By OliverGlass (Aug 25, 2011)

Is it just me or all of the features and improvements mentioned were better off sent as one massive firmware update by Nikon? It's almost the same internals and same body right?

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Aug 25, 2011)

New processor, makes a considerable difference.

0 upvotes
Jim Ku
By Jim Ku (Aug 25, 2011)

hello? ISO100?

1 upvote
patcam7122
By patcam7122 (Aug 25, 2011)

What are you trying to say, Jim?

0 upvotes
f8pc
By f8pc (Aug 25, 2011)

All the shots are ISO100. Hard to tell high-ISO performance at all.

0 upvotes
patcam7122
By patcam7122 (Aug 25, 2011)

How can anyone possibly assess the capabilities of this camera if all you let us see are ISO 100 samples?

0 upvotes
f8pc
By f8pc (Aug 25, 2011)

I came here to say that too. Nikon must have stipulated.

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Aug 25, 2011)

I had literally about an hour with the camera, outdoors. I concentrated on getting the best images I could in the situation that I was in. Nikon did not stipulate anything.

In the (highly unlikely) event that they did stipulate the sort of images that we published, we wouldn't publish a samples gallery. If you're curious about low light, high-ISO images, take a look at the two samples galleries that we published from the P7000 last year. It should give you a pretty good idea. We will of course publish more samples as soon as we can.

http://dpreview.com/reviews/q42010highendcompactgroup/page19.asp

1 upvote
patcam7122
By patcam7122 (Aug 25, 2011)

That's a pretty feeble reply. Why even bother posting photos that tell us nothing about the camera? Were you so eager to be "first on the block" with news of the P7100 that it didn't matter you had no real concrete information to pass on besides a company press release? Telling us to look up sample galleries of a previous model only reiterates the fact you have nothing useful to report.

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Aug 25, 2011)

Wow, what a spiteful reply. Well, I'll do my best here. The P7100 is an interesting model because it updates a camera that was nearly very good and seems to do so in a way that fixes most of what was wrong. The preview details those changes to the maximum extent possible, after such a short time with a pre-production unit.

One area that Nikon has not made huge changes to is the camera's sensor and imaging pipeline, beyond minor tweaking. Therefore, the preview concentrates on the ergonomic and operational differences between the P7100 and its predecessor.

The samples gallery was created quickly - very quickly, and I said, my priority was to get the best out of the camera in the situation I was in. An ISO 3200 shot of a beach in bright sunlight would have showed you nothing useful.

We are hoping to take delivery of a full production P7100 shortly, and we will expand our samples (naturally including high ISO images) as soon as we can.

0 upvotes
Tigadee
By Tigadee (Aug 25, 2011)

Ignore the sourpuss, Barney. It's so obvious there is no difference in the sensor or lens, so why worry about high ISO samples when it will be exactly the same from both the P7100 and P7000?

0 upvotes
Tee1up
By Tee1up (Aug 25, 2011)

I would really like to see some low-light, high ISO stuff. Thanks for the update.

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Aug 25, 2011)

I am sure it is going to be just like the TL500, S95, G12, P7000 and others that are using this same 1/1.7" sensor.

2 upvotes
Photo Pete
By Photo Pete (Aug 25, 2011)

What is the AF accuracy like? The P7000 wa shocking. Also has manual exposure mode improved with a proper exposure preview and non laggy exposure meter?

0 upvotes
Total comments: 46