Just Posted: Nikon Coolpix S9300 Review

Yes, I would tend to agree here. 1/2" should be the smallest size sensor in a camera today. I don't really care about how many MegaPixels I get. I am more interested in the quality of those little dots. And, furthermore, how well those dots are processed into a final image.

I personally believe that camera mfgs (for small P&S) should spend available budget funds more on sensor R&D and build quality.

There is too much money spent on developing shmancy fancy software tricks and gadgetry. Let's divert money from those useless features toward bigger sensors and thus better image quality. That's what taking pictures is all about, isn't it? We're not here to play with menus and graphics. We're here to take a picture!

I don't buy the nonsense argument that bigger sensors cost more. That's a load of BS based on incessant cost cutting. Big sensors are like anything else. Produce enough of them and the price drops to near nothing. Business wins and consumers win!

From the criticism here it seems my work is done :)

It's getting to the point that I won't waste my time looking at reviews for 1/2.3" sensor cameras anymore. The Canon SX220 seems the plateau of IQ since last year.

What a sad year,

We've experiencing yet another substantial decrease in P&S quality, with focal lengths on travelzooms being pushed into unrealistic ranges. Megapixel race seems to be revived (after its refreshing stagnation - and even reversal - in 2011).

At the same time the prices of the newly introduced cameras in the higher categories (DSLRs, mirrorlesses, premium compacts) increased more than noticeably.

Thank you for putting "Full manual on CD-ROM" in the cons.

I don't remember having seen this in any previous reviews, when appropriate.

I hope you will continue to underline this fault. Maybe some manufacturers will notice.

(Then there's also the abysmal quality of most manuals, whether on paper or on CD, but that's another battle)

Thanks!

I'm not looking for excuses, i'm looking for a normal camera, you know what it means.
I quote "Noisy and soft photos have noticeable detail loss, even at base ISO of 125, Not great for night shots, below average battery life, low light focusing not great" Etc.
It's Devolution Of cameras, Even worse, it is insult to as customers.
Worst of all, all models for Everyday photographers dropped in quality:
Nikon Coolpix P300 is devolution to Coolpix P310.
Nikon Coolpix S6200 is devolution to Coolpix S6300.
Nikon Coolpix S9100 is devolution to Coolpix S9300.
Etc.
So why buy from a company,that Knowingly Manufactures lower levels Of products???
(English is not my native language, i hope you understand me).

Nikon makes great DSLRs, undoubtedly, but struggles, sputters, crashes and burns on P&S and small compacts.

This camera has no identity.

Just like the epic fail "1 series", it is just a container with Nikon's proprietary goodies inside.

While you can easily tell other brands by the way their compacts are shaped and the unique "style" of their ergonomic handling... the Nikon design output is tired and lost.

Yes, there are truly good bells and whistles inside, but the exterior is one good "also ran".

Yes, the images look soft, but honestly, there is a place for cameras like this. I don't own this camera or plan on buying it, but for purposes of comparison, II find that I use my Canon SX230 more than I do my Panasonic GH2, because the SX230 is easy to carry and the zoom is awesome.

When I look at the images closely, the GH2 images are WAAAAAYYYYYYYY better than the SX230 images, but honestly, I don't use or need that extra resolution and sharpness most of the time. It doesn't matter on the web, and I rarely print over 8"x10".

I mean, if you print the ten best photos of your life at 8"x10", then that probably does it for most of us as far as space on the wall goes. After that, aren't you printing small (if at all) for a photo album or something like that?

I love the ability of these types of cameras to get the image, even if it does look crappy when pixel-peeping.

i see no reason to choose this camera over Fujifilm FinePix 770EXR.

No thanks. I tried 3 S9100's and gave up.

I have used Nikon slr's as a pro starting in'72. Good reviews, and a good substantial camera. I wanted to like it, and tried hard.

No S9300 for me.

Go Jeff, you are jammin. I don't think any other reviewer out there is doing as many nor near as fast as you :).

C

"the Nikon Coolpix S9300 represents an excellent value and offers a nice point-and-shoot feature set, its photo quality is poor relative to the competition, with mediocre low light shooting and below-par battery life. "

THAT is a 69% camera? It offers a few bells and whistles, but can't take a picture worth a damn? The Panasonic FZ15 got 73% - despite indicating it "produces better-looking images, while maintaining the robust performance, competitive feature set, and ease of use...". So, it's easier to use, faster, with similar features, and above all gives you DECENT photos and videos - and that gives it a 4% lead??

I wonder what a 50% camera would be - a block of wood that's painted to look like a camera?

Bah humbug, DPR. Since when does feature creep trump image quality? The details in the review spell it out; the 9300 is a miserable excuse for a camera, just like it's predecessor was. 69% suggests it's in the vicinity of the SX260 or ZS15... but it's not.

This type of camera - with incremental, relatively uninteresting upgrades over its prior model - would seem more properly covered in a group roundup. Not sure a full individual review is warranted here. Perhaps of more widespread appeal would be a new waterproof group comparison. There are several significant new entries in that market (canon d20 and oly tg-1 come to mind), the feature-set is not matched by camera phones (no iPhone or Android model can survive when wet), it has been a year since the last DPReview roundup, and it is summer after all! Thanks for your valuable work.

Junk. Why don't you redirect your time and effort to full reviews of actually interesting cameras, like the Sony RX100 and the Pentax K30?

I would only review a non-PASM camera if it had a truly unique feature, like emitting a low-pitched ultrasonic whistle that would scare away teenagers and dogs.

While Nikon's DSLRs have a super slick and efficient interface, their point and shoot models are bottom of the barrel in terms of UI and general speed.

Reviews, including at DPR, all seem to gloss over what I see as a major difference. Nikon's P&S cams are just klunky.

I'll take a look at one of these out of curiousity, but I don't expect this trend to change.

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.

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.

I'm more surprised it doesn't get a silver award. Seems like almost everything gets that nowadays.

Fuji F550 EXR is on for $199 at Best Buy here in Canada. Larger sensor, full manual controls, though slightly less zoom. IQ is much better though. I would buy that over this any day!

You can't have a camera this small having such a zoom range with a larger sensor. The problem is that they choose to put in a 16mp sensor that must have heavy NR to clean up the image. Problem is, it cleans up the detail as well. The Canon SX230 has less MP count and shows more detail in the studio shot. Not splitting hairs either.

1/2.3 sensor? not interested.