Previous news story    Next news story

Just Posted: Nikon Coolpix P7700 real-world sample images

By dpreview staff on Oct 26, 2012 at 01:17 GMT

Just Posted: We've just added a 36-image sample gallery to our hands-on preview of the Nikon Coolpix P7700. We've been using a production P7700 for a few days and as we work out way through the necessary studio and real-world shooting we've created a sample gallery to show you what the camera can do. Our gallery contains images shot in a range of different conditions, both indoors and out. Click the links below to go see our full hands-on preview of the P7700 now updated with with real-world samples. 


Nikon P7700 preview samples gallery - Posted on October 24th 2012

There are 36 images in the samples gallery. Please do not reproduce any of these images on a website or any newsletter / magazine without prior permission (see our copyright page). We make the originals available for private users to download to their own machines for personal examination or printing (in conjunction with this review), we do so in good faith, please don't abuse it.

Unless otherwise noted images taken with no particular settings at full resolution. Because our review images are now hosted on the 'galleries' section of dpreview.com, you can enjoy all of the new galleries functionality when browsing these samples. 

82
I own it
20
I want it
11
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 73
Danlo
By Danlo (Dec 11, 2012)

This makes me sooo mad. I downloaded raw files from photographyblog.com and the P7700 beats the crap out of my Nikon J1! No more Nikon for me thats for sure. Well, not until they use a Sony sensor in the 1-system. For me, the most important thing now on a Nikon camera, is that it uses a Sony sensor.

0 upvotes
jjonesphotos
By jjonesphotos (Oct 30, 2012)

I'm guessing that most posters here do more writing on forums like this than actual picture taking. They seem to relish criticsizing cameras they've never actually used, based soley on specifications.

For instance, sensor size: I'd like to see a point an shoot with a large sensor AND a 200mm lens. Pretty sure it wouldn't fit in your pocket.

Well, I have had my p7700 for about a month now and still think it's a great package. I didn't expect it to match my SLR's quality and didin't need it to, but the features it has are remarkable for a point and shoot.

The only shortcoming I've found so far, and it's minsicule, is that the P7700 doesn't seem to have a sleep mode. It will turn of at selectable intervals, up to 30 minutes, but you then have to restart the camera.

Oh, and to anyone who actually buys one of these, the best fitting camera case I've found for the p7700 is a Nikon SS-600, which is meant for the SB-600 speedlight.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
1 upvote
riyanto ong
By riyanto ong (Nov 1, 2012)

agree! we can't judge the product from the spec only. i am a j1 user, and although the spec is not fantastic, it is really an excellent camera.

autofocus is very fast, very sharp lens, good bokeh and ..... small size.

0 upvotes
Slanicka Tomas
By Slanicka Tomas (Nov 1, 2012)

I have the same experiences. Month ago I bought J1 to my daughter and I have to confirm, that although the 4/3 system spec looks better, the J1 takes great pictures. Study of spec is really important but spec are not everything.

0 upvotes
Raw Images Raw Talk
By Raw Images Raw Talk (Oct 28, 2012)

this would be a great alternative camera to a smartphone but Nikon didn't include a wifi feature. Instead, it is in a lower priced model. Misstep is what I say.

2 upvotes
gsum
By gsum (Oct 29, 2012)

That's such a depressing post. This camera would have been so much more without the useless clutter of scene modes and face detection plus all the associated knobs, buttons and thumbwheels. 'Smart'phone functionality is just more useless gimmickry.
There are endless cameras out there for people who want these features but nothing for those that need a photographic tool.

1 upvote
Camediadude
By Camediadude (Oct 29, 2012)

+1 what gsum said, most of us don't give a toot about wifi

3 upvotes
Altruisto
By Altruisto (Nov 4, 2012)

And when we want so, we have our Eye-fi cards which fit with most cameras. Guys who don't understand the positioning of this camera can't get that it's simply not for them. I picked one and I can't be happier.

0 upvotes
averagjoe
By averagjoe (Oct 28, 2012)

When will manufacturers, (not just Nikon, but all) do something about white-out issues on LCD in outdoor situations? These LCDs are all but useless in sunlight. A camera without an optical viewfinder, even if it's but a tunnel, is just plain incomplete.

And another thing.... those flatly lit indoor pictures of coins, dolls and playing cards on a shelf are about as relevant as hair color in a thunderstorm.

1 upvote
Photomonkey
By Photomonkey (Oct 27, 2012)

I see the new spec fad is sensor size. Doesn't matter what real world performance is sensor size is everything.
Let's see.... first it was megapixels, then noise, then hi ISO performance, then DR, then DOF and now sensor size.
Yes, I understand the differences but at bottom the focus is on specs not real world enjoyment.

13 upvotes
wetsleet
By wetsleet (Oct 27, 2012)

this is so ingrained in people. I saw one poster claim that small sensors "by definition" have less color depth and clarity.

So you really don't need to see what a camera does, the tech specs already 'define' it ;)

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Raw Images Raw Talk
By Raw Images Raw Talk (Oct 27, 2012)

have to disagree; sensor size is the single most important factor in the camera body. To say it's a fad speaks more about a lack of understanding about sensor technology by you than people who choose to discuss it. Maybe you need to become a more informed camera user.

1 upvote
wetsleet
By wetsleet (Oct 27, 2012)

it may be the single most important specification, but not the single most important factor. That remains, always, what the camera can actually do. The point being people get so caught up discussing a dimensional specification, when what is on offer here are actual photos taken by the camera.

3 upvotes
RadPhoto
By RadPhoto (Oct 28, 2012)

I think all of those kind of "fads" are important for technology advancement.

1 upvote
Camediadude
By Camediadude (Oct 28, 2012)

Almost seems as though a segment of these size-obsessed folks (the most rabidly frothing ones, anyway) are compensating for some perceived (but not necessarily actual) shortcoming in themselves. Sadly, insecurity is like an epidemic these days. Make the most with what you have, people. There will always be something 'newer,' 'shinier' or 'bigger,' but you already likely own the tool you need to make great images. Ok, no more lamenting, let's get out there and enjoy.. :)

4 upvotes
Raw Images Raw Talk
By Raw Images Raw Talk (Oct 28, 2012)

"it may be the single most important specification, but not the single most important factor. That remains, always, what the camera can actually do"
Newsflash: What a camera can do is inextricably related to its sensor and related capabilities and/or limitations.

0 upvotes
Raw Images Raw Talk
By Raw Images Raw Talk (Oct 28, 2012)

"Almost seems as though a segment of these size-obsessed folks (the most rabidly frothing ones, anyway) are compensating for some perceived (but not necessarily actual) shortcoming in themselves. Sadly, insecurity is like an epidemic these days. Make the most with what you have, people. There will always be something 'newer,' 'shinier' or 'bigger,' but you already likely own the tool you need to make great images. Ok, no more lamenting, let's get out there and enjoy.. :)"
Obviously this statement is a rationalization based on an overbloated sense of greatness as to your own photographic skills. Great photographers want tools that help them achieve their vision. Deal with that.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
thethirdcoast
By thethirdcoast (Oct 29, 2012)

I just took delivery of a P7700.

So far its performance is amazing. It's as good, possibly better than many APS-C dSLRs of only a few years ago.

1 upvote
Camediadude
By Camediadude (Oct 29, 2012)

"Obviously this statement is a rationalization based on an overbloated sense of greatness as to your own photographic skills. Great photographers want tools that help them achieve their vision. Deal with that." -RIRT

Dude, chill out. I was just making an observation. I am certainly not great, I am just a newbie. I am just tired of this obsession with size, that's all, but that said, I have nothing against folks who prefer the largest sensor that can fit in a given body style. I simply am tired of those folks who go on and on about it, and tell me that my camera is now offically worthless becasue x or y camera just came out. People need to get over the gear envy. That is all, good day.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Oct 29, 2012)

@wetsleet.

A small sensor's base iso is equivalent to a larger sensor's higher iso. Color depth fades at higher iso. Thus smaller sensors deliver less color depth. This is not news.

The fact that most of us don't notice it is a technological achievement, not proof that it isn't there.

I have and recommend smaller sensor cameras for it's many benefits, but i also know when to admit its shortcomings.

The point was not to make or break 'the small sensor', but to analyze and explain the results. Some of us do actually know how to read specs, don't blame me for other people's rash conclusions of misinterpretation.

0 upvotes
Wye Photography
By Wye Photography (Oct 29, 2012)

The camera manufactures have make you buy their newest, latest, camera. You have to keep the shareholders happy you know! That is what marketing is all about, how to persuade you to buy!

1 upvote
wetsleet
By wetsleet (Oct 29, 2012)

@Jesper
"A small sensor's base iso is equivalent to a larger sensor's higher iso"

Think about that for a moment. So in a Nikon FX DSLR, the DX sensor effectively at the centre of every FX sensor, the ISO characteristic changes at the boundary between the two zones?

I think you may find that sensor size is actually irrelavant to base ISO. Pixel area, now that could be implicated.

But anyway, here we have actual pictures taken by the camera to look at - that is the point I am trying to make. Can't we just judge how good a camera is by looking at the pictures?

0 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Oct 29, 2012)

You can go down to the cause of the cause, and sure Pixel area is a factor. The sensitivity you end up with all starts with sensor size, that is assuming not to be too many generations apart.

Always agreed with you guys on the other notion. But if somebody asks why the images disappoint, i can still answer can't i. It's sad tho that most are so quick to dismiss when not understood, especially without apparently mandatory disclaimer that no harm to their favorite brand is intended.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
DVT80111
By DVT80111 (Oct 27, 2012)

Look like this is the camera that can go with me on the hiking trail.

Will wait until next year for inventory clearance.

2 upvotes
Raw Images Raw Talk
By Raw Images Raw Talk (Oct 26, 2012)

The samples show that the camera is doing well with what it has to work with. The reality is, at its introduced price, there are great alternatives that offer much better IQ potential. If this size sensor is to live on it needs to do so at around the $300 range and not after 6-9months.

I will say that if this camera body and feature set include a 1" sensor, I would be on line to get one.

4 upvotes
OldZorki
By OldZorki (Oct 26, 2012)

You can get now Nikon V1 with 10-30 lenses for 479.. You can get better sensor and viewfinder.

1 upvote
Slanicka Tomas
By Slanicka Tomas (Oct 27, 2012)

Great alternatives? Which of them has F2 on 28mm and F4 at 200mm? I suppose, none.
Yes, I agree that bigger sensor produces less noise, but this senzor is not so bad as somebody expected and with great lens on P7700 we can go 1-2EV down than on another cameras. So, sensor size is important parameter, but without good lens the senzor is good for nothing.
If this is on me, I'd like to see in P7700 1" sensor with 10MPix. ;)

6 upvotes
Vincent Aquilino
By Vincent Aquilino (Oct 26, 2012)

For all the cry babies who complain about the small sensor,If you can't take a
good picture with a small sensor,you certainly can't take one with a bigger sensor.

33 upvotes
OldZorki
By OldZorki (Oct 26, 2012)

" my sensor is bigger then yours" (c)
But I agree with those, who impressed. Nice, sharp pictures with excellent colors. Incredible for a compact camera actually.

2 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Oct 27, 2012)

Give this man the prize for the top comment. Sensor size "exports" should realize that deep DOF many be desirable at times (i.e., for street shooting) and a couple of EV less high ISO may not a big deal for many applications. Consider that many people do web galleries these days. Also, investing in an MILC, especially if you have a DSLR system and just want something pocketable for travel or fun, may not right for everybody.

High end, small sensor cameras are a blast and some of my favorite images were made with the GRD III, X10 or XZ1. Based on these samples, I'd say this new Nikon is right up there in quality.

2 upvotes
bobbarber
By bobbarber (Oct 27, 2012)

I like this comment.

My old Olympus C7070, 7 megapixels, was overkill for printing at 8x10. It was sharper than many DSLRs at that print size.

All these sensor-size discussions take place without reference to what resolution the photographer needs for what they are trying to do.

And go read about large-format photography before whining about deep DOF. Large format photographers went to a lot of trouble, tilts and so on, to get deep DOF. Look at Ansel Adams' work. Yet in a camera with a small sensor, suddenly deep DOF is a disadvantage.

In other words, I can take a picture with a high shutter speed and deep DOF, and supposedly that's a disadvantage in all situations. Does somebody want to explain that to me please?

Disclaimer: I will NOT be buying this camera, but I like the sample photographs.

2 upvotes
Reg Natarajan
By Reg Natarajan (Oct 28, 2012)

Maybe the best comment I've ever seen here.

0 upvotes
peterwr
By peterwr (Oct 26, 2012)

Some of the nicest, most natural pictures I've seen from a compact. Plenty of detail, even at 1600iso, and beautiful colour rendering - though admittedly, I'm not viewing on a calibrated monitor.

If only this camera had an eye-level viewfinder (optical or electronic, I don't mind)*, I'd rush straight out to buy one before the shops close.

* weatherproofing would be the icing on the cake...

3 upvotes
fotokeena
By fotokeena (Oct 27, 2012)

if you are happy with what you see, who needs a calibrated monitor.

Seems like everyone has a reason not to buy.....

0 upvotes
Slanicka Tomas
By Slanicka Tomas (Oct 27, 2012)

Yes, the viewfinder is missing but I have another improvement - Phase detection AF. ;) Maybe we will find it in 2 years in new model.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Oct 26, 2012)

Where are low-light pictures? Where are action pictures? The static subjects in daylight are simple for any $50 P&S (or free cellphone camera), is it the proper way to evaluate $500 camera?
And why ISO is not displayed for pictures #2 and #3?

6 upvotes
Simon Joinson
By Simon Joinson (Oct 26, 2012)

but otherwise we did ok?

12 upvotes
Dimitri Khoz
By Dimitri Khoz (Oct 26, 2012)

Yes, great shots, Guys!

1 upvote
Pat Cullinan Jr
By Pat Cullinan Jr (Oct 26, 2012)

No good turn goes unpunished.

1 upvote
Digitall
By Digitall (Oct 26, 2012)

Yes DPR did Ok, but please be consistent with the information available. Would like to know the ISO values ​​of 2 photos that are missing that information. Thank you.

update: OK, the information already appears. Thank you!

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
MDGColorado
By MDGColorado (Oct 26, 2012)

I must say these are well-composed samples. And as for the camera, sharpness and colors are impressive. Lots of good things happening in the advanced P&S segment lately! Good to see Nikon in the running.

2 upvotes
wootpile
By wootpile (Oct 26, 2012)

For once, these sample images are good, creative and adequate to display what the camera can and can't do. Whoever took them deserves a pat on the back.

Looks promising on IQ too.

3 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Oct 26, 2012)

Thanks!

2 upvotes
Simon97
By Simon97 (Oct 26, 2012)

I like the jpeg rendering. They give it a little "bite". Lens looks good too. Nikon is doing a good job luring me away from Canon.

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Oct 26, 2012)

Too cool WB IMO.

1 upvote
Greg Henry
By Greg Henry (Oct 26, 2012)

I'm actually quite impressed. Nikon seems to have done more with their processing and this sensor combo than on the Canon G12 (and perhaps G15?). I recently got a Canon G1X and maybe should have held out until the stores got this one in stock instead to save some money, though the G1X has advantages of it's own.

Nikon's smaller sensor cameras have rarely had a "wow" factor like some others, though their DSLRs pack a punch - good to see them step ahead with this one. Nice going on their part.

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Sean4Peace
By Sean4Peace (Oct 26, 2012)

Bring on the in-depth review. This will replace the wife's aging Canon A620 (been a great camera). She's always used the LCD on it so a lack of a viewfinder will not be an issue. I wish Nikon made sweet little waterproof cases for their cameras like Canon does. Our first Nikon camera, but nothing I've seen so far anywhere holding me back on pulling the trigger on this. Agree the colors do look a little flat but I bet there's a setting in the camera that will make them look better, and always something in post you can do.

0 upvotes
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (Oct 26, 2012)

Nice camera and results, good job Nikon.

1 upvote
YiannisPP
By YiannisPP (Oct 26, 2012)

I too find the IQ pretty impressive regarding noise and sharpness edge to edge, but colours? You say this is sweet Nikon colour, is Nikon colour by definition a bit on the dull side? I mean it might have been a dull day out but I see very muted colours everywhere. Also possible WB issues, that billiard balls shot doesn't look right somehow.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Oct 26, 2012)

Small sensors by definition have less color depth and clarity. On a clear day there is enough color for its JPEG processing algorithm to make something nice of it, but on a cloudy day like this where subtle tones really matter, its flaws are more apparent.

Sharpness usually isn't a problem with a decent lens on it.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
1 upvote
photo perzon
By photo perzon (Oct 26, 2012)

Yes the colors are muted

1 upvote
Dan
By Dan (Oct 26, 2012)

There are countless examples of pleasing images from small-sensor cameras, especially those from Fuji.

What does the size of the sensor have to do with color? The images look "muted" because that's how Nikon chose to process the images. If you don't like it, just turn up the saturation and/or contrast.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Oct 26, 2012)

What does it have to do with sensor size ? A whole lot. Just like noise, and just like dynamic range.

Hate to bring them up but DxO Markt tests for color as well:

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/%28appareil1%29/834|0/%28brand%29/Nikon/%28appareil2%29/733|0/%28brand2%29/Nikon/%28appareil3%29/680|0/%28brand3%29/Nikon

And yes, some cameras know how to get quite great images out of it anyway. But it's far from perfect.

1 upvote
wetsleet
By wetsleet (Oct 26, 2012)

"Small sensors by definition have less color depth and clarity."

Eh? Small sensor, by definition, are little transducers. Period. Whatever else is not by definition.

2 upvotes
Dan
By Dan (Oct 30, 2012)

A small sensor is cut from the same wafer as a large sensor. The only thing the small sensor gets less of is light. Therefore, there should be no difference as far as color is concerned.

I will remind you again, most people do not have any issue with the colors coming from most small-sensor cameras.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
bills_pix
By bills_pix (Oct 26, 2012)

Looking forward to using the P7700. FYI, after several failed attempts to fix my wife's P7100 for the lens cover issue, they replaced it with a brand new P7700. First shots seem sharper with impressive detail.

1 upvote
iudex
By iudex (Oct 26, 2012)

Having a newer model for no surcharge, that is what I call great customer care! (be glad you live in Canada).

1 upvote
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (Oct 26, 2012)

There's only one thing missing in this package: attachable EVF. That would've made it spotless !

0 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Oct 26, 2012)

I definitely agree. The OVF in previous model was considered a big advantage by many (although the usableness of optical tunnel with hardly 80% coverage was questionable). Having a decent EVF with 100% coverage would be perfect.

1 upvote
iudex
By iudex (Oct 26, 2012)

I must agree with others saying this a is a great performance by a 1/1,7" sensor camera. Considerably better than my Canon S100, especially at higher ISO (3200 looks much better than on S100). Long focal length with reasonably fast lens compensate for the small sensor size as regards the bokeh.
Well done (especially when I think of the questionable outcome of Sony NEX-6 with the new lenses).

0 upvotes
PhotoClimber
By PhotoClimber (Oct 26, 2012)

It's double the Canon S100 in weight and size, anyway... this beast should be compared with cameras like the G1X, G15...

By the way, I'm impressed by the image quality and the focal range.

0 upvotes
ijustloveshooting
By ijustloveshooting (Oct 26, 2012)

iso800 portrait shot is impressing! too much detail, well kept sharpness and color at iso 800! i'm impressed...lens looks really sharp, may not be like the one in XZ-1 but again it looks really sharp....P7700 looks like a winner.

1 upvote
Debankur Mukherjee
By Debankur Mukherjee (Oct 26, 2012)

There's not much difference between 7700 and 7100 .... doesn't worth the upgrade.....

1 upvote
Zigadiboom
By Zigadiboom (Oct 26, 2012)

Hmmm well if a more attractive and better built body, Full HD recording, a sharper and faster F2.0-4.0 vs F2.8-5.6 lens, 12mp CMOS vs 10MP CCD resulting in better high ISO performance/faster burst rate is not much of a difference then I'm not really sure what is?

Sure the newer camera is more expensive and existing P7100 may not feel the need to upgrade. However this does not take away the fact that the P7700 is a better camera overall.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
16 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Oct 26, 2012)

Some of the best looking JPEGs ever from a Nikon P&S, and right up there with the best small 1/1.7" sensor cameras as far as I can see. Good colors, not many awful artifacts, and the lens seems to be quite sharp.

4 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Oct 26, 2012)

Good colors? They are way to cool, good for shooting zombies maybe?
Look at the picture #22 for example:
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/photos/2284486/dscn0911?inalbum=nikon-coolpix-p7700-preview-samples
The wood on the left is blue instead of gray! The brown wood on the right is unnaturally muted. The yellow tape is almost green! The wire, which is supposed to be silverish gray, is blue!

Nikon does it forever, and never learns.

2 upvotes
mr.izo
By mr.izo (Oct 26, 2012)

well, i have this camera at home (now it's gone with my girlfriend on trip to china).
have it just a day or so, but what i can tell about colours (and other vital parametrs of camera) is:
you can set manualy almost anything, so setting colours by your needs it's not a problem (you have some pre-sets, like vivid, neutral etc, also nice colour ring..), best thing to do is raw anyway.
"washed" colours are raleted to cmos sensor (vs. more vivid on ccd chips), if you ask me, and probably intagrated neutral density filer (not sure if this is real filter or just digital mimick), which helps for better tonality.
anyway, it's nice camera. oh, another thing as i am more canon dslr guy: does nikon have any FREE raw converter or not?

1 upvote
andrbar
By andrbar (Oct 27, 2012)

Yes it has : ViewNX, which should be provided with your Nikon raw capable camera.
Enjoy your new toy.
André

0 upvotes
mr.izo
By mr.izo (Oct 27, 2012)

sorry, iwas not precise enough before. what i want to say is: is there some free raw converter with good raw editing tools (wb, noise removing, lens correction etc)? now i discover that view nx (which i install it as soon i bring camera at home, hehe) have some editing tools, but it's very basic.
thnx.

0 upvotes
Robert Garcia NYC
By Robert Garcia NYC (Oct 26, 2012)

Great job Nikon!!! Hopefully the performance is good.

0 upvotes
SaltLakeGuy
By SaltLakeGuy (Oct 26, 2012)

I am quite surprised at the detail this sensor and lens combo is providing. A LOT less artifacting and nearly no smudging I see in nearly ALL the fixed lens cameras out there. The colors are sweet Nikon all the way. I think they did a fine job with this camera.

1 upvote
Combatmedic870
By Combatmedic870 (Oct 26, 2012)

Well the LX7's smaller sensor is actually a non issue. Compared to the P7700 it performs as good or better in raw. Very good show.

You cant beat the focal length of the P7700!

Comment edited 43 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Oct 26, 2012)

I actually like some samples as photos. Suprising..

And image quality is pretty good too. Bit smudgy here and there tho. RAW might be solution..

0 upvotes
Total comments: 73