|
Average rating:
4.33
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Average rating:
4.33
|
|
|
|
Opinion: This was my first camera and not it dates back to almost more than 36 months. The best p&s perhaps canon is created. Any where it gives the comfort. Especially in low light situations it performs dam well i have taken pictures when twilight is there and pictures have come out damn well. A nice camera to take to parties also to give kids for learning photography.
Problems: Poor battery chamber construction. THe socket has come loose only one tag holds the battery. Poor coloring the color fades off also small lcd panel and poor battery performance.
Opinion: I've had this camera for about 18 months and think it's brilliant. Would like a bigger zoom and manual settings and a larger lcd, but am having a hard time finding something to upgrade to.
It is very well built and has a good range of features including iso preference and auto bracketing. Performs well in low light and in bright light I don't get any purple fringing. Although the lcd screen is small I can see whether the picture is sharp or not unlike some other p&s cameras. Not sold anymore but if you see one second hand I would recommend it.
Problems: none
Opinion: Great little camera which gives stunningly high resolution images across the frame when examined critically - something which many of the smaller cameras seem unable to do. Excellent natural colour and almost perfect white balance. Exceptionally good macro for a mini camera. Doesn't really offer much manual control apart from ASA equivalent setting, but performs very well within its limitations. In my view the "soft image" question is a total non-issue, as the images are very high resolution and look extremely natural. I do not feel any need to post-process them. In most other ways it is about as good as the competition - there are some annoyances compared with a "serious" camera but it is very usable. And the output is *very good indeed*.
Problems: Won't bother many people, but lens distortion at wide-angle is higher than I'd hoped for (no better than or maybe slightly worse than some competing cameras) and spoils an otherwise near-perfect technical performance.
Oh, and the AF is less reliable than 5 year old Nikons at long focal lengths, and bad enough to be an annoyance - don't believe the stuff about the AF light providing some sort of panacea where AF is concerned.
Opinion: I had the Nikon Coolpix 5200 for a couple of weeks and I've now returned it. I'm a novice so I can't possibly give a proper in depth review. There aren't any other reviews here, so I may as well share my opinion.
The cam was an impulse buy. I urgently needed a cam. I took over 1000 shots with it... I was pretty unsatisfied considering I paid $600 for it here in Australia. Not including the 128 MB SD card and extra warranty, which were also refunded. I definitely paid much more than this camera is worth.
Generally, the images were soft.
With a LOT of the shots I took, the images were either overexposed or underexposed.
The noise was bad in low light settings, on the lowest ISO setting... whether I used the flash or not.
But there seemed to be very low level of noise in better lighting (outdoors)
4 cm isn't an amazing figure, but the macro on this cam is really good.
Colours were pretty accurate... a little dramatic sometimes but that's a good thing for me
The camera looks good, seemed allright to hold, fits in a regular decent sized pocket.
Pretty easy to use.
I didn't notice any extreme flaws... there was a bit of purple fringing... didn't notice many halo artifacts, or jaggies... but the review on this site would be better at judging that of course.
Problems: Listed what I could think of. I would advise you to try the cam out for yourself if you have a high interest... but I returned it because it wasn't worth anywhere near what I paid for it...
It's okay if you just want a point-and-shoot to whip out of your pocket. I wanted something with more manual controls, and the image quality was nothing to rave about. I think this site says in their conclusion that better quality is achieved by image editing programmes... not something I'm interested in.
|
|