Nikon Coolpix SQ

Opinion: Not so good. But image quality better than others. When you shot some pictures you have to wait until writing on the card. I missed a lot of shoots. In that case too slow. Battery life is soo good. When you are going to travel you have to carry all accessories. (Not for only charger) This is awful.

Opinion: Nice cam... i got it for almost a month, and i like it...Easy to use, solid, good looking...For a beginner, it's excellent. Except some artifacts and a little grain that came out in low light, everything it's perfect. Good job, Nikon! :D

Opinion: This is my first digital camera. I have not experienced the problems others stated in reviews. Pictures are sharp. Cannot focus manualy, but can choose focus area. Great deal on Ritz.com for $199.00.

Opinion: Nice design, all-metal construction, very sharp display, easy to use, good lens.
A great camera for beginners, a good pocket camera for amateur.

Opinion: well, at first i want to tell that i also own a kodak 14n and a fuji S2, aside my largeformat and panorama film cameras,- i can tell that i am not a newcomer in the aspect of image quality. i needed for some reportage work next weekend a little unvisible camera. finally the work didnot happen now aften buying the sq... therefore i wanted to bring back the cam today to my dealer, cause i bought it just for this job. and what happened? when i wanted to do it in its package it fall down on my floor, which is made from stones. app. 1.20mtr directly down. it has a dull now, but it works. i would not want to see my 14n or my fuji after such a fall...... enough said bout building quality or? i had to hold the camera now and i started to make some prints. picture quality is really not bad. very good colors if you increase a little bit the saturation. noise doesnt show up much in the prints. if the camera goes up to above iso 100 till 200 it becomes very visible on screen. noise removing in ps helps a lot, and as i said the prints are looking really nice. images are sharp. the camera overexposes slightly. quality becomes better, saturation also, with -0.3 or -0.7 compensation,- at least in the manual mode. great to shoot without that anyone realise it....
nice camera. i tried other 3- 5 megapixel cams also. couldnt see that they have been sooo much better. anyway i wasni fixed too much in the quality,- the swing lense made my decision.

Opinion: a friend of mine need a small digicam, i did some research and conclude that the ideal cam for her is either nikon 2100 or 3100. i reluctant to suggest canon a60 or a70 since she is a novice in photography.
when we get to the store, all technical details regarding 2100 and 3100 went to drain as she saw the cute shape of SQ. i didnt object her choice since it bares the same brand, nikon, for which i trust.
however, after testing it for a week, i regret for not objecting as she chosed SQ. the image quality is very noisy (even thou i check the ISO is already low / 70). the flash is not powerfull. compared to nikon 2500 that i have used, this cute baby is very dissapointing.
i put 5 for construction as the shape is indeed beautifull. 5 for features, as the menu is quite extensive, even a bit confusing (3 for ease of use). i put image quality as 2 (below what i expect from nikon)

Opinion: I have been interested in this camera for some time but because of many negative reviews I have been reluctant to purchase. To help make a decision, I took my own memory card to a local shop and took 6 indoor/flash shots inside the store and the same number of outdoor shots on a very bright sunny afternoon. The indoor shots seemed fine to me (very little noise) and the outdoor shots were excellent with none of the problems mentioned by some users. All the shots were sharp and clear with good color and detail. You could see some noise in the shadow areas but on my 4x6 dye-sub prints they were barely noticable.

I'm wondering if some users have gotten defective cameras? The salesman in the camera store did say that the lens on this camera was slow and that it needs a good source of light to produce reasonable images. So the camera certainly isn't without its limitations, but from what some users have said here, it sounds like their cameras are defective. Even my indoor shots inside the store in very dim flourescent lighting came out pretty good and sharp.

Opinion: As a user of Nikon for over 15 years, I have waited since their announcement to purchase the elegant Coolpix SQ. However, the pictures in the bright day lights came out very fuzzy, with the blue skies looking like quilts. The pictures are useless to keep. Due to my blind trust to Nikon, I bought two of those from a non-returnable website, intending to give one away as a gift. I don't know if I should blame myself or nikon for that, but the result is that I have two of those cute SQs boxed in my garage.

Opinion: With such a bad image quality, I am surprised this bears the label
NIKON. I have had many NIKON's before, and have been very
satisfied. I am currently using CoolPix 990 and 995 for
professional work. The SQ was meant as a complement that is
easier to take along. But, these images are not useful at all. The
grainy quality makes a web-cam look good in comparison. I have
the latest 1.3 firmware installed, but without any improvement.