|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
The second image here is our new chromatic aberrations test shot. It's a sheet of black card with a test pattern cut into it which produces very bright regions, against a window. Camera set to full wide angle and deliberately overexposed 3 stops to make the aberrations more visible.

Barrel and Pincushion Distortion
The lens system in the 990 appears to be pretty much unchanged from the 950 (give or take a few millimeters) and thus still suffers from a similar amount of barrel (a spherizing of the image at wide angles) and pincushion distortion (a pinching of the image at telephoto) these effects can be removed afterwards with third party software and techniques.
Apologies for the slightly amateur looking target in this test, but it's adequate to calculate the amount of distortion encountered at full wide and full tele. Distortion calculated as the amount of distortion to the horizontal line (from left or right to its center) as a percentage of image height.
![]() |
![]() |
| Full Wide Angle, 1.1% Barrel Distortion | Full Telephoto, 0.9% Pincushion Distortion |

Low light
I've
received several requests from readers to do a quick comparison between
the amount of noise generated by the 990 for longer exposures compared
to the 950, so here it is. The first two shots were taken in a dark room
with the lens cap on. Eight seconds is a long exposure (for a digital
camera) and both cameras produced what to the visible eye is a black frame,
using Photoshop to increase the brightness 10 fold we can see that the
990 does indeed produce a little more low level noise than the 950, but
these tests should be taken with a pinch of salt, they're pushing the
cameras to their absolute extremes considering that they're performing
fairly well.
Crops taken from the center 240 x 180 of each image. Shutter Priority mode was used to lock the exposure at 8 seconds, on the 990 the sensitivity was fixed at ISO 100, on the 950 you can't manually alter the sensitivity in shutter priority mode I measured it from the EXIF headers as ISO 112.
![]() |
![]() |
| Nikon Coolpix 990, 8 seconds, 10x brighter | Nikon Coolpix 950, 8 seconds, 10x brighter |
The next shot was taken in a darkened room, measured light was 1.8 EV (flash meter). The 950 under exposed the shot because of a higher aperture and lower ISO. From a noise point of view there is some visible on the 990 shot but it's very very slight, there are also visible stuck pixels from both cameras, more visible on the 950 shot.
![]() |
![]() |
| Nikon Coolpix 990, 8 seconds, F4.3, ISO 100 | |
![]() |
![]() |
| Nikon Coolpix 950, 8 seconds, F5.6, ISO 80 | |
The following shot was taken from a tripod with an EV compensation of +0.3 EV. The image on the right has had the noise removed using a dark frame technique. Put simply take a full black frame (lens cap on) at the same length exposure, in Photoshop paste this frame as a new layer and give it a slight Gaussian Blur (0.3 pixels), then change the Layer Options to "Difference" and voila the noise will disappear (well not quite, it'll leave tiny holes but be less visible).
| Nikon Coolpix 990, 8 seconds | Fixed in Photoshop using a black frame |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
| Bookmark: | ||||
| Actions: | < Previous | Next > | Print page |
Please wait, fetching latest prices.















