Just Posted: Nikon Coolpix P7700 real-world sample images

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.

Oct 28, 2012permalink

gsum

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.

Oct 29, 2012permalink

Camediadude

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

Oct 29, 2012permalink

Altruisto

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.

Nov 4, 2012permalink

averagjoe

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.

Oct 28, 2012permalink

Photomonkey

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.

Oct 27, 2012permalink

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 ;)

Oct 27, 2012*permalink

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.

Oct 27, 2012permalink

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.

Oct 27, 2012permalink

RadPhoto

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

Oct 28, 2012permalink

Camediadude

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.. :)

Oct 28, 2012permalink

"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.

Oct 28, 2012permalink

"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.

Oct 28, 2012*permalink

thethirdcoast

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.

Oct 29, 2012permalink

Camediadude

"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.

Oct 29, 2012*permalink

@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.

Oct 29, 2012permalink

(unknown member)

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!

Oct 29, 2012permalink

@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?

Oct 29, 2012permalink

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.

Oct 29, 2012*permalink

DVT80111

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

Will wait until next year for inventory clearance.

Oct 27, 2012permalink

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.

Oct 26, 2012permalink

OldZorki

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

Oct 26, 2012permalink

Slanicka Tomas

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. ;)

Oct 27, 2012permalink

Vincent Aquilino

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.

Oct 26, 2012permalink

OldZorki

" 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.

Oct 26, 2012permalink

marike6

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.

Oct 27, 2012permalink

bobbarber

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.

Oct 27, 2012permalink

Reg Natarajan

Maybe the best comment I've ever seen here.

Oct 28, 2012permalink

peterwr

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...

Oct 26, 2012permalink

fotokeena

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

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

Oct 27, 2012permalink

Slanicka Tomas

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

Oct 27, 2012*permalink

peevee1

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?

Oct 26, 2012permalink

Simon Joinson

but otherwise we did ok?

Oct 26, 2012permalink

Dimitri Khoz

Yes, great shots, Guys!

Oct 26, 2012permalink

Pat Cullinan Jr

No good turn goes unpunished.

Oct 26, 2012permalink

Digitall

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!

Oct 26, 2012*permalink

MDGColorado

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.

Oct 26, 2012permalink

oldtimes

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.

Oct 26, 2012permalink

Barney Britton

Thanks!

Oct 26, 2012permalink

Simon97

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.

Oct 26, 2012permalink

peevee1

Too cool WB IMO.

Oct 26, 2012permalink

Greg Henry

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.

Oct 26, 2012*permalink

Sean4Peace

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.

Oct 26, 2012permalink

rhlpetrus

Nice camera and results, good job Nikon.

Oct 26, 2012permalink

YiannisPP

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.

Oct 26, 2012*permalink

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.

Oct 26, 2012*permalink

photo perzon

Yes the colors are muted

Oct 26, 2012permalink

Dan

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.

Oct 26, 2012*permalink

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.

Oct 26, 2012permalink