P9 Review

Heheheh... we've been down the "if they wanted to do it" road. And we've argued with Sony about it for years here in the forum.

Having worked in programming, as well as in mass production, I'm just tellin' ya, it don't work that way.

You've also got the marketing division, which we haven't even talked about yet. Those guys are the secret ninjas of any company.

bob d said:

All Sony has do to do is program this once, then they could put it
into every camera. Sony could do it if it wanted to.

Click to expand...

I disagree with Ulysses here. That F707 is hard to carry around. I don't know if I'm dedicated enough to always have it with me.

But I'm going to stick for now with the 3MP Nikon 880 which I already have so I'm not in the market for a new compact camera at this time.

In the future, do I see myself buying another small camera, perhaps when there are some good affordable compact 5MP cameras. When I do buy the camera, it won't be a strictly P&S camera like the P9.

Before the Nikon, I had a Sony Mavica (I know, very embarrassing), and the thing I hated about it was not the big size, or even the puny 1.3 megapixel count, but rather the complete inabliity to know what aperture and shutter speed and ISO the camera had selected. That drove me nuts.

One of my complaints about the F707 is that in auto mode it doesn't tell you this information either, forcing me to always use A or P mode.

Ulysses said:

You've also got the marketing division, which we haven't even
talked about yet. Those guys are the secret ninjas of any company.

Click to expand...

When the marketing division see reviews trash the camera for not having manual features, then the will tell development "WE MUST HAVE MORE FEATURES."

If Joe conusmer thinks the camera is missing important features that another similarly priced camera has, he will be the morre feature-laden camera, even though he has no idea why he needs them.

Why else do all cameras have digital zoom? Now THAT's a waste of a feature. If the programmers who spend all day working on digital zoom could instead work on aperture priority mode and manual white balance, they would produce a much better camera for the exact same price.

This is a good thread. Hope Sony sees it.

--- and I have to add, that though there are different approaches here on the P&S class of camera, how refreshing to be able to discuss this without all of the crud we've been watching in other threads for the past few days---

Anyway....

bob d said:

Does the "common" user even need four megapixels? I don't think so.

Click to expand...

Nope. I absolutely believe that they don't "need" it. But let me ask another question:

Which will the "common" user place the emphasis upon: Having manual features or having greater megapixels?

Your own disposable camera illustration makes the point here: Most users want a camera that is virtually brain dead, but they equate high quality prints with higher megapixels.

Additionally, given that many users are also purchasing wide format cameras, they will actually use those extra pixels to good advantage as they can now print larger or at least crop full size 8x10 pics from a 4MP image more easily than from a 2MP or 3MP image.

bob d said:

I was just looking at some film prints yesterday and they looked so
bad. It's kind of strange how a medium with so much more
theoretical resolution thatn digital usually winds up making such
inferior prints than digital. But I'm finally starting to "see"
the truth.

Click to expand...

It's true. Film is not the end-all and be-all. Digital has truly entered the public consciousness as a real alternative.

Ulysses said:

Of course, you can. And of course, there is a need. The P9 is not
meant for that photographer, however. Think about who the P-series
is meant for, and where it will be MOST successful: The P-series
does best in Europe and Japan for the users who just want to pocket
the camera and forget about it.

Click to expand...

I thought the Japananese were all very serious photographers, and Europeans were more sophisticated than Americans. They still like manual transmissions in Europe, why not manual cameras?

Member said:

I actually like the auto w.b. for most purposes. For most
everything else, I use the One push manual, even though that can at
times be a bit flakey, too.

Click to expand...

No, the Auto WB is flaky. Even for basic daylight pictures, the sky always comes out a different color. Nikon never did that.

What do you mean that the manual is flakey too? Does this camera have yet another bug I haven't discovered?

Heheheh... I'm laughing at our rapid-fire responses to one another. Maybe at our rate, Phil really WILL put up a chat room.

bob d said:

When the marketing division see reviews trash the camera for not
having manual features, then the will tell development "WE MUST
HAVE MORE FEATURES."

Click to expand...

Yes, they will, but not immediately. They'll figure out the cost pros and cons. History here tells us that this sort of change doesn't come as quickly as we'd like.

bob d said:

If Joe conusmer thinks the camera is missing important features
that another similarly priced camera has, he will be the morre
feature-laden camera, even though he has no idea why he needs them.

Click to expand...

OK, but my primary question in this thread is this: Does Joe even know that he wants manual features? I don't think he does. That's because Joe probably doesn't know the difference between an aperture and a shutter speed.

That's not to disrespect Joe. It's just a lack of photographic education. And sometimes Joe doesn't care to be bothered with learning.

I will say this, in fairness: I'm sure that the consumers in this forum have become much more educated much more rapidly than Sony anticipated. Which accounts for our picking up on the weaknesses of the F707.

bob d said:

Why else do all cameras have digital zoom? Now THAT's a waste of a
feature. If the programmers who spend all day working on digital
zoom could instead work on aperture priority mode and manual white
balance, they would produce a much better camera for the exact same
price.

Click to expand...

Heheh... good point. While I won't go so far as as to calling it a total waste, I know what you mean. Again, it's a lack of education on the part of how digizoom works, as well as what it does not do. Digital zoom has now become a sort of 'gimme' feature. It's been around for so long and developed for so long that THERE is a feature that fits what you were talking about earlier. It costs nothing to pop it in.

But to add new features into the P9 like manual control would be a reworking of probably both the firmware, as well as possibly the hardware.

Ulysses said:

This is a good thread. Hope Sony sees it.

Click to expand...

They may.

Member said:

Nope. I absolutely believe that they don't "need" it. But let me
ask another question:

Which will the "common" user place the emphasis upon: Having manual
features or having greater megapixels?

Click to expand...

The theory behind the Kodak DX4900, it's the cheapest 4MP camera out there, and it makes awful photos. But someone will buy it because it's 4MP and costs less than 3MP cameras from other manufacturers.

Member said:

Your own disposable camera illustration makes the point here: Most
users want a camera that is virtually brain dead, but they equate
high quality prints with higher megapixels.

Click to expand...

The purpose of the point was that if people can't figure out how bad the prints from disposable cameras are, they will never need more than 2 megapixels.

Member said:

Additionally, given that many users are also purchasing wide format
cameras, they will actually use those extra pixels to good
advantage as they can now print larger or at least crop full size
8x10 pics from a 4MP image more easily than from a 2MP or 3MP
image.

Click to expand...

You are saying there are these people are aren't sophisticated enough to know what an F-stop is, but they know how to do advanced stuff with photoshop? I think not.

Member said:

It's true. Film is not the end-all and be-all. Digital has truly
entered the public consciousness as a real alternative.

Click to expand...

Film allows a person with a high level of POST-picture taking expertise and equipment to make very good prints. This is beyond the equipment and ability of the average person. Harder and more expensive than using Corel Photo-Paint.

bob d said:

I thought the Japananese were all very serious photographers, and
Europeans were more sophisticated than Americans. They still like
manual transmissions in Europe, why not manual cameras?

Click to expand...

I thought it was the Europeans' love of art and music that made them more sophisticated. Certainly not the tiny rollerskates they call cars. )

bob d said:

No, the Auto WB is flaky. Even for basic daylight pictures, the
sky always comes out a different color.

Click to expand...

Yeah, it's flakey. I guess I tend to manage with it. For consistency, the better way is to go with the presets like you're doing, few though they are. Fortunately, we can look forward to future models including a wider array of presets. But like I said, I tend to use the One push w.b. for all but flash shots.

bob d said:

What do you mean that the manual is flakey too? Does this camera
have yet another bug I haven't discovered?

Click to expand...

No, we've talked about that a long time ago. You just have to be careful what you use to calibrate the One-push. I don't use a gray card. I don't use a white sheet in the shade. I try to use white that is in the same light as what I'm shooting. Otherwise, it gets screwy.

Yeah, I gotta admit. I don't leave home without it. The times that I do, I always regret it. When I'm going out for work, I take my briefcase and my camera bag. When I'm going to shop, I take my money and my camera bag. When I'm going to friends, I take my wife and my camera bag.

I always regret it when I don't.

bob d said:

I disagree with Ulysses here. That F707 is hard to carry around.
I don't know if I'm dedicated enough to always have it with me.

Click to expand...

Ulysses said:

Heheheh... I'm laughing at our rapid-fire responses to one another.
Maybe at our rate, Phil really WILL put up a chat room.

Click to expand...

I suppose I really should be doing something else. But oh well, one more response...

Member said:

Yes, they will, but not immediately. They'll figure out the cost
pros and cons. History here tells us that this sort of change
doesn't come as quickly as we'd like.

Click to expand...

The S70 didn't have these features, then they were added to the S75. That was pretty quick.

Member said:

OK, but my primary question in this thread is this: Does Joe even
know that he wants manual features? I don't think he does. That's
because Joe probably doesn't know the difference between an
aperture and a shutter speed.

Click to expand...

Correct, Joe doesn't know.

But how does Joe know he needs more pixels? That's what I want to know.

Member said:

I will say this, in fairness: I'm sure that the consumers in this
forum have become much more educated much more rapidly than Sony
anticipated. Which accounts for our picking up on the weaknesses of
the F707.

Click to expand...

Read the threads where people say what other cameras they own. F707 owners are NOT point and shooters, they are for the most people with previous experience using sophisticated film cameras.

Member said:

Digital zoom has now become a sort of 'gimme' feature. It's been
around for so long and developed for so long that THERE is a
feature that fits what you were talking about earlier. It costs
nothing to pop it in.

Click to expand...

Digital zoom costs nothing? I thought you were arguing before that something simple like aperture priority mode cost too much money to include. But now digital zoom is free?

Member said:

But to add new features into the P9 like manual control would be a
reworking of probably both the firmware, as well as possibly the
hardware.

Click to expand...

No, the hardware doesn't have to be changed much. Just an extra stop on the dial. Everything else is handled through software.

Member said:

I thought it was the Europeans' love of art and music that made
them more sophisticated. Certainly not the tiny rollerskates they
call cars. )

Click to expand...

Hey, I drive a small car.

Member said:

No, we've talked about that a long time ago. You just have to be
careful what you use to calibrate the One-push. I don't use a gray
card. I don't use a white sheet in the shade. I try to use white
that is in the same light as what I'm shooting. Otherwise, it gets
screwy.

Click to expand...

That's not flaky. Flaky means that the camera is not working properly. Holding your white card under a green light will obviously screw up the white balance.

Four outdoor work, the "sun" setting seems to work. For indoors, you should be able to walk up to the target area, do the white balance on a white card, and walk back.

Ulysses said:

Yeah, I gotta admit. I don't leave home without it. The times that
I do, I always regret it. When I'm going out for work, I take my
briefcase and my camera bag. When I'm going to shop, I take my
money and my camera bag. When I'm going to friends, I take my wife
and my camera bag.

Click to expand...

Wow.

I have been waiting for the P9 to exchange my P1 (the P1 have problem to focus in low light because no "AF assist lamp"). When I was on vaccation last week I borrowed a friends P5 and when looking at the pictures when I came home I was really disappointed! The camera must have serious focusing problem or something (please note that i'm a novice). The pictures from my P1 is much better than the P5. If the P9 is like the P5 I definetely do not want it.

I think I will buy the S40 (or maybe there will be a new Canon soon?)

Magnus

r00t said:

So after reading the review, which would you get?

Click to expand...

bob d and Ulysses,

I disagree with both of you re: more megapixels...

It is much simpler than "more is better, so I want it" and definitely not wasted upon 'Joe' the archetypal P&S user.

All things being equal, a 4MP cam produces a better photo than a 3MP cam. They might be overexposed, poorly composed, out of focus, whatever, but the 4MP will have MORE detail and look less horrible. At least theoretically!

Therefore, more IS better. If not, why do film P&S cams use 35mm film? I am sure somebody could have come up with a cheaper but lower quality format...

More MPs will be sought after by manufacturers and consumers (of all ranges) until a better format replaces the current technology or the current technology is exhausted.

Tom L.

bob d said:

Ulysses said:

This is a good thread. Hope Sony sees it.

Click to expand...

They may.

bob d said:

Nope. I absolutely believe that they don't "need" it. But let me
ask another question:

Which will the "common" user place the emphasis upon: Having manual
features or having greater megapixels?

Click to expand...

The theory behind the Kodak DX4900, it's the cheapest 4MP camera
out there, and it makes awful photos. But someone will buy it
because it's 4MP and costs less than 3MP cameras from other
manufacturers.

bob d said:

Your own disposable camera illustration makes the point here: Most
users want a camera that is virtually brain dead, but they equate
high quality prints with higher megapixels.

Click to expand...

The purpose of the point was that if people can't figure out how
bad the prints from disposable cameras are, they will never need
more than 2 megapixels.

bob d said:

Additionally, given that many users are also purchasing wide format
cameras, they will actually use those extra pixels to good
advantage as they can now print larger or at least crop full size
8x10 pics from a 4MP image more easily than from a 2MP or 3MP
image.

Click to expand...

You are saying there are these people are aren't sophisticated
enough to know what an F-stop is, but they know how to do advanced
stuff with photoshop? I think not.

bob d said:

It's true. Film is not the end-all and be-all. Digital has truly
entered the public consciousness as a real alternative.

Click to expand...

Film allows a person with a high level of POST-picture taking
expertise and equipment to make very good prints. This is beyond
the equipment and ability of the average person. Harder and more
expensive than using Corel Photo-Paint.

Click to expand...

bob d said:

The theory behind the Kodak DX4900, it's the cheapest 4MP camera
out there, and it makes awful photos. But someone will buy it
because it's 4MP and costs less than 3MP cameras from other
manufacturers.

Click to expand...

Now, that camera is different. That series for Kodak wins not only because of their simplicity, but also because of the docking station. There is a third reason, too, that these cameras are so popular from Kodak: The store reps really, really, really push them when customers come in. Walk into any BestBuy or Circuit City and watch them. It'll drive you nuts.

This series has saved Kodak's digital buttocks this year.

But again, it supports my own contention that the users are generally looking for something easy to use. Not more complex. This is why we see Sony investing more into their P-series, Canon restarting up again their A-series, and Nikon (NIKON, of all people... giving users more and more 885, 775, and now the 2500). Nikon producing P&S cameras. Simplicity is the order of the day.

bob d said:

The purpose of the point was that if people can't figure out how
bad the prints from disposable cameras are, they will never need
more than 2 megapixels.

Click to expand...

But which is drilled into public consciousness:
a) More pixels equal better pictures and prints
b) More manual features equal better pictures and prints

Most customers will choose "a" every time, just like a baby picking up a shiny new penny instead of picking up the scratched and soiled quarter coin.

That's not shenanigans on Sony's part. That's just the results of their demographics expressed in their camera here.

bob d said:

You are saying there are these people are aren't sophisticated
enough to know what an F-stop is, but they know how to do advanced
stuff with photoshop? I think not.

Click to expand...

No, I'm not saying that at all. People can learn whatever it is that they want. And they are more educated now than ever. But only up to the point that they know that they want to take a picture, and they want to print it out from their computer. Here is all you need to do that, for example, with minimal effort on the users' part, assuming you have a PC already:

1) A point-n-shoot camera

2) A copy of any decent and inexpensive image viewer/editor or XP for that matter

3) An inexpensive Epson or Canon printer for not much more than $100.

At least, that's what the BestBuy salesmen will tell them.

bob d said:

Hey, I drive a small car.

Click to expand...

Oops... busted...

bob d said:

That's not flaky. Flaky means that the camera is not working
properly. Holding your white card under a green light will
obviously screw up the white balance.

Click to expand...

Trust me... it's flakey. We've talked about it way back when the camera first came out. But it's minor.

bob d said:

I suppose I really should be doing something else. But oh well,
one more response...

Click to expand...

Ulysses waves his hand slightly to and fro.

--

You don't need to respond to this post. You have other more important business.

--

"I'm not going to respond to this one. I have other more important things to do right now."

heheheheheh....

bob d said:

The S70 didn't have these features, then they were added to the
S75. That was pretty quick.

Click to expand...

The S75 also came in at a steep price point. Hundreds more than the P9.

You pay for those features.

bob d said:

But how does Joe know he needs more pixels? That's what I want to know.

Click to expand...

Joe is persuaded by the marketing industry that he needs it. No one persuades anyone about needing manual features, except when a person finds a forum of experienced users like this one. Then he runs smack dab into US and realizes that he wants to have more control.

But all Joe will find when shopping at the retailer is an emphasis on megapixels. It's always been this way. It was that way when I got my first digicam. Most were selling 1.3 or 1.5 megapixel cameras. But no, that wasn't enough for me. I had to go out and get a 2... 2... 2MP camera.

I was on top of the world... until the 3MP cameras came out two months later.

bob d said:

Read the threads where people say what other cameras they own.
F707 owners are NOT point and shooters, they are for the most
people with previous experience using sophisticated film cameras.

Click to expand...

I'll only add here that there are an awful lot of first-time buyers in that crowd, too. The forum is skewed in that it is not totally representative of what is happening outside the forum. The forum is more progressive and has much more advanced expectations than most users.

bob d said:

Digital zoom costs nothing? I thought you were arguing before that
something simple like aperture priority mode cost too much money to
include. But now digital zoom is free?

Click to expand...

We've had digital zoom for years and years and years now. Nobody needs to ask about how to use digital zoom. You push the button and it makes the picture big.

But ask the same sort of customer about how to make heads or tails of aperture priority and how it will affect his exposure...?

These are not the same. Yes, I'd argue that aperture control is going to be a more costly feature than digital zoom.

bob d said:

No, the hardware doesn't have to be changed much. Just an extra
stop on the dial. Everything else is handled through software.

Click to expand...

Maybe, but my guess here is, Not everything. You've also got logic boards to consider, as well as quite possibly some actual hardware to consider.

You've been watching by the sidelines the whole time, considering when and where you'd strike, haven't you?

Tom L. said:

All things being equal, a 4MP cam produces a better photo than a
3MP cam. They might be overexposed, poorly composed, out of focus,
whatever, but the 4MP will have MORE detail and look less horrible.
At least theoretically!

Click to expand...

Where I think the 4MP can be of advantage is in the larger prints.

I don't believe the 3MP produced inferior images. Look at the ones that were produced by the F505V, for example. Beautiful stuff that easily held their own against the 3MP and sometimes even 4MP cameras. Well... OK, against the 3MP cameras (I went too far... reverse megapixel fever).

It's the industry of chip makers and camera manufacturers that drive this megapixel war. Until they stop it (and they won't), then the consumer will always place top priority here.

Yeah, I know. My friends used to say that I "have a problem." It's like having an extra finger. Now, they just don't talk about it. At least not in front of my face. )

bob d said:

Ulysses said:

Yeah, I gotta admit. I don't leave home without it. The times that
I do, I always regret it. When I'm going out for work, I take my
briefcase and my camera bag. When I'm going to shop, I take my
money and my camera bag. When I'm going to friends, I take my wife
and my camera bag.

Click to expand...

Wow.

Click to expand...

Ulysses said:

No, I'm not saying that at all. People can learn whatever it is
that they want. And they are more educated now than ever. But only
up to the point that they know that they want to take a picture,
and they want to print it out from their computer. Here is all you
need to do that, for example, with minimal effort on the users'
part, assuming you have a PC already:

1) A point-n-shoot camera

2) A copy of any decent and inexpensive image viewer/editor or XP
for that matter

3) An inexpensive Epson or Canon printer for not much more than $100.

Click to expand...

This is why digital isn't about to kill film. It's a lot easier to just buy a disposable camera and take it to Walgreens to get it developed. And everyone knows the film has more resolution anyway.