Outside Magazine names W90 "Gear of the Year"

Outside Magazine "Buyer's Guide" (which arrived at newsstands in US and Canada on May 4th) named the W90 a "2010 Gear of the Year". Here's link to a post with more info, if interested:

http://nedbunnell.blogspot.com/2010/05/outside-magazine-names-w90-gear-of-year.html

Cheers,
Ned

Thanks Ned for the post.

I have been thinking of getting the W90 for the very reasons stated in the magazine article. I have been holding off to see sample images taken with it first and I am having a hard time finding them. My K10 is a little large sometimes when I am just out and about in the outdoors and don't want to haul around lots of gear.
GR
--
grcolts
http://web.me.com/grcolts/Site/About_Me.html

That's good news Ned, and certainly very encouraging. What I am still waiting to find out is if the IQ of the W90 can at least match that of the W60. The IQ kind of took a dip (unfortunately) with the W80, and the W90 has the same sensor resolution. That is to prove that more pixels doesn't necessarily equates to better IQ. The images you've posted in your blog look good though, and certainly caught my attention. I wouldn't mind upgrading from my 33WR and the W90 seems an interesting option.

--
Roger

Recently I was in Okinawa (Japanese islands near Taiwan) and it suddenly dawned on me that the W90 would have been the best companion to have for the beaches and diving that was scheduled. I spent half an evening trying to find a retailer who was carrying the W90. Unfortunately, none had it. There were quite a few P&S from C&N, none waterproof and one waterproof one from Fuji, but still I just couldn't think of anything less than the W90. Finally, evening ended in disappointment. I have many beautiful shots from my trusty K20D on land, but none from underwater. I will definitely buy the W90 before the next trip to the beaches.
Akhil

--
Latest Work:
City lights http://www.pbase.com/akhil80/beauty_of_night
Street Candids http://www.pbase.com/akhil80/tokyocandids

rogerstpierre said:

The IQ kind of took a dip (unfortunately) with the W80, and the W90 has the same sensor resolution.

Click to expand...

Yes, the W80 has horrible high ISO, I tested my daughter's W80 yesterday. I've tried it before and thought it could be used up to ISO 400, but it's worse than I thought: The noise is already annoying at ISO 200. I've now advised her to have auto ISO set at 64-100. There's already some very visible shadow chroma noise at ISO 100, but at least the really annoying NR isn't applied at that ISO.

It's really a pity that the W80 wasn't equipped with a better sensor, because the lens is very good, miles ahead of the lens in my W10.

Here's a sample ISO 200 shot - the noise can be spotted even in this small version. On the other hand, this shot also shows the excellent close focus (these are really small leaves, spring has just arrived here!) sharpness and flare resistance of the lens:



Full size version here: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3390/4619099001_a5a2d11fa0_o.jpg
--
Espen

Having owned and used a W90 I have no idea how a respectable magazine could name the W90 "gear of the year". I had numerous problems with mine and it is now getting repaired under warranty. Other user experiences on the web seem to mirror mine only without the problems getting quite as extreme. Most owners have only been posting pictures from their backyard or in their swimming pool. I used mine in a more extreme environment (2 weeks on a remote island in the Carribean) which likely correlates to the more extreme problems I experienced.

The pictures were lackluster when the camera worked. Even the lauded microscope mode was smoke and mirrors, it took pictures at 1920x1080 (a crop of the sensor?). The lack of image stabilization seemed to cause noticable image quality problems compared to other waterproof cameras which were on the same trip (it's hard to take or use a tripod underwater). The ISO can be set fairly high for a P&S, but the noise was ridiculous at anything beyond 400. When set to auto, the camera would frequently overexpose pictures to the point that they were just a wash of whiteness.

The only thing the W90 has going for it are its looks. The thing looks rugged, and looks sell. It's too bad that the Canon D10 looks so ugly, because in my experience it performs better than any of the current generation of waterproof cameras.

That being said, anyone who thinks the looks justify the performance should talk to me about buying my W90 when Pentax fixes it and sends it back or replaces it with a new one.

--

A warming of several degrees, Melted ice and raised oceans and seas. The Army was finished, the Air Force diminished, but the Navy was quietly pleased.

Yes, it is a good looking camera.

I have considered this camera but after seeing so many negative reviews on it I am looking at its competition. Too bad because I had high hopes for this camera. Too bad Pentax did not spend more time on its performance. I would have bought the Pentax but performance is important to me. BTW, most of its competition does have IS.
GR

Quaid said:

The only thing the W90 has going for it are its looks. The thing looks rugged, and looks sell. It's too bad that the Canon D10 looks so ugly, because in my experience it performs better than any of the current generation of waterproof cameras.

That being said, anyone who thinks the looks justify the performance should talk to me about buying my W90 when Pentax fixes it and sends it back or replaces it with a new one.

Click to expand...

--
grcolts
http://web.me.com/grcolts/Site/About_Me.html

Pentax just released a firmware update for the W90, but the list of changes don't address any of the problems people have been reporting...and certainly none that I experienced. The fixes were all about the Eye-Fi memory compatability or similar...which I would label as really, really not important relative to the slew of problems the camera has. That's just my opinion though, maybe other people have been enjoying the unreliable, faulty, disappointing performance....but really pining over their Eye-Fi compatability woes.
--

A warming of several degrees, Melted ice and raised oceans and seas. The Army was finished, the Air Force diminished, but the Navy was quietly pleased.

I really don't understand why I keep running into such negative comments about the W80 and W90. I'm a professional, and during almost four decades of selling images, I've never owned a P&S of any kind, but I bought a W80 last summer just to play around with and investigate underwater photography.

I was impressed and surprised with the quality, so sent some images out. Before the charge bill even came due, I sold two inside images and two covers. The only thing I can figure is that people are shooting in the wrong mode or something.

I figured if I liked underwater photography (and I do), I'd probably upgrade to a professional quality camera to dunk, but the quality of the W80 is adaquate for covers, and that's good enough for me.

I am thinking of getting a W90, simply because it is compatable with the new waterproof remote, but I also heard it won't work when the camera is under water. Is that true?
--

In the end, the only things that matter are the people we help and the people we hurt. http://pa.photoshelter.com/user/ronkruger

Ron Kruger said:

I really don't understand why I keep running into such negative comments about the W80 and W90. I'm a professional, and during almost four decades of selling images, I've never owned a P&S of any kind, but I bought a W80 last summer just to play around with and investigate underwater photography.

I was impressed and surprised with the quality, so sent some images out. Before the charge bill even came due, I sold two inside images and two covers. The only thing I can figure is that people are shooting in the wrong mode or something.

I figured if I liked underwater photography (and I do), I'd probably upgrade to a professional quality camera to dunk, but the quality of the W80 is adaquate for covers, and that's good enough for me.

I am thinking of getting a W90, simply because it is compatable with the new waterproof remote, but I also heard it won't work when the camera is under water. Is that true?
--

In the end, the only things that matter are the people we help and the people we hurt. http://pa.photoshelter.com/user/ronkruger

Click to expand...

Would you share any of your W90 work with us?
Where can I see the four images you sold straight away?

--

A warming of several degrees, Melted ice and raised oceans and seas. The Army was finished, the Air Force diminished, but the Navy was quietly pleased.

Posting images here is too much trouble, but you can see them at my website listed below. I believe they are all in my Smallmouth Stream Fishing gallery. Both cover images were of smallmouth bass underwater. One is a verticle #0922. The other is a horizontal #0636. The two inside sales were of a tadpole and of frog eggs. These may be in the smallmouth gallery as well, but they may be in my Coyotes and Other Critters gallery. As you look thorugh images, all underwater shots were taken with the W80. I considering a W90.

I've also found this camera takes good pictures above water as well, if you are in the right mode. I have further improved above water shots by holding a 49mm polorizer (bought for my Limiteds) flat over the lens and by holding a GND flat against the front of the camera as well to darken skies.

But for all of my serious above water shots, I use my K20D and Limiteds and DA* lenses. It's not that good.

With your W-series cameras, be sure you are in the right shooting mode and then process them with the ACDSee that came with the camera. Straight out of the camera, they don't look very good, but by simply clicking the Auto Exposure button, they come to life.

--

In the end, the only things that matter are the people we help and the people we hurt. http://pa.photoshelter.com/user/ronkruger

Those are some great shots. Thanks for sharing.

--

A warming of several degrees, Melted ice and raised oceans and seas. The Army was finished, the Air Force diminished, but the Navy was quietly pleased.

isn't the idea of a point and shoot camera just that...point and shoot and get fairly decent images off it? if you still have to process the images which i'm fairly confident most point and shooters at which the camera is aimed at won't do then it does deserve the bad rap its getting and is pointless as a point and shoot camera.

raven900sx said:

isn't the idea of a point and shoot camera just that...point and shoot and get fairly decent images off it? if you still have to process the images which i'm fairly confident most point and shooters at which the camera is aimed at won't do then it does deserve the bad rap its getting and is pointless as a point and shoot camera.

Click to expand...

That's a valid point, Raven, but it would seem anyone could click on one button. It's so simple, it never occured to me that a lot of people wouldn't know to do it. Your point, however, does explain where much of the bad rap originates and clears up much of my confusion.

When one knows something about photography, it is easy to take the most simple things for granted. Maybe this is what Pentax did as well. Even though it is a P&S, it is not as simple as a disposable camera, with many more options and features than I expected. I like it because of these features, but it may be confusing overkill for the target market.
--

In the end, the only things that matter are the people we help and the people we hurt. http://pa.photoshelter.com/user/ronkruger

Ron Kruger said:

I am thinking of getting a W90, simply because it is compatable with the new waterproof remote, but I also heard it won't work when the camera is under water. Is that true?

Click to expand...

The "waterproof" remote is weather sealed, not submersible. It only works when facing the front of the camera, and can't be used for any drive mode other than a special single-shot remote mode (either immediate release or three-second timer). So you can't use it to start a time-lapse sequence, for example.

For the most part, it seems to be designed to free the photographer from having to race against the self-timer to make it into a group shot or self-portrait.

Don't know if it will work with the camera underwater, either with the remote above the surface or underwater in a ziploc bag. I would assume not until proven otherwise.

On the upside, it works with remote-capable Pentax SLRs.

Thanks Matt. That's what I suspected. Back to the DYI workbench.
--

In the end, the only things that matter are the people we help and the people we hurt. http://pa.photoshelter.com/user/ronkruger