thoughts on wb750

I would think its ability to achieve very high optical magnification at extremely low cost and size is rather useful to many people.

lisztfr wrote:

Look at the sensor size :

Sensor Size, 1/2.3

So this it not worth to buy, the sensor is too small, for achieving anything far from correct. This sort of product should be banned from market.

WB750 is already in sale in the Czech Republic. The price is 5 890 CZK (~ 311 USD). First user review is here: http://www.megapixel.cz/samsung-wb750?stranka=recenze (use translator).

Some sample photos are here: http://www.megapixel.cz/samsung-wb750#nazory (bottom of the page) and here: http://www.ulozto.cz/10971404/test-samsung-wb750-zip

Jesus, those samples, even at low ISO, are terrible. Still the heavy NR in place.

I might even have to say that I'm seeing possibly worse results in those samples than with the 650. Perhaps the high ISO performance might be ok, comparatively speaking, but still, that's a complete mess with NR.

I'd seriously give up zoom to swing an S95.

i have no use for a s95. i really don't want to pay extra for manual controls that i won't use, and i really do want at least 10 times zoom. I want a camera that will work great in auto mode and will take decent pics in lower indoor lighting... i know it won't be fantastic but anything that is better then my fuji f70 exr i will be very happy with!

Tretten : how do i go about translating it? i have never done that before...

LOLOLOLOL

Classic post.

lin7604 wrote:

i have no use for a s95. i really don't want to pay extra for manual controls that i won't use, and i really do want at least 10 times zoom. I want a camera that will work great in auto mode and will take decent pics in lower indoor lighting... i know it won't be fantastic but anything that is better then my fuji f70 exr i will be very happy with!

Tretten : how do i go about translating it? i have never done that before...

I totally agree; images are very disappointing. I can't believe samsung to release a cam with these IQ, I won’t pay a dollar for this. My mobile or my camcorder can take those pics. Only can wait for a review on controlled conditions or a firmware update...
What a pity I really wanted the 10mp stills while video shooting feature.

But as alternative I prefer then Canon SX220 (14x zoom and very good IQ for a compact)

Yeah, the 220/230 are putting out some seriously top-notch pics, too. If you're not sure about what cam to buy, ever, then it's always safe to just pick up a canon.

I really hope this is not representative of the cam, but even the mess at ISO 100 is troubling.

Daifex wrote:

I totally agree; images are very disappointing. I can't believe samsung to release a cam with these IQ, I won’t pay a dollar for this. My mobile or my camcorder can take those pics. Only can wait for a review on controlled conditions or a firmware update...
What a pity I really wanted the 10mp stills while video shooting feature.

But as alternative I prefer then Canon SX220 (14x zoom and very good IQ for a compact)

i agree the pics were disappointing and i would definitely but the 220 considering they are the same price. Why would i not choose the camera with great IQ? why would samsung not serve this camera with something comparable, i just don't get it... There are only a handful of cameras that seems to get good reviews on IQ, so why not try and stay in the same category for competition.... and then with a few of those other features it would be a solid new compact extended zoom camera for sure....

lin7604 wrote:

Tretten : how do i go about translating it? i have never done that before...

http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=cs&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.megapixel.cz%2Fsamsung-wb750%3Fstranka%3Drecenze

You intended that to not make sense, right?

lin7604 wrote:

i agree the pics were disappointing and i would definitely but the 220 considering they are the same price. Why would i not choose the camera with great IQ? why would samsung not serve this camera with something comparable, i just don't get it... There are only a handful of cameras that seems to get good reviews on IQ, so why not try and stay in the same category for competition.... and then with a few of those other features it would be a solid new compact extended zoom camera for sure....

hahaha... sorry. it made sense when i was thinking about it but as i was trying it all came out wrong...

i just don't see why with the competition out there right now ( nikon s8200/9100, canon 220/230m sony hx9, panasonic, etc) all get good reviews and have pretty good IQ, why they wouldn't try to keep this samsung in the same mix?

Are you saying there's a conspiracy by reviewers against Samsung which makes certain products in their lineup not as good as the competition

lin7604 wrote:

hahaha... sorry. it made sense when i was thinking about it but as i was trying it all came out wrong...

i just don't see why with the competition out there right now ( nikon s8200/9100, canon 220/230m sony hx9, panasonic, etc) all get good reviews and have pretty good IQ, why they wouldn't try to keep this samsung in the same mix?

not by reviewers, the images says it all on it's own.... ( imo i know some people will only like certain cameras for what ever reason and not like others at all). Those picture that were on here were very disappointing. SO i am confused to why samsung wouldn't want to make IQ as good as it can be for that camera/ sensor like the others to have a fair competition? does that make sense. I mean there are always good reviews and bad ones but the pictures don't lie, that's the true side of the camera that comes forward. even if they have certain gadgets that others done, can take still while recording a video are all nice but when you don't have IQ what good area they? right.... when i looked at those pics posted, i thought they were the worst out of the group of cameras i have been looking at, why is that? i would of thought they would of been pretty close to the rest.

Some new photos, taken with different settings (res/ISO/compression/sharpness) and new version of firmware.

http://www.ulozto.cz/11230520/test-samsung-wb750-v-interieru-zip

translation of czech parts in the file names:

"stredni ostrost" = sharpness: medium
"nejvyssi ostrost" = sharpness: high
"nejmensi ostrost" = sharpness: low

can't view the links?

Thanks for your samples. Not as bad as samples in previous links, but will be interesting if we could see shots at 100 iso and at least 1/250 speed (best light needed).

This samples show less noise on low sharp ones, can get with pp pretty decent noise level for light conditions and subject.
Hard work still to do for Samsung in post process on firmware.

btw, today video sample that shows some ugly focussing when zooming
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVNZERFbNYY

Is that focusing typical of small, point/shoot cameras? Don't most cameras need a moment to focus after zooming in or out?

The color accuracy/white balance seems pretty good on the video. Much better than the TL350 that I had.

Some little defocus may be normal, but this complete defocus and refocus makes useless the zooming-while-filming function (you can not show a video with this problem). Same issue was on wb700 and has not been improved. Maybe the problem is that super big zoom and this super high speed on zooming, but the complete defocus is unacceptable. In this sample focus was not on close objects but in distant ones, so there is no reason for defocus two or three times on a full zomming.
Too many issues to hope to be solved on firmware upgrades solely.

The problem is traditionally Samsung doesn't invest too much into firmware, seemingly cutting costs there when they get the products functional. It also appears they aren't diverting resources to further development once a product is shipped, beyond a few minor updates that don't fix major problems, so likely there will never be firmware that will fix this.

Daifex wrote:

Some little defocus may be normal, but this complete defocus and refocus makes useless the zooming-while-filming function (you can not show a video with this problem). Same issue was on wb700 and has not been improved. Maybe the problem is that super big zoom and this super high speed on zooming, but the complete defocus is unacceptable. In this sample focus was not on close objects but in distant ones, so there is no reason for defocus two or three times on a full zomming.
Too many issues to hope to be solved on firmware upgrades solely.

Again, look at their marketing- it's ONLY devoted to the NV800. There is rarely anything else because they are betting everything on that camera. That should give you an idea of where they're going and it's not IQ. It's feature list and gimmicks.

lin7604 wrote:

not by reviewers, the images says it all on it's own.... ( imo i know some people will only like certain cameras for what ever reason and not like others at all). Those picture that were on here were very disappointing. SO i am confused to why samsung wouldn't want to make IQ as good as it can be for that camera/ sensor like the others to have a fair competition? does that make sense. I mean there are always good reviews and bad ones but the pictures don't lie, that's the true side of the camera that comes forward. even if they have certain gadgets that others done, can take still while recording a video are all nice but when you don't have IQ what good area they? right.... when i looked at those pics posted, i thought they were the worst out of the group of cameras i have been looking at, why is that? i would of thought they would of been pretty close to the rest.