Don't sweat it, we're not going to quiz you on the specs from Samsung's
NV40 -- after all, this puppy was introduced way back in January of the year 2008. Nevertheless, the 10-megapixel shooter has finally arrived at
PhotographyBLOG's labs for review, so let's dive right in. Simply put, the NV40 isn't a revolutionary step above the
NV20, though that wasn't seen as necessarily bad. It was noted that the image stabilization worked quite well, but captures were still noticeably noisy even at ISO 200. The unit itself felt like a premium product, and the Smart Touch interface was highly praised, but reviewers just couldn't find a way to stomach the £199 ($385) price tag with such disappointing image results. Check out the full review for yourself before passing judgment, but it sounds like Sammy just barely missed the mark with this one.
posted May 8th 2008 2:16PM
At a price tag like that, I'd expect something a little better under the hood.
Clearly they did not give this camera enough megapixels.
This is the part of the post where I disclaim that I'm being sarcastic to avoid ridicule from those with uncalibrated sarcasm detectors, unfortunately killing any humorous effect my post may have had. Thanks guys!
There's various smiley's to make your point clear, and if people then still don't get it then they might as well be ignored anyway, there's no great harm, or are you running for president and don't want to be misunderstood and lose votes?
Incidentally, smiley's were actually invented because people didn't get the meaning from the words alone I gather (the real ASCII ones not the icons)
What a fug cam.
you, sir, have no taste.
the NV series are some of the best looking compacts on the market. if only the image quality was as good as the industrial design
I must be missing something...I just wonder how good is the industrial design for this NV40?!
Didn't you think that Nikon Canon Sony Panasonic Fuji Olympus Lecia Ricoh Sigma have better industrial design of compact camera body?!
you can't take photographyblog 's review seriously.
they do not know what they are talking about , read their Canon 40D review, they said the camera has serious PF problem , it is the lens you used for the review not the Camera,sorry but they are morons.
Also , ignore the DCresource.com, that guy is also idiot.
the best reviewer of these cameras is Dave at IR.
My Nikon F100 only cost $200 (plus lens...one of my lenses is a 50mm 1.8D, which is only $115), and it can technically take 112 megapixel pictures.
(Although I shoot with Velvia50 and Rollei ATP, both of which are only theoretically 22 megapixels and 34.6 megapixels. One would need a really sharp and good lens (probably even using a tripod), and a roll scanner (they cost like $100.000, however, you can get scans done for like $100)...That doesn't really matter though, as I just make ilfochromes.)
@ Jesse S
Then why are you letting your verbal diarrhea get all over our digital photography article?
He's got a virtual stomach bug?
Too bad it has a SCHNEIDER-Kreuznach lens.
I was hoping they'd go for a Hapsburg-Affenpinscher lens this time.
Seriously, I've always wondered if that's just Korenglish for "we have precision lenses too". I have never heard of THAT German lens outfit -- except on a Samsung camera. [Insert fake German accent] Are our lenses as exciting to drive as our phones?