Big lens on Nikon's Coolpix P90 superzoomer doesn't compensate for poor IQ
By Tim Stevens 
posted Jun 1st 2009 10:24AM
posted Jun 1st 2009 10:24AM
posted Jun 1st 2009 10:24AM
The size of the sensor -- in gigapixels -- in a camera the US Army is hoping to build for aeriel surveillance
The US Army is soliciting proposals for a camera sensor for surveillance, which should provide continuous coverage of a range of about sixty-two square miles at a resolution of 0.3 meters.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
2 years ago I'm proud of my 12x ultra zoom; now... 24x zoom? I'm speechless.
It's not how big your zoom is, it's how you use it.
I agree, it's the photographer that matters. But I can imagine 24x zoom does come handy when you need it. Birding, anyone?
Birding? If that's what you call it...
a) Zoom is relative. I've got a 4x zoom that's probably got longer reach or gets a "more zoomed in" picture.
b) If it is a decent, long focal length then firstly you're going to have to deal with haze for landscapes and secondly it'll be a nightmare to use without some form of image stabilisation.
Only 12MP.... even samsung/SE phones got 12MP meh canon
MP>SENSOR+Everything
WTF? Why do you even need 12MP on a camera that is a complete waste at ISO400 is beyond me.
y 2 year old Sony does 12x zoom at 7MP, but it gives me semi usable pictures at ISO 800 atleast!
All the 14.x megapixel cameras that came out last year got poor reviews on the image quality side of things because the sensors start to produce a lot of noise when you try to get them so dense. The fact that this thing is a 12mp camera is further evidence that, for now, the optimum resolution for small P&S sensors is about 12mp. Hell, I think the optimum is closer to 10, but whatever. If you want a higher res without sacraficing the many other and more important aspects of image quality, then you need a larger sensor (i.e. dSLR).
12 MP from a 1/2.33" sensor, and they expected iso 400 to be usable? Come on. It doesn't surprise me that it's a mediocre camera, but very few cameras with small sensors are worthwhile at iso 400.
Did I hear Fuji?
Yeah, older fuji or the newer panasonic dmc-lx3, which is fine at iso 400 and recoverable at iso 800.
Bloody monkey hell, I just bought this camera 2 weeks ago! I have come across some images that do indeed have a lot of noise in them. While I haven't played with all of the settings yet, I've missed out on some good shots because the camera focused on the background instead of the subject/people... that's probably more my fault than the camera, but the noise in some cases is almost inexcusable. I am hoping for a firmware update to fix the noise problem.
The only reason I went with the p90 was the fact that I got tired of lugging my digital SLR around, or regretting the times I didn't have it. So I keep the p90 with me about 95% of the time now. It does have a fantastic zoom on it and some pictures do come out with some amazing quality. I just got to pay attention to the noise and go about it with some manual settings instead of auto.
LOL
I've loved the p90 since CS!
Noise was the #1 reason I bought a DSLR.
What? You gave up a DSLR for this? Come *on*, man. If you gave it up for something small like the Panny TZ7, it would be more excusable, but for this... it's so bulky that you might as well lug around a DSLR. And don't forget what you're giving up from a DSLR:
1. Instant and accurate focus, even in low light
2. Image quality
3. High, high ISO
4. Speed, speed, speed in everything
5. Versatility with lenses
6. Add-ons, like a powerful flash
7. Manual functions
8. Etc.
I really haven't seen/heard of any firmware update that fixes any camera's IQ significantly, especially in noise, unless it had some obvious flaw, like streaking, so I guess you're stuck with the noise.
He also gives up the ability to brag about having a DSLR
that is the exact reason I bought it too.it has some focusing issues but I have never had any noise issue where i didn't expect it. really thought they have all been taken outdoors too.
in truth, every camera is going to have some problem when compared to film. it is not the camera but the photographer who uses the tool. so for what I use it for, this camera has served me well in the month I have had it. I am not going to go looking for problems or complain about small things or even focus on what it cant do. I am going to be happy and use it just like I have been and be happy of getting shots I was missing before because I didn't have a camera at all with me
I didn't give up my Digital SLR... I still have it, still use it, but let's face it, carrying around a digital SLR with 2 lenses, filters, tripod, flash every single day just isn't practical. If I am I going somewhere where I know I will be taking a lot of photos, I definitely bring it along, but on my way to and from work, or just hanging out with friends... an SLR ends up being a bit to bulky and an overkill.
The p90 is a nice little camera to cart around for all of those occasions where I wouldn't want to drag around an SLR. It's nice to have a little camera around during those times when I wished I would have had my DSLR... but I am not going to cart around my big ass camera bag everywhere I go. The p90 is small enough to fit in my laptop backpack which I have with me almost every single day.
I still use film and low ISO Kodachrome is the same as a 30 megapixel DSLR.
P90 is one of my fave SMG in COD4. Best use with grip and steady aim.
its IQ (image quality) not PQ, get it?
I always thought TVs had picture quality and cameras/photos had image quality. At least calling it "photo quality" might have been a little better.
Nikon hasn't made a decent P&S since ages (coolpix 8800 was the last) so i can't say i'm surprised it's a piece of shit.
Nikon hasn't made a decent P&S since ages (coolpix 8800 was the last) so i can't say i'm surprised it's a piece of crap
Hmm, i didn't see my comment before this and thought 'shit' was wordfiltered out. Ahwell, Gizmodo's comment system sucks even harder, so i won't complain.
Irritating "PQ" abbreviation. Yes, I figured it out, but it was just lazy not to write it out.
They thought they were being hip and cool, but the problem is that IQ is the term they should have used.
That one annoys me too, but at least it's more common.
Indeed. I realise that terms like "Picture Quality" and "Image Quality" are common in photography but until now I've not seen them being abbreviated. Let's not start doing this - photography is already filled with enough abbreviations to confuse the newbies. Just accept that your keyboard will not melt if you type a few additional letters and everyone will understand what you are talking about.
Hah! They changed it to IQ. Progress has been made. Funny.
Now, we just need to get them to write it out. :)
How about bringing this back Nikon
http://shashinki.com/review/nikon/lens_scope/index.htm
How about that!
PS Or at least an updated version ;^/...
Looks like there is a new stalker cam in town.
this nikon locks horny
Well it seems to compensate for something.
if this one doesn't satisfy the men... the ladies will.....
Engadget, please enlighten me, what does IQ have to do with taking pictures?
This is one troll I refuse to feed!!
Get a Canon, they have the expertise in producing professional reliable products. The SX1 shoots hi-def video and has the award-winning Canon zoom lens which is reminscent of it's professional "L" series in the pro DSLR world. Try one for yourself and you won't be disappointed by its high image quality and low noise levels.
I'll stick with my Mamiya M645 with 80mm 1X zoom lol
In its defense, all super zooms have crap quality pictures - some are just less crap then others.