Pentax Optio X90 superzoom reviewed, trumps many beginner SLRs

The power of an SLR with the ease of a compact. That's what Pentax would like you to believe its Optio X90 offers and, according to a Photography Blog review, that's about what you can expect. The 12 megapixel, 26x superzoomer's lens offers amazing flexibility without doing the lens-swap shuffle, and image quality was said to deliver very good with "striking colours" (it's a British site, mind). This is definitely a camera with a focus on helping users, but there are controls for setting shutter and aperture priority, and you can go fully manual if you like to work it, work it. Pentax's shooter doesn't score a perfect recommendation, with an inability to optically zoom while filming being a definite bummer, but the X90 earns high marks for its combination of performance and usability -- and at $399 it's something of a good deal, too.

[NikAmi Posted Jun 8th 2010 1:12PM]

@Atkins Actually it can't. Evolution is simply random genetic changes which are positively or negative selected by environmental factors. Therefore, a mutation which helps an organism thrive and reproduce will be selected for while one that has deleterious effects will be selected against even if it takes multiple generations. Even if it doesn't make sense to us or makes it look like its a disadvantage, there is a reason in nature that the change occurred.

[Atkins Posted Jun 8th 2010 1:28PM]

@NikAmi Actually, it is arguable.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolphil/teleology.html

"Evolution is not progress. Populations simply adapt to their current surroundings. They do not necessarily become better in any absolute sense over time. A trait or strategy that is successful at one time may be unsuccessful at another."
from http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-intro-to-biology.html

[mahut Posted Jun 8th 2010 1:43PM]

As you can see in the sample images, there is no way this can compete with a DSLR - the sensor is simply too small and the lens too soft - thats the price that you pay for 26 zoom. Additionally, the viewfinder and autofocus performance don't come close either.

[ydoucare Posted Jun 8th 2010 2:18PM]

"Trumps many beginner SLRs"
That's a laughable statement. Sorry, but you can clearly see from the sample pics that the Pentax has to ramp up noise reduction at anything over ISO 200 because of the noise from that tiny ass sensor. As a result, look how blurry the images are past ISO 200-400. Certainly nothing special at all in regards to image quality. Even ISO 100 is noisy. Secondly, if you want a real review, you go to somewhere like dpreview. These guys can't even take a decent looking picture of the camera itself in studio lighting!

[jasonx Posted Jun 8th 2010 2:22PM]

(it's a British site, mind)
I would love to know what the author is getting at with this statement ?

[dan828 Posted Jun 8th 2010 2:50PM]

@wunch Bad grammar is not linguistic shift.

[engeek Posted Jun 8th 2010 3:08PM]

@Indefinite Implosion Or you can just concede the defeat of the English language and enjoy the crossover appeal of the new Pentax. I, for one, think it's high time they combine the manual control and power of an SLR with the ease of use, zoom range and portability of a superzoom.

[DaHarder Posted Jun 8th 2010 3:11PM]

Personally... I find FujiFilm's HS10 to be a far more compelling choice, especially since it can be found for around Us 450.00 (only US 50.00 less than the Pentax), with tons more features.

[FORDY Posted Jun 8th 2010 4:13PM]

@dan828
Changing "colour" to "color" is not bad grammar.

It's a change of spelling.

Surprised noones mentioned all their mispronunciations!

"Froyo" is completely lost on people who can speak English correctly (ie. the English!) as the word 'Yoghurt" is pronounced yog-ut. As opposed to yo-gurt.

Not to mention the fact that in general we do not care for Frozen Yoghurt anyway.

[NikAmi Posted Jun 9th 2010 5:08AM]

@Atkins You actually proved my point. I never said that evolution was progress. I said that the environment will positively or negatively select for certain traits. Obviously because the environment is constantly changing, life is constantly evolving. So even if a trait was at one time was advantageous, but is now disadvantageous, is selected against, that is not to say that the original selection was poor or that is was not progress. You have to look at the action in the time it was taken and no other time. That is why evolutionary changes are positive; they help the species survive better in a given environment. That is, until the environment changes and an evolution is need again.