Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ60
Nikon Coolpix L830
Canon PowerShot SX510 HS
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100
Nikon Coolpix L330
Lomo Instant Review
Canon PowerShot SX710 HS Review
Pentax QS-1 Review
Panasonic Lumix GF7 Review
Leica D-Lux (Typ 109) Review
Page 1 of 2 pages
1 2 >
Is the RAW handling issue something that can be handled with a firmware or software update, or is one pretty much stuck with this issue for the life of the camera?
3:44 pm - Monday, October 4, 2010
Mark: more of a question than a comment. I own a G11. The “thumbwheel” control on the back has such a soft feel that I can accidentally change settings without realizing / without wanting to. Same for the couple of buttons on the back. There is just no real estate on the back of the G11 for a normal sized thumb and I end up holding it like a dainty teacup instead of a camera.
The Nikon appears to have a space on the back for your thumb. So my question is do the thumbwheel and buttons have a good, firm feel?
The RAW processing time is a bit of a conundrum as well. I don’t need another “raw processor” that doesn’t work with anything I use (like the Fuji HS10 when it first came out…)
Great review. It’s really a help.
3:46 pm - Monday, October 4, 2010
Looking good, mine is on its way, suppposed to be here tomorrow. Since I never shoot raw, those issues don’t bother me.
I will be using this camera exclusively to carry to the new product show events I cover, which are always in a big auditorium or hotel conference rooms. I need something small and relatively light to carry with me on all my travels, but that will take good .jpg’s at high ISO’s and have the ability to set white balance manually and use an accessory flash.
Since I have a lot of other Nikon equipment and flashes anyway, this should do the trick for me and will save a lot of weight and space, rather than carrying my D200 with 18-200VR lens. I’ll be trying my P7000 with the SB-400 and 600 flashes and I’ll be at a big trade show in 3 weeks, so that will be its first real workout! Looking forward to it, thanks for the encouraging review.
6:11 pm - Monday, October 4, 2010
Well £450 is just a joke really.
6:24 pm - Monday, October 4, 2010
I was very excited and look forward to get the camera till I read about how slow it take to write a RAW file! My Coolpix 8400 behave the same! Come on Nikon, after all those years you still can’t fix that? Look like Canon G12 is a better choice? It is a real blow to all the Nikon fan!
7:57 pm - Monday, October 4, 2010
Working for 25 years with nikon professional and owner of D3 & D3x & D700 and for the first time a point and shoot the P7000 now for more than a week !
And I can tell you that this is a small beast!!! you need to learn the camera first and get amazing results !!!
Well done Nikon !
8:00 pm - Monday, October 4, 2010
Mr Rothengatter, with due respect; how do you “learn” to make the RAW file load faster so you don’t miss the next shot?
8:08 pm - Monday, October 4, 2010
Quite an expensive compact camera which is rather useless for
RAW shooting. The viewfinder is a bit of a dogs breakfast too.
I do enjoy my NIKON DSLR but I would not touch any NIKON
compacts. There are more exciting offerings around.
11:40 pm - Monday, October 4, 2010
Okay, in my case I have no problems with it. Never shoot quickly moving objects ;-) always used the “single” mode on my camera’s
After 2 weeks, I like the overall feeling & quality of this superb small camera!
It’s my opinion!
7:32 am - Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Good answer! Thanks Peter.
7:51 am - Tuesday, October 5, 2010
I have it for a week now, and really love it.
The slow raw write speed doesn’t really bother me, but I agree that this should be improved. I wonder if this could be solved in a future firmware update or that this is a hardware issue.
I particularly like the image quality, it’s really dSLR “neutral” with the right settings. Also the ergonomics are pretty good, although I feel the clickwheel “clicks” a bit too easy for my taste.
I feel it is the best companion to my trusty D700.
Oh and FWIW, Bibble will soon have P7000 support as well.
8:35 am - Tuesday, October 5, 2010
It’s about time Nikon made something in the line of the G11 class. It seems to have a few advantages over the G11, namely the zoom. As I always shoot in RAW the slow RAW write of this camera would make it a ‘not interested’ on that feature alone. I use my G11 mainly when I am climbing mountains and waiting for the camera to finish its business is just a no go. This is the reason I replaced my Ricoh GX100 (a superb camera other than its slow RAW write) with the G11. If you think that waiting 10 or so seconds after a shot is being a bit anal then let me remind you that when I am shooting a mountain climb I take 300 or so pix. It adds up to quite a delay (take out camera, switch-on, wait for lens to extend, aim, focus, shoot, write, switch-off, wait for lens to retract, return camera to inner jacket x300).
I have no doubt that users will be pleased and I do aim to trial one my self, just to see how it compares with my G11. My most negative comment would be that it just looks like a G9/10/11/12 clone.
8:56 am - Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Got mine yesterday, first impressions are that this is definitely not your average digicam, it’s a “pro” compact for sure. The average user would be instantly overwhelmed by the buttons, dials and customization available on this thing.
I sat down with the (printed!) manual last night and it is going to take some time to wade through it.
Quick impressions are that:
1) the photos are outstanding, lower noise than my D200 or D70.
2) White balance is much, much more accurate than my DSLR Nikons, which have always given me fits, even in the studio and even when manually white balancing (they seem inconsistent). Even the auto WB on the P7000 is accurate under my weird kitchen and other room flourescent lights.
3)The LED screen on the back is amazing, super high resolution, way, way better than either of the DSLRs, which are very small and never give an accurate representation of the photos, causing me to sometimes use incorrect settings for the photos because it doesn’t look right in the display. The P7000 display is probably at least twice the size of the D200. My next DSLR better have a screen like this!
4) Lots and lots of buttons and dials on the P7000. It makes it difficult to hold the camera and if the camera is on, when I pick it up, I end up pressing some button. The left side is especially difficult to hold, because the display dominates the entire left back of the camera, plus I can’t “pinch” the side because the flash is at the upper left. I guess I will get used to it, but there isn’t a lot of real estate for fingers on this camera, they could have actually made it bigger.
5) It definitely has Nikon genes and feels like a pro miniature version of a Nikon. I do think it will suit my purposes beautifully, a small compact camera for use on the road in the product shows and events I cover for a website.
Haven’t tried the SB-400 yet with it, will do that today and will also compare studio shots under the same lighting/exposure conditions with my DSLRs.
11:53 am - Tuesday, October 5, 2010
bought this in NYC and it was a nightmare. My comments:
1. It is far too slow at writing, even in fine jpg. I missed all my street shots.
2. The screen kept on going black and the only way I could even close the camera lens was to take the battery out and put it back again and then push the on off again (battery was fully charged).
3. The FN button did not work
4. The av/tv button did not work
5. Changing the aperture by twirling the dial thing at the back often got me into a different menu altogether - and I have small hands. I found myself re-doing the same steps all the time to achieve a simple change of aperture.
6. The eye view finder was next to useless.
7. I read and read the manual and still could not work it all out - I do believe there may have been an electronic fault as I own a DX, D3, D2H, and a D40x and have no problems with operating them. If Nikon had a proper worldwide warranty, I might have stuck with it and hoped for a firmware update or exchange here in the UK.
8. I have a 3 year ricoh GRII that has better response times and produces excellent images. I think I will see what else ricoh has to offer
6:09 pm - Tuesday, October 5, 2010
What Steph and Zigster confirmed that:
1. File writing is indeed slow, forget about capturing the decisive moment ;) That is kind of disappointing since Nikon claimed this is like a mini pro camera.
2. Next to useless view finder but great LCD screen.
3. Confusing menu?
4. Lack of space to hold the camera properly without pushing some buttons accidentally.
5.Perfect for “product shots” ;)
Should I still buy one?
7:57 pm - Tuesday, October 5, 2010
no - you are transferring your wish to something that is not. Like I did.
10:55 pm - Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Much appreciate, Steph; like you I will look somewhere else :( Cheers
11:17 pm - Tuesday, October 5, 2010
@C.Y.Leow - Its not bad at capturing the decisive moment if you try to get it on the first shot. Its actually quite responsive, taking the pic right when you click the shutter release button if its not locked up writing. I tend to think of it to be similar in shot to shot as my old manual advance camera (if I really wanted I could advance in less than a second and recompose, but in reality I would take one shot at a time, pause, advance and take another shot). If I adjust my raw write expectations accordingly, then its a great camera. Now, should I have to adjust my expectations, no, but some of us can and for some its a deal breaker.
I do hope they can do something about it in a firmware update…
3:44 am - Wednesday, October 6, 2010
@David - thanks for your advice! I had the same experience when using the Coolpix 8400 :) It is all about timing… may be I go and try one out at the shop.
3:58 am - Wednesday, October 6, 2010
How do You update a non existing buffer? There is more
bad news, if You care reading dpreview’s ‘Nikon forum’. Quite a few
people have serious ‘focus issues’ with P7k and are not happy. I cannot
comprehend why a company like Nikon has failed to produce a
decent high quality compact camera so far! There are rumours that
Nikon has an ‘EVIL’ camera in the pipeline. Not sure how long I want
to wait for that.
4:17 am - Wednesday, October 6, 2010
### RAW FILES ###
I do not own a Canon G10/11/12, but am considering buying the new Nikon P7000.
After reading this review and the 20 comments above, I ask those who know: does a Canon G11/12 writes RAW files faster than the Nikon P7000 (single shot and burst mode) ?
5:43 am - Wednesday, October 6, 2010
I just want to say that I really wanted to love this camera as I am a Nikon user through and through. However even the first shot was missed because IT DID NOT FOCUS FAST ENOUGH. In fact, unless the subject was still, all shots were out of focus. As I said before, I came to the conclusion that the camera was faulty, and due to Nikon’s poor warranty policy worldwide, I had to return it. I used to have a contax T2 and it was amazing. Now, something like that with zoom capabilities? Re the canon G12, it has a less sophisticated focusing than the Nikon P7000 and is bulkier. But if it works?
8:14 am - Wednesday, October 6, 2010
So sad.. I want to use Nikon too! My daughter’s Canon G7 focus really well and fast :(
8:26 am - Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Here’s my problem with this review: I don’t think the images are good. They are soft and grainy, and the colors are either blah or crass, depending on how much light there was when the photo was taken. The softness in particular is disturbing. Indeed, I think that “blurry” is a better word. But what’s even more disturbing is that this reviewer thinks these are good images! With so many better cameras out there—the Micro 4/3 cameras with large sensors, and the Sigma cameras which produce images with such amazing sharpness—there is no longer any reason why a reviewer should give his stamp of approval to any point-and-shoot camera with a small sensor, a poor-quality build-in lens, and an over-aggressive processing engine.
12:41 pm - Wednesday, October 6, 2010
I would check out this link from Nikonians that has comments and images from others who have used the camera. The RAW issue is discussed but the images posted there are excellent.
1:54 pm - Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Jesus, what a lot of stupid comments!
There are a lot of people on DPreview who wants to tackle Nikon with false reviews, while they never touch a nikon P7000, so watch out!
I’m a professional nikon photographer working over 30 years with nikon and own also D700/D3/D3x so I know what people should expect from a PS-camera from 499 dollar.
I’m using this P7000 (my first P&S) now for two weeks and even I have to learn a lot to customize this amazing good camera for it’s money!
You can find the first examples in my DP gallery at: http://forums.dpreview.com/Galleries/3436465746/photos
Nex week there will follow a lot more and I’ll make some studio shots with the P7000.
Remember this: for it’s money it’s the best P&S you can get at this time!
1:57 pm - Wednesday, October 6, 2010
I agree with you.
I don’t mean any disrespect, but there seems to be a tendency to denigrate Nikon ... and promote Canon instead ...
Saying that Nikon P90 or P100 do not offer the best possible images is believable (I own a P90), but attacking this new P7000 seems unwarranted: I also do not believe that, if used properly, Nikon P7000 focuses less fast than other P&S, or that the pictures are not good. (the pics I’ve seen are excellent !).
The only real issue seems to be the slow shot-to-shot RAW shooting. The slow RAW write time is an issue with a camera such as Fujifilm HS10 (which I also own), using a 1/2.3” (6.16mm x 4.62mm, 0.28cm²) CMOS sensor, and, I believe it is expected to be an issue with all cameras using small (CCD or CMOS) sensors, either 1/2.7” or 1/2.3”.
If you know, please tell us, is this slow writing time is a serious issue with cameras such as Canon G10/11/12 ?
4:19 pm - Wednesday, October 6, 2010
I dont see that anyone is denigrating Nikon. Peter - I went on your gallery, but every shot I clicked on was taken with a pro body - after a while I gave up clicking. For the record, I am also a pro and know what to expect from a point and shoot that has been promoted as a spare/travel/whatever for the pro and serious enthusiast. And I spent three whole days with this camera. Yes, it was probably faulty. But then again, maybe not. It is nice though to have someone’s input who has used the product, as you have. It is also nice to let people have their opinions without calling them stupid!
4:53 pm - Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Mr. Rothengatter, in Your last post You sound like 18 year old
fan boy who just bought his first point and shoot camera and tells
the world what they should expect for $499! Quite a few experienced
photographers seem to have a different take on the P7k than You and they all made
stupid comments? I find Your comments not exactly very bright. As an ‘experienced
photographer’, as You claim to be, You probably should know that ‘photography
is a complex field with a wide variety of different forms which create different needs
for different people. I don’t buy the P7k for my reasons and they are valid ( for me ).
6:37 am - Thursday, October 7, 2010
Yes, of course I had an overeactedenthousiastic feeling about the p7000, and it still is…. I called some of the reactions stupid, not the people behind it, so excuse, if you felt attacked.
There might be the reason for my enthousiasm that I personaly like this camera so much because it’s the first good p&s Nikon build after the 28Ti analog :-)
7:35 am - Thursday, October 7, 2010
To P.R. I am happy You enjoy the P7k. It can indeed produce good
quality images. I shoot RAW only and for that reason alone the P7k
is not the right camera for me. I use Nikon SLR’s and DSLR’s and hope
that Nikon will produce a high quality ‘EVIL’ camera for low key street
photography with a quicker RAW buffer ( dreamy dreams ). Anyway,
enjoy Your new toy and happy shooting. Hans
8:40 am - Thursday, October 7, 2010
Look like I will have to convince someone to loan me one for some real world tests before I plonk down my hard earned cash!
Pity i do not work for Nikon ;)
8:51 am - Thursday, October 7, 2010
Hmm. I cant wait untill they do a comparison with the Canon G12, Nikon P7000, Samsung EX1, and panasonic LX5….
8:02 am - Friday, October 8, 2010
RAW Performance - Single Shot (shot-to-shot time)
- Nikon P7000 (PhotographyBlog): 5sec
- Canon G11 (DPReview): 2.9sec (*)
4:42 pm - Saturday, October 9, 2010
Mark, I am afraid the P7000 is worst than you describe it. Here is the review I posted in my blog (http://giannigalassi.typepad.com/blog/2010/10/137-nikon-p7000-review.html
Let me make it clear: this is a real-world review, based on my personal opinions (right or wrong) and on visual evaluations of the files. No test charts involved here, no MTF measurements. As for the photographs, they are out-of-camera jpgs (I don’t shoot RAW anymore, so I’m not interested) viewed on a calibrated LaCie 321 monitor. This review only refers to the specimen in my possession.
Keep in mind that my approach to the P7000 is deeply biased by my two-years positive experience with the Canon G10. Therefore as soon as I unboxed the Nikon I could’t help noticing that it weighs less than it looks. I was expecting a sturdy and rugged unit like the Canon. As a matter of fact most authoritative experts and reviewers have pointed up in the last weeks that the P7000 is almost a clone of its rival Canon G11, since both share the same sensor and size, as well as most features and specifications. Somebody even ironically calls it “Powershot P7000”.
The lesser weight is easily explained: whereas the top and the front plates are metal made, the bottom and the back are pure plastic. I know, it should be called “polycarbonate”, but I’m totally allergic to all those press-release-style euphemisms, like “globalization” instead of exploitation, “new economy” instead of piecework, “creative finance” instead of fraud or “outsourcing” instead of subcontract. Fact is that despite its semipro-compact ambitions, the P7000 feels slightly plasticky. The three knobs on the top don’t click firmly enough and tend to get inadvertently rotated, the wheelpad on the back is flimsier than in a $ 200 point&shoot; and the battery/card compartment cover is simply shameful. Briefly a very good design, both ergonomically and aesthetically (the camera is indeed goodlooking), spoilt by inadequate materials and manufacturing. Paradoxically, the P7000 lacks the gorgeous ruggedness of the Nikon pro and semipro DSLRs, and inherits the poor and unreassuring tactile experience of the Canon semipro and entry-level ones.
As soon as the “on” button is pressed, the unit is ready to shoot. And the 921.000 dots lcd monitor is a real treat: big, clear and crisp enough to venture a picture evaluation. Menus are well organized and easily understood, as usual at Nikon’s. Nothing to do with the insane and obscure literature found in Canon’s G series. The viewfinder is definitely more accurate than the one of my G10, but the latter is bigger and slightly clearer. The three control knobs are clever and very well positioned. Especially the exposure compensation dial: your forefinger and thumb naturally “fall” on it, making the expose-to-the-right job an easy task. By the way, whereas the istogram remains visible after focusing, the (very welcome) electronic spirit level inexplicably disappears. I don’t know about you, but I definitely don’t have a steady hand, so I’d find a permanent level really helpful. I hope this issue will be addressed in an upcoming firmware update.
Speaking of focus, the P7000 has big troubles in focusing on bright sunny surfaces, even when they are well textured. In my one-day test, I experienced at least one focus failure over eight attempts. Three times the LCD screen got gray and a warning appeared to advice me that the lens was getting re-initialized. I have never seen anything like that before. It’s a fault that Nikon MUST take care of. All the more so because, this shortcoming apart, the P7000 would be a fast and reactive camera, very suitable for street photography.
What about picture quality? A camera is all about taking photographs, after all. Well, the Nikon P7000 delivers too contrasty images with a low noise level. In my opinion (I’m not an engineer) the overcontrast is due to an inherent lack of dynamic range. I noticed that the exposure meter has serious troubles in keeping the highlights within the clipping threshold. In other words, to avoid highlights burning, I had to underexpose (up to 1 IL and more) most of the shots I took during the test, whereas the G10 easily managed the same shots with no tweaking. Of course the underexposure caused a severe darkening of the lowlights. As I said, noise is low enough, and has that pleasant Nikon “feeling”: it’s more luminance than chroma, and looks like film grain. The (optional) geometric distortion in-camera correction is nothing less than effective, and the lateral chromatic aberration is superbly controlled (G10’s LCA is inexcusable). The corners too obviously lack crispness.
My conclusion: at its pre-Photokina introduction the P7000 looked very promising to me (http://giannigalassi.typepad.com/blog/2010/09/nikon-p7000.html). Does it match those expectations? Frankly, no. Despite its being two years behind the competition, it’s an unaccomplished product. And an overpriced one, too. If a Canon G11 is sold for $ 460, the P7000 is worth no more than $ 350. Too bad for Nikon and, most of all, too bad for buyers.
10:01 pm - Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Gianni - I just want to back up your findings with the specimen I had in my unscientific possession. I also experienced the focus problem in clear light, also the lens initializing problem and grey screen. After this happened, my camera became un-responsive and I could not even close the lens. Removing the battery and re-inserting it resolved the issue. I also had problems with the battery compartment flying open - I put this down to the fact that I had to re-insert the battery so often that I may have forgotten to close it properly sometimes. I underexposed to avoid clipping highlights by 2/3 stop. I was not enamoured with the way you twiddled the wheels on the back to change settings - I kept on landing in different menus if I applied the wrong kind of pressure. I do not see this as a street camera as you can not shoot while the camera is writing and it writes slowly, even on jpeg only setting! So, I retract previous statements that I may have had a faulty camera - it was clearly representative of the model. I do think however, battery compartment aside, all these problems could be resolved with a firmware update. I just do not understand how Nikon can release a product that clearly is so buggy, and with such fanfare.
9:22 am - Wednesday, October 13, 2010
In a vacuum…do you go with the new Canon G12 or the Nikon P7000…
Having trouble deciding, loved my Canon G7, but it didn’t love getting dropped in the sand. So I’m in the market…
6:21 pm - Monday, October 18, 2010
stephanie de Leng
Nicholas - I am in a vacumm too. This is going to sound strange, but after reading about the G12 and the canon powershot S95, I decided that the S95 suited my needs better. They are very similar - read the review on this site and the comparison on digitalrev - http://www.digitalrev.com/en/canon-powershot-g12-vs-g11-vs-s95-comparison - I realized that I need a real, very discrete, point and shoot sometimes, and for the rest I shall probably go four thirds with a GH2. If you don’t mind a bit of bulk, by all means buy the G12. For me the portability of the S95 wins out, with few downsides next to the G12. I have ordered one, and if anyone is interested I shall report in my non-scientific fashion.
6:36 pm - Monday, October 18, 2010
After more than 3 weeks I own the Nikon P7000 now I like this camera more and more…. I’ll link todays photo’s soon and watch :-)
6:42 pm - Monday, October 18, 2010
Thanks for the link and the input…
Now there is a third in the mix. One I am unfamiliar with, but needs to be considered nonetheless.
Now it’s G12, P7000 or S95, in a vacuum…?
The Vacuum is getting bigger.
7:25 pm - Monday, October 18, 2010
Here’s one studio test with the P7000 with broncolor studioflash and radiotriggering in manual setting:
8:55 am - Tuesday, October 19, 2010
I had a P7000 for a few days before returning it. There was a lot I liked about the camera, especially the low-light performance. I thought that was pretty amazing. But, as I shoot only in RAW, the slow response time was extremely frustrating, causing me to miss shots. Some outdoor shots were overexposed and needed work in an image-editing program. If Nikon can fix this problem with a firmware update, then the camera is clearly a winner for me and I’d buy another.
10:23 pm - Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Ken Rockwell did testing the p7000 too!
8:05 am - Thursday, October 21, 2010
That’s interesting. After reading Ken’s review I know why I couldn’t get the buttons/ menus to respond properly. Interestingly, he opts to use the canon S95 instead. Waiting for mine to arrive.
9:39 am - Thursday, October 21, 2010
I have been using this camera for a couple of weeks. Image quality is excellent. Control and setting are excellent too. All perfect, as long as you shoot jpeg. Raw files are only supported by nikon view or capture nx. In addition, when sooting raw it takes ages to save the file on the memory card, so I gave up and shooting only jpeg, which is not the reason why I bought this camera.
Nikon, please update the firmware!
11:36 am - Thursday, October 21, 2010
And Nikon have the cheek to tell the world this is good enough for the pros? I really doubt a firmware update can fix the slow RAW write!
12:22 pm - Thursday, October 21, 2010
There are a lot of conflicting opinions here. Some say the camera has too many flaws and return it. Some say it’s great and they love it. It has been called Nikons greatest compact P&S. When I see this many conflicting comments I have to wonder. There are even a lot of negative comments towards the Canon G-series and this isn’t a Canon review. So many of you are pros shooting $2000+ cameras in your work. Is it possible your expectations are unreasonable for what amounts to a $499 pocketable backup camera? I have been awaiting this camera for some time. I had hoped that there would be a consensus to help me decide but I’m not getting one here. I can’t help but think that if this camera was
evaluated as Nikon’s Best Compact and not a Pro users alternative, maybe the comments might have
been more favourable.
4:42 pm - Thursday, October 21, 2010
In the two days I thoroughly tested the camera, there was much to like. I did notice (besides the slow RAW write)that the occasional outdoor shot had weird lighting - somewhat overexposed with odd colours. Indoor shots were great and I loved the low-light performance. So little noise at high ISO’s - better than the Canon G11 I had last year.
5:24 pm - Thursday, October 21, 2010
I think Nikon’s promo of the P7000 by using a pro and the way he praised the P&S came back and bite them ;) Like WillieV commented, yes; among all Nikon’s compact, this is their best but obviously it is NOT a pro users alternative. In that respect Canon started the “game” by using well know photo agency “VII” to promote their G series ;)
7:58 pm - Thursday, October 21, 2010
for those “masters of disaster” photographers who shoot only RAW,[hahahahaha] remember photography is one thing and photoshoping is another. first learn to to take pictures, and then judge technological feats like pk7 and g12.
8:22 pm - Saturday, October 23, 2010
That’s pretty rude, Andreas. Also shows a complete lack of understanding of what RAW is and how good photographers use it - most pros shoot in RAW nowadays. Try it before you bash it. With a good RAW shot, I do very little in Photoshop - just minor tweaks, but if the white balance is off in tricky lighting, it’s correctable.
9:46 pm - Saturday, October 23, 2010
Comment like this strikes some RAW nerves ;) Obviously Andreas have no idea what RAW is about.
10:52 pm - Saturday, October 23, 2010
Call me old school, but I’m sending up a yellow flag on this otherwise appealing Nikkie ( I use a 2 year old Coolpix 5100 presently ). What I see lacking is a tiny aperture. Am I wrong when read the specs and the lens only stops down to f/5.6 and no further ? I saw a note where it uses built-in Neutral Density filters to knock back the light, which to me seems counterintuitive from a company known for its excellent optics.
I really do need Depth of Field on many occasions , and I feel lack of a minimum aperture of at least f/11 or better yet f/16 is a serious design oversight.
I guess my ideal digital camera hasn’t been made yet, by Nikon or anyone else. It would most resemble a late 1950’s Nikon SP rangefinder camera with an LCD but retaining the fabulous parallax corrected multifocal optical rangefinder as well, and interchangeable lenses. It’s the Leica M-style camera that Nikon based the first Nikon F reflex on, and I miss it.
8:22 pm - Tuesday, October 26, 2010
That f5.6 fiasco can only mean two thing:
1) Nikon found that above f5.6 the lens have so much CA that it is pointless to go to f8.
2) Nikon trying to hide a zoom lens of dubious quality by using ND filters!
Come on Nikon, you disappointed all your loyal fans / users!
8:58 pm - Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Hey technicians, it’s
f8.0 instead of f5.6 and it’s
normal with these type of sensor size / zoom combinations, so don’t worry and I’m after almost 4 weeks very happy with the P7000 !
7:34 am - Wednesday, October 27, 2010
oh, forgotten, there are several posts about this matter on dpReview like:
7:36 am - Wednesday, October 27, 2010
As per CAcreeks comment at dpreview and i quote:
“Until evidence to the contrary, I think we can assume the P7000 is like other P&S cameras in that it uses an ND filter rather than a diaphragm to achieve “f/8” aperture.”
Is that true, Mr Nikon ;) Technically, there are no f8?
I can understand why you defend nikon, because you work for them ;)
I was trying to get Nikon to loan me a P7000 to do a “Real World Test” but they are not interested.
With all the negative response, I am not gonna splash out NZ$800 to BUY one!
10:28 am - Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Lots of varied opinions here!!!
I tend to agree with Rockwell’s ten commandments condensed into ONE and that is: “it’s the taking of the photo and not the CAMERA!”
These days the ball-park figure of around US$420-440 for the P7K does not seem overly expensive. Remember the audio is pretty good too.
If it’s size and IQ that you are after, perhaps there are better small cameras out there like the M9, X100 GF1/2, or whatever…but the P7K is neither small or light, say like the F200EXR which leads me to say that choosing a camera is a very personal thing.
No single feature like noise, RAW speed, or weight is ever going to be THE deciding factor unless that is the MAIN interest. Then obviously for the other features, compromises will have to be accepted or rejected.
If you can use this or any other camera to YOUR satisfaction, then it’s to YOUR credit and you take the cake because you are SUITED in style, ability and experience to the hard/soft-ware. Sensor-size, ease of use and colour renditions etc etc, are ALL personal preferences as well. One could use a Leica M9 Titanium and mortgage the house for it, and STILL make a hash of one’s pictures. So cool it you guys. Everything has it’s strength and weaknesses.
If I was interested in dropping money for this camera, I’d wait till at least the Gen II. There is NO RUSH. Unless your next meal depends on it, a camera is a camera is a camera.
4:48 am - Friday, November 5, 2010
I was ready to use my paying card
for the new Nikon P 7000 in my local store.
But after descovering the cameras slow RAW-process, I went for a Canon Powershot S 95 instead.
My S 95 is fast, accurate and gives me wonderful
manual control. I don´t regret my decision.
And the S 95 produces wonderful pictures.
4:23 pm - Thursday, November 11, 2010
Just bought the Canon S95 too and it’s great. Small enough to put in a shirt pocket, but loaded with useful features and the RAW shooting is reasonably quick. Fast lens, so great for low-light shooting. I think the next version of the Nikon P7000 will be vastly improved and I look forward to checking it out as i think Nikon has a good product - just needs some work.
5:40 pm - Thursday, November 11, 2010
I feel so let down by the nikon p7000 the slow raw file transfer just put me right off i am just glad there are more cameras to go for.
1:59 pm - Monday, November 15, 2010
I’ve been reading reviews for Lumix LX5, Nikon p7000 and the G12 and all I get are contradictory comments.
I need a camera for shooting outdoors especially the beach and also indoors during parties/reunions. I’m very much interested with the wide angle lens of LX5 and p7000 but it seems that the G12 or the S95 is still a better option for most people. I also want great manual control since I hope to transition one day to pro DSLRs.
WHICH WOULD YOU RECOMMEND?? LX5, P7000, G12 or S95???
4:05 am - Monday, December 6, 2010
G12, G12 and G12. :)
4:19 am - Monday, December 6, 2010
Ragmuffin, for photographing nature, you should get the Sigma DP1x. No camera with a Bayer-type sensor is capable of taking crisp images, and for nature shots, you need maximum sharpness. Sand in particular will look like mush, even when photographed with an expensive DSLR. If you care about image quality, there is no other way to go.
4:27 am - Monday, December 6, 2010
Hello Murdock, your assumption of “No camera with a Bayer-type sensor is capable of taking crisp images” is really over the top!
So according to you,DSLR the like of Canon 1Ds, Nikon D3, D700 etc etc are all no bloody good for “sharpness” and “nature shots”?
That is the biggest BULL we ever heard!
Ha ha ha ha….
8:18 am - Monday, December 6, 2010
You can laugh, but it is true. When you view an image from a Bayer-type camera at 100%, there is always blurriness. If you don’t see any blurriness, it is because the picture has been sharpened. Bayer technology always results in a loss of resolution, first because the interpolation of colors is not perfect, and second because an anti-aliasing filter is usually necessary. Pictures of trees and beaches are particularly revealing. A Bayer sensor will make a beach look soft and amorphous, whereas a beach photographed by a Sigma camera will look crisp and defined. Sigma cameras currently have a 4.7 MP Foveon sensor, but that sensor has been shown to capture the same detail as a 9 MP Bayer sensor. Sigma will be coming out with a 15 MP sensor in early 2011 which should capture 30 MP worth of detail. The pixel-level sharpness of Foveon images is really quite amazing. Like Foveon, other manufacturers are developing sensors that capture all 3 colors at each pixel. I predict that Bayer technology will be dead by 2020.
8:46 am - Monday, December 6, 2010
Hi Murdock, sorry for laughing; what you said are mostly true but you said yourself that a 9MP Bayer can be as good as a 4.7 Foveon ;)
I am sure your prediction Bayer tech will be dead by 2020 could be true, but in the mean time; I am having a hell lot of fun shooting with my E-P2, G12 and D300!
Photography is not just about detail and sharpness my friend but having fun.
Take a look at my blog and laugh.
Kind Regards - CY
8:59 am - Monday, December 6, 2010
The P7000, G12 or S95? I owned the G11 and had the P7000 for several days and now own the S95. It’s the winner as far as I’m concerned. I shoot only RAW and having a powerful camera I can slip into a shirt pocket is a real plus. It does very well in low light and has an excellent image-stabilizer. The control ring around the lens is very useful. It’s the same camera as the G12 in a much smaller package. You give up the viewfinder(next to useless on the G12) and the tilt-out LCD, but the super portability means I can have a camera with me when I don’t want to lug my D90 or even my Lumix G2.
4:10 pm - Monday, December 6, 2010
Thanks guys for that! I will take into consideration what you said :) Just a bit nervous with the Sigma because I have never used one and the truth is, despite the less than enthusiastic reviews about the p7000, it is still a strong contender because I love the images I took when I borrowed my friend’s D90!
1:26 am - Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Ragamuffin—-be wary about assuming that Nikon’s point and shoots are just compact versions of their DSLRs in quality and performance and especially their modality. They are NOT. I was extremely disappointed in my Coolpix 5100, which was Nikon’s top of the line prosumer compact camera at the time. I bought one in a hurry in late 2008 to be a companion to my D80 and D90. That was a mistake. IT had many shortcomings…wouldn’t shoot in Adobe RGB color space; fell short of implementing all the basic EXIF stuff like Auto-Rotation of image in browsers ( ggrrr….). The sensor and image quality were lacking…very noisy pix at any speed above ISO 400. And a bunch of other things too numerous to put here,. Let me just say it was so different I thought the camera was made by somebody else, not Nikon at all.
1:39 am - Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Ragamuffin, DewD is absolutely right, if you were impressed by your friend’s D90 and expect the P7000 to deliver same; you will be disappointed!It is like expecting your Fiat Uno to perform like your friend’s Ferrari ;)
1:47 am - Tuesday, December 7, 2010
http://www.dxomark.com is a good place to compare different cameras.
The D90 overall score is 73 and the P7000 a mere 39!
You are not comparing apple with apple.
1:53 am - Tuesday, December 7, 2010
I just got rid of my G7 to upgrade to a G12, bought a P7000 instead. Returned it within days and went with the S95.
2:00 am - Tuesday, December 7, 2010
No brainer indeed!
DXO Mark score - G12, S95 =47 and P7000=39.
Say no more ;)
2:10 am - Tuesday, December 7, 2010
I currently own P7000 and am very unhappy. All of the things stated above. SO - I can still send it back and I want a “luggable” small camera. Movies are not so important but RAW is. I usually only shoot raw (my other camera is Nikon D3x). It looks like S95, LX5 or G12. Would appreciate some feedback.
7:41 pm - Thursday, December 9, 2010
stephanie de Leng
For me it is no contest - S95. I bought one after returning the P7000 and it is great. The G12 is not luggable and the S95 is basically the same re focus speed and image quality, less (unneeded) options otherwise, just smaller. Loads of comparison reviews out there.
7:52 pm - Thursday, December 9, 2010
Since you own the humongous D3x, G12 will appear tiny to you :) I do not agree the extra features on the G12 are, according to stephanie “unneeded”.
Just the articulated screen on the G12 sold me.
Try doing a low low angle shot or high angle shot with the S95 and you will know what I mean.
I am very disappointed with the P7000 too and results in DXO Mark (dxomark.com) confirmed that.
Many moons ago I wrote about the usefulness of a articulated screen on a P&S: http://cyleow.blogspot.com/2010/01/neglected-gem-coolpix-8400.html
9:17 pm - Thursday, December 9, 2010
Boo Nikon!!!! Partiality! haha so it’s the G12 v the LX5. I trust Canon since I’ve been using an Ixus ever since but it terms of pictures there’s nothing special about it. On the other hand I was really impressed with the LX3’s low light pictures without flash so I’m expecting (although I may be wrong again), that LX5 should perform almost the same plus I really like that wide angle lens and white body! But I have to say that Lumix flash is just ugly in my experience :/
Thanks guys for the help! As you can see, I’m the typical consumer to get duped by pretty ads -_-
4:56 am - Friday, December 10, 2010
I was interested in purchasing the P7000, but after reading some comments, not so sure anymore. I am a total amature, however, I would like a camera that takes great action shots, i.e., hockey and soccer. Any recommendations? Thoughts on Nikon S8100 or the Olympus Stylus 9000?
4:04 am - Friday, January 7, 2011
the “decisive moment” is not about how many frames per sec you shoot!!! it is one well thought and well timed trigger of the button..not rapid fire pap style!!
7:37 pm - Thursday, March 10, 2011
Good/experienced photographer seldom use RAW. Take photo and deciding to do adjustment is not good. I own P7k since it launched. When time to focus-it make me sick. Nikon should call back this model to do ‘upgrading’ the firmware. I luv nikon for it robustly made like my prime tool D300/D70.
12:41 am - Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Sorry, Fouzi, but experienced photographers mainly use RAW. It allows the most control over the photo if there are problems with lighting, contrast, exposure, etc. JPEGs are “lossy” files, which means information is thrown away when the files are compressed. RAW doesn’t do that.
Apparently, the firmware update to the P7000 has helped somewhat, but I still recommend the S95 or G12 or LX5 or the new Olympus XZ-1.
L Wood, the Nikon 8100 is a nice little camera for general use. The 10x zoom is handy. It’s not in the same class as the above-mentioned cameras, though, having a smaller sensor and noisier at higher ISOs.
1:56 pm - Wednesday, March 16, 2011
gdc…hai there. I enjoy wedding ceremony/photography and was a wedding photographer as my 2nd job. I SELDOM shoot raw unless the lighting gave me trouble. I know what do you meant about raw but i prefer to shoot jpeg most. My P7k was sent to the distributer, the focusing made me mad…
12:05 pm - Thursday, March 17, 2011
the decisive moment is about carefully taking a photo that is able to focus accurately without problems, even on a moving subject. It is not about taking your time - but about having a tool that lets you choose the time. A split second decides the moment worth keeping and from this point of view a few rapid bursts are not a bad thing.
12:23 pm - Thursday, March 17, 2011
i dont think cartier bresson..had auto focus or motordrives..i think he used hyperfocal distance focusing.and to quote” you must know with intuition when to click the camera”
7:32 pm - Thursday, March 17, 2011
If Henri were alive today, he would have auto focus… and a Leica with a fixed lens. I agree about the intuition bit, and therefore rest my case. He had nothing to stop him taking the photo as he set the camera up himself, as I often do with cameras that do not require poking into menus and so forth. However, many of these small modern cameras get in the way of intuitiveness by refusing to take the d..m thing when you want it to. That aside, I was not even talking about the great man. Just talking about a confusion of issues.
8:05 pm - Thursday, March 17, 2011
yes he probably would have a leica..m8 or m9…none of which are auto focus..
9:59 pm - Thursday, March 17, 2011
but if they were, he would. He would take the best tool to do the job. As would anyone. The camera he used in his day was the best for his needs. It would not be today. We also no longer use gun powder to “flash” our subjects.
Who knows - he might have actually deserted the Leica! But we can’t ask him… I am sure he would think us a bunch of fools.
10:22 pm - Thursday, March 17, 2011
I’m on my 3rd P7000 and it left for repairs again yesterday.
Lens cover blades problems. The first 2 cameras were replaced as they were new and the last one gave up after a little over 4000 photos. I love the camera… but besides the blade problems which is a common issue, the slow NRW (RAW) which only works with a few softwares ( Lightroom 3, CS5, Thumbs 4 Plus,), the white balance that goes wild after a few picture (you have to work with NRW if your photos are important), the camera is not reliable and was put on the market without some real testing other than give away gifts to review writers. Trying to catch up to the G12?
I have a camera around my neck all day long except when I shower and go to bed and even then, when it’s new and I love it I take it to bed with me like a new gift like when I was a kid. Today I’m sad and I’m seriously thinking about buying another one today after I finish this article. I have bought every imaginable accessories for that camera, (SB400, wide angle lens, 2 extra batteries, tube to use 52 mm filters, etc) and I prefer that instead of my 3 DSLRs. I should buy an extra one so I would have a chance of having one around my neck while the other is on it’s way from or to to repairs. Nikon people in Toronto are very king, professional and understanding but without a P&S camera, I’m like a cab driver without his car. If you want a P7000, get a deal for 2 and cross your fingers.
12:05 am - Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Why would anyone pay good money and SUFFERED, like you??? Get a G12 and GET A LIFE mate! I had a G7, use it for two years; sold, still going. Then a G9, two years; sols, STILL going. Now I am using G12, no problem at all! Come on Nikon, you broke my heart ;)
12:20 am - Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Not agree, there are lot’s of people who likes their P7000 !!!
I use it and likes it since november 2010 besides my d700-D3 and D3x cameras.
7:56 am - Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Hello Mr Ptrus, are you not working for Nikon? At least I DO NOT work for Canon! LOL
9:08 am - Wednesday, April 27, 2011
I’m fit to be locked up ...just got my 4th P7000.
The 2 first ones buged up in less than 2 weeks and
were replaced, the third one is in repair and they dont’t know when they’ll get the parts. Lens Blades issue. I bought a 4th one because i have bought every imaginable accessories including an SB400 flash (My SB600 and 900 are too big) I’m close to 1,700.CN$ to have (if I’m lucky) one working camera while the other is on it’s way to or from repairs. Unthinkable of selling, I would need to find a looser not to be one myself.
4:09 pm - Friday, May 6, 2011
I have shot with a p7000 for a few months. I mainly use it for those little family outing or when I don’t want to carry the big DSLR gear with me.
Sure RAW is nice but the average amateur or consumer isnt going to buy photoshop and diddle round with it.
As far as overall speed goes it not as bad as folk seem to make out. DONT review every picture you shoot and its fine I think.
The add on wide angle is amazing in my opinion, sure it isnt cheap but its a nice piece of glass and gives good results. The SB400 with a little stofen on it will give excellent results also.
What not to use it for.. anything action related. If this is your primary use for goodness sake buy a dslr…
oh and something else. D-lighting which the p7000 has in three setting of low medium or high is amazing! tell me again why you need raw to fix those dark areas etc?
4:02 pm - Sunday, May 29, 2011
Moment of truth…...
Wanting a nice P&S to use when not wanting to lug the D3s, D3 or D700….wanting to stay faithful to Nikon with the P7000 but the G12 looks very tempting….
I’m an equine photographer and shoot tons (and I mean TONS) of action, sometimes 8,000 frames in a weekend, but I want this P&S for the randomness that is my life….
So which one, P7000 or G12….
3:54 pm - Thursday, June 9, 2011
HD movie recording is another big upgrade on the Nikon P7000, and you can connect the camera directly to your HDTV, via the built-in mini-HDMI connector. cashadvancex(dot)com
8:51 am - Friday, June 24, 2011
As a Nikon DSLR user of some years getting tired at humping its weight around I resorted to a P7K as a close alternative.
For P&S work its RAW could/should be faster so you need to be alert to a possible annoyance: but its fine with care. Also I’ve had the odd hang-up/freeze needing battery removal BUT without loss of data. Seems it doesn’t like accidentally knocking the Zoom lever as its ‘doing its thinking’!!
As a new P&S user though it surprises me that none of you complain about the LCD Screen ON ANY OF THE COMPACTS. The reflection one experiences off the screen makes proper composition and photo checking virtually impossible. WHY AREN’T THEY NON-REFLECTIVE LIKE ‘E’ BOOK SCREENS ARE AFTER ALL THIS TIME??
At least Nikon’s answer with the View Finder is a Godsend and intuitive to all DSLR users.
All-in-all though a very neat little package.
7:55 am - Saturday, June 25, 2011
had a G 7 did not foccused anymore repaire 390 USDOLLAR
4:22 am - Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Ihave had my p7000 since December 2010, it has behaved well until recently, when the lens cover blades decided to remain partially closed on powering up. Repeated pressing of the on/off button, did not rectify the problem.
Have now returned it to Nikon UK and await a response from them, otherwise I am quite happy with the P7000 which is used as a backup for my D80.
3:16 pm - Monday, August 1, 2011
shooting pictures since 1967 went through quiet a few cameras incl. underwater which was a nikon, last camera canon G7 which broke down and the repair is over 350 US ?? went for nikon P7000
and all i can say “crystal clear pictures” and most important none of you never mention FUN , FUN ,FUN !!!
best camera so far for the price it challenge you to be creative and try different options . well done nikon
still have a contax G1 with zeiss biogen T f/2.8-28mm and sonnar T f/2.8-90mm and from time to time shoot picture the old way still great images
4:16 am - Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Support PhotographyBLOG: Buy the Nikon Coolpix P7000 from
one of our affiliate UK retailers:
Support PhotographyBLOG: Buy the Nikon Coolpix P7000 from
one of our affiliate retailers:
hd video,hd,3 inch LCD,compact,hdmi,nikon,RAW,coolpix,10 megapixel,prosumer,28mm,7x zoom,stereo sound,28mm lens,optical viewfinder,NRW,p7000,Nikon Coolpix P7000 Review,P7000 Review,Nikon P7000 Review
Camera Reviews ·
Camera Buying Guide
Camera Buying Guide
Best Digital Cameras ·
Lens Reviews ·
Photography News ·
Photo Gallery ·
© Copyright 2003-2015 Photo 360 Limited