#1 r4 sdhc

Since when does a camera without interchangeable lenses have no flash?

7:58 am - Tuesday, February 9, 2010

#2 Gilo

I hope the NX10 is not going to be a similar flop…

10:25 am - Tuesday, February 9, 2010

#3 Willem

I have had this camera for a few months now and I’m quite happy with it. Haven’t used the RAW function yet, but I’m pleased with the JPEG picture quality. The main reasons for buying this camera (from camera’s with similar zoom lenses) were:
a) SD support
b) battery (you can find a charger and a spare battery for very little)
c) USB charging

1:08 pm - Tuesday, February 9, 2010

#4 Willem

d)nearly forgot: the full zoom video

1:10 pm - Tuesday, February 9, 2010

#5 Arbnor

Hi there! I realy don’t know,if Im’ going to buy this right now,cuz now it is to cheap only 270 EURO
It was 400 before!!
I would like to know why, the quality,or ....forget it!!

2:10 pm - Friday, February 12, 2010

#6 Nancy

I have had this camera for about a month- I am a novice and I use it mostly for wildlife photos and macro—the $399 lowest price is incorrect,I paid $319—the zoom ability allows me to take sharp shots that can be made into 8X10 prints—despite a bad back, I can carry this camera without pain on a 2 hour hike—on the downside, the settings, options and limitations of various modes are complicated for a beginner, and downloading and printing the online manual does not result in something convenient to carry in a camera bag. In Playback, the LCD does not give a sharp image, I generally find the shot on the PC is much better than it appears on the camera.  There is a plug-in charger available online for the SLB11A battery, and I recommend an extra battery.  In general, the camera fills my needs, provides an opportunity to learn about and experiment with settings, and considering the purchase price, I feel it was a good choice.

6:37 pm - Tuesday, February 16, 2010

#7 mark

yeah,this article was written on February,2010. It should not be metioned as $399. Now it is even under $300.
Good toy for playing around since it offers so many features. Just remember u would not be able to print great large photo. but for small print. this camera is good.

3:30 am - Tuesday, March 9, 2010

#8 DAWK

I JUST OPENED MY SHIPPING BOX AND HAVE SET UP THIS CAMERA,AND BEFORE PURCHASED,READ SEVERAL REVIEWS THAT WERE POSITIVE,UNTIL I FOUND THIS REVIEW,WITH MUCH BETTER INFO/IMAGE SAMPLES.
  HAD I READ THIS REVIEW-FIRST,WOULD HAVE NEVER PURCHASED THIS DECEPTIVE -STATS BY SAMSUNG,‘TOY’.
  SAMSUNG,ARE YOU READING THIS? IT’S LIKLEY I WILL RETURN THIS CAMERA,AS I PURCHASED IT ON THE SPECS WHICH-APARENTLY ...YOU LIED ABOUT AND DECIEVED THE LIKES OF ME + OTHERS!
  MY REASON FOR NIEVLY BUYING THIS CAMERA,WAS TO HAVE ‘RAW’ WORK FOR VERY SHARP MACRO IMAGES IN PHOTOSHOP! THIS REVIEW SAMPLE IMAGES PROVE DIFFERENT. I ALSO WANTED TO USE-EDIT MPEG 4 VIA MOVIES,BUT THATS NOT GONNA HAPPEN,INSTEAD APPLE QUICK TIME? IT’S REALY JPEG IN DISGUISE.  IT ALSO APPEARS THAT OTHER CAMERAS ARE 4 TO 5 HUNDRED BUCKS.BUT THESE OTHER CAMERAS FEATURED, ACTUALLY ‘DELIVER’WHAT THEY SAY IN SPECS.
  YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY-FOR,AND AM SEVERLY DISSAPOINTED THAT SAMSUNG WOULD INSULT THEIR TECH EXPERTS AND DEVELOPE A CAMERA,USING OUT-RIGHT DECEPTION,THUS INSULTING THEIR OWN MANUUFACTURING EXPERTS,AND SEEMS THE DECPTIVE MARKETING DUDES NEED TO BE ‘FIRED’ FOR THIS?
  SAMSUNG,YOU LOSE….

5:17 pm - Friday, April 2, 2010

#9 BenP

I think you must have had a duff sample or get more money from other manufactures like Fuji as this camera is well worth 4.5 on image quality, when you rate fuji camera at 5 with the fringing problem. Like intel reviews very biased here!

9:19 pm - Sunday, December 5, 2010

#10 Tony

I have a samsung wb 5000 camera. its great with pictures. but am having a big problem with it after taking pictures it takes so long to process. more than a minute.
can someone advice me on what to do as to change the processing time?

10:59 pm - Sunday, December 11, 2011