Canon PowerShot SX500 IS
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ40
Canon PowerShot SX50 HS
Canon EOS 700D Review
Ricoh GR Review
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Review
Nikon Coolpix S3500 Review
Sony NEX-3N Review
Buy a WB700 14.2 Megapixel Compact Camera (7.6 cm 3" LCD - 18x Optical Zoom - Electronic, Optical IS - 4320 x 3240 Image - 1280 x 720 Video - HDMI - PictBridge - HD Movie Mode)
Thanks for the review! Good to see also this Samsung is getting high notes. Currently I own the Samsung WB650 and the WB210. Image quality of the 650 is very good (judging from 120x80 cm enlargements) with acceptable corner sharpness throughout the zoom range. With the WB210 unfortunately the top left corner is often unsharp. However the WB650 has a very long shutter delay (1 sec), so I miss all the action. The WB210 does not have this problem at all.
My questions: does the WB700 has a negligible shutter delay? Also: the WB650 has the excellent Amoled display, how would the LCD of the WB700 compare? Thanks.
4:06 pm - Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Thanks for the review. Matt Grayson’s surprise that the WB700 takes standard SDHC cards surprised me.
The WB600, which PBLOG also reviewed (May 2010), also takes standard SDHC cards!
4:10 pm - Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Is it possible that the both Pictures showing the 100% crops of jpg-setting fine and superfine are just swapped? Fine is showing more detail then superfine. The filesizes are also missing.
the picture quality is just astonishing for such a small chip.
6:20 pm - Tuesday, August 16, 2011
ok, the real-world photos are exakt what someone has to expect from such a sensor. Even at low iso smeared details and watercolor….
6:27 pm - Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Hmm, I also asume that the 100% crops showing the old Camera in different ISO-Settings aren’t 100% crops. Looking at the downloaded images they look quiet different at 100% .....
6:37 pm - Tuesday, August 16, 2011
I got this camera when it was first released, within minutes of first using it I relised I’d made a huge mistake getting it.
Useless in every respect, loud zoom in movie mode, bad image quality, slow, horrid screen layout. Compared to my old Lumix TZ5 this camera sucks big time, compared to my Canon S95 (which I bought after this), well, you get what you pay for.
7:13 pm - Tuesday, August 16, 2011
@ Gonzo: my WB210 also ‘suffers’ from detail smearing, however in postersize print with 350,000 Mpix (ink droplets) the detail smearing actually looks better, as you cannot see the individual pixels. Still the (center) image sharpness is impressive.
@mtbgus: this week we compared images taken with Canon EOS500D (15 Mpix) with Samsung WB650 and WB210 on color calibrated high res screen. Comparing the center of the images, we could not find a difference in sharpness. Edge/Corner sharpness however was much better with EOS. Colorwise Samsung output was actually more pleasing. Verdict of my collegues who daily work with Photoshop. Since two years I am no longer using my digital SLR, but use the Samsungs instead; 21-288 mm focal length in matchbox size and impressive close-up capabilities. I know these cameras have their limitations, but my travel images never looked better.
9:24 pm - Tuesday, August 16, 2011
This camera is a piece of @#^$&%*%() The large jpeg of some building looked like a Monet painting, even at 100ISO! And it gets a good review? Hogwash! These reviewers are mentally ill and operate with horseblinders on, or were bribed by Samsung.
This review site sucks; totally subjective, at whim, in other words; total BS, BS, BS !
10:33 pm - Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Excellent camera which takes great photos for the price paid. Coming from Panasonic’s TZ3 & 7, FZ5 & 18, Fuji S6500FD & F70EXR the Samsung perfoms well. Full manual mode including focusing allows wonderful flexibility when I don’t want to carry my dSLR. I find the LCD to be bright and clear enough but is obviously not as good as my WB2000 AMOLED screen. BTW my model is the WB690 which is Argos’s version of the WB700 except I only paid £120 with a 12mp sensor (rather than 14mp)and everything else is the same. In fact the flash recyling time is about 2 secs so it may be better than the WB700!
10:25 am - Thursday, August 18, 2011
I read somewhere that the WB700 takes over 4 seconds between taking photos. Has anyone found this to be true?
12:50 pm - Thursday, August 18, 2011
It looks like a good replacement for the WB600 and maybe not as lacklustre as I first thought? It’s a pity there’s no replacement for the WB650 which a friend of mine owns, and is always raving about. Samsung should start using it’s SuperAMOLED Plus screens on it’s new cameras. Hopefully the NX200 and NX20 will get them? Maybe they’ll feature on the WB3000 and WB750 and EX2 cameras too (if they ever happen)?
8:52 am - Sunday, August 21, 2011
This is now coming down in price - http://amzn.to/qMOKvH
10:19 am - Tuesday, August 23, 2011
hi. iwant to buy this camera but i dont know really is it good or not? [lz help me
this is my email:
9:38 am - Wednesday, August 24, 2011
I just bought this very good camera last day and now I’m testing it. Works very well at low Iso. It’s a real bargain, now it costs about 160 euros.
11:34 pm - Friday, September 2, 2011
Im sorry but the sample pics and the review seem to belong to different realities. Horrible noise, yet the review says its a good compact? Seriously, its supposed to be in the mid-high end spectrum of the compacts. I’ve seen 100$ cameras produce much better results. Either the author was bribed, or he is technically uncapable of writing a proper review. Sorry for the harshness, but its hard to be forgiving when your own sample pictures contradict your words.
2:16 pm - Sunday, September 4, 2011
IMHO this is a very good quality photo for a camera of 160 Euros.
4:01 pm - Sunday, September 4, 2011
Between the Samsung WB700 and the Panasonic TZ20. Which camera gives better quality images?
which camera performs better at high iso?
And which camera has better maunal controls?
9:40 am - Monday, September 5, 2011
These cameras are evenly matched. They both have aperture, shutter priority & full manual. High ISO performance seems to be very close, I’d say that the Samsung just wins it on 1600. The quality of their general images are close to being the best you can get from a compact. The Samsung looks to be slightly sharper and more vivid, but again it’s close.
10:19 am - Wednesday, September 7, 2011
Reading the text and looking at the sample images, I can’t believe that these are related to the same camera.
The images are noisy even at base ISO and the Edges and Borders are very soft. The blue sky is close to clip on the blue channel, making it look more cyan. Reading the review, I expected something else, even on a compact superzoom.
7:14 pm - Thursday, September 8, 2011
Very very dissapointed. The camera takes detail photos ONLY at 5 x zoom and daylight. After 5 x zoom photos are blury especially when ISO is higher than 400 . As for night shots ...my mobile phone produces better results when it comes to long range photos at night.
11:19 am - Thursday, September 22, 2011
I use this camera and for me is a good camera.
12:42 pm - Thursday, September 22, 2011
I have this camera, and I think that it does very good photos. Its zoom is accurate. The manual mode allows you to be more creative. The colors are very bright. I recommend this camera for those that want a good camera with some reflex caracteristics and little body.
11:54 am - Tuesday, October 18, 2011
I’m looking for a superzoom camera and the specs of this one are very good, but now I am in doubt between this one and the wb650 because the comments on the wb700 aren’t so good.
Which one should I choose? Good zoom quality and stability is most important for me. The wb700 has better zoom, but the wb650 has a AMOLED screen. Who can help?
5:20 pm - Thursday, November 24, 2011
Thanks for your review. The picture quality is great but flash recycle time is horrible, I count roughly 7 to 10 secs flash to flash.
My old SL620 was much faster flash to flash.
DO YOURSELF A FAVOR AND BUY ANOTHER CAMERA!
3:14 pm - Monday, November 28, 2011
Which is the best? Sony Cybershot DSC-WX7 or SAMSUNG WB700? THX
2:25 am - Tuesday, December 13, 2011
This is the most ridiculous camera “review” I have ever encountered.
There is not ONE real-life sample image above ISO 80. F****ng 80!
And that with some of the images taken with absurdly long exposures too. The nigh shot is a 16 second exposure. THAT DOESN’T TELL ANYTHING ABOUT THE CAMERAS LOW-LIGHT CAPACITY!
The “100% crop” images for ISO settings are not 100% crops, the full-sized samples look like crap in comparison…
The images for fine and super fine are swapped, as proven by the image sizes (fine 4KB larger). And clarity…
And even at ISO 80 the samples don’t look very impressive, yet quality was praised.
For some moths I actually thought this was a quality review site, than god I didn’t base my purchasing choices here. Back to dpreview.
So bad I actually bothered to write this, I can’t believe it.
12:22 pm - Thursday, December 15, 2011
I completely agree with this last comment. I am very surprised by the so called reviews posted on this site. I bought a Fuji HS10 after reading these reviws. Boy was i disappointed with my cameras actual results. I have ended up having to use my mobile phone for any indoor shots as the camera cant cope with anything other than well lit outdoor pics. Overal, very disappointed with these expert reviews. Do not trust these reviews I beg you.
11:14 am - Thursday, December 29, 2011
the fuji hs10 is a bridge camera, the samsung wb700 is a compact camera, the price of the samsung is about 160 euros, for a schneider lens, powerful zoom 24-400 in 35mm, movie in hd 720p with stereo mic, full manual control much better of fuji (and i had a fuji). this camera is a real bargain and the review is a very good review.
look at this:
2:29 pm - Thursday, December 29, 2011
I just bought this camera from John Lewis and when the lens is open it seems to make a quiet clicking sound every time you move it. Is it supposed to do this? or is it self focusing all the time?
7:50 pm - Sunday, January 8, 2012
Purchased the WB690 version mentioned earlier in these comments. At £99 from Argos, I think it’s a fantastic camera.
Quick start up times, great quality pictures and video and loads of things to “fiddle” with if you want too. For family snaps I leave it in the auto mode most of the time and it works a treat!
Even managed to take some great snaps of the moon with the use of a cheap tripod and the trials & errors of an amateur in manual mode.
Would certainly recommend one.
2:39 pm - Tuesday, January 10, 2012
I would like to make up my mind considerind these 3 cameras:
FujiPix F 500 EXR
Samsung wb 650 or 700
Who could help me choosing one of these?
9:27 pm - Friday, January 20, 2012
The WB690, derivative version ‘exclusive’ to Jessops, is now on sale at Jessops for £99 -
I don’t Need a new travel zoom (quite happy still w my Sony HX5) but 99 for a 18x zoom scoring decent marks across different online reviews? Hmmm gets you thinking.
10:02 pm - Tuesday, April 17, 2012
Bought the Samsung WB690, this week, I liked the photos for quality and zoom, but I was disapointed yo find that no matter what size SDHC card you put in for video, you cannot do more than 20 minutes at a time, checked with Samsung who said this is correct for this camera, tried 4 gig SDHC + 8 gig SDHC. But bought at Argos for £88.99p + got a £5 voucher back as well.
3:57 pm - Saturday, June 2, 2012
Are you all serious?
For this money ... this is an excellent performance camera.
I’m using nikon all my life ... but was wery suprised by this little thing.
For this money ( 130 EUR) ypu can9t find better.
9:33 am - Tuesday, June 12, 2012
If you enjoyed this review, please help spread the word by tweeting it on
Twitter or liking it on Facebook.
Support PhotographyBLOG: Buy the Samsung WB700 from
one of our affiliate UK retailers:
Support PhotographyBLOG: Buy the Samsung WB700 from
one of our affiliate retailers:
3 inch LCD,
Samsung WB700 Review
Camera Reviews ·
Camera Buying Guide
Camera Buying Guide
Best Digital Cameras ·
Lens Reviews ·
Photography News ·
Photo Gallery ·
© Copyright 2003-2013 Photo 360 Limited