Nikon’s new Coolpix P300 features a super fast f/1.8 4.2x optical zoom (24-100mm 35mm equivalent) lens, effectively giving Canon’s S95 and Panasonic’s LX5 a real run for their money (especially considering it is a full $70 cheaper than both).
This high-end compact sports a 12.2MP backside-illuminated CMOS sensor, a 3” 921,00 dot LCD and offers full 1080p HD video capture at 30fps.
It is clear that Nikon drew up the P300 with advanced photographers in mind, as it features full manual controls, optical Vibration Reduction technology, Nikon’s EXPEED C2 processer and ISO sensitivity up to 3200. However, from Nikon’s press release, it appears that the P300 does not allow users to shoot in RAW, which could be a serious detractor for those looking to squeeze every last bit of image quality out of a pocket camera.
User can choose between Aperture Priority, Shutter Priority and Full Manual controls. If manual modes aren’t your thing, like all of Nikon’s other compacts, the P300 offers the usual list of scene modes.
Available in March, the Nikon Coolpix P300 will run you $329.95. For more info, head to Nikon.com
Cmon Nikon, you had me until you left RAW out. I'll hazard an unscientifically determined opinion that many photographers who want the other advanced features, probably want RAW capability.
No RAW - No Interests!
I have to agree about the lack of Raw. I love the idea of the fast lens and full manual controls, but without Raw, its just another point-and-shoot. Sorry.
This is like going to the twelfth grade but not graduating.
Shame!!!!!!
Submitted by Norman Creighton on February 10, 2011.
What's the sensor size compared to the Canon and Pansonic? Smaller?
No View finder . like many of my friends would not
buy the camera without one
I have the canon S90 and am making exceptionally good 20X30 prints from the JPEG images I shoot. Per the prior reviews of the S90 there was little advantage to using its raw images. What I don't like about the Nikon P300 is its use of the std snapshooters sensor size, 1/2.5 vs the 1/1.7 bigger sized sensor in the S90 and S95, which I see as a major issue/problem with noise reduction and color accuracy. Nonetheless, I like the 24MM (eq.) lens compared to0 the Canon's 28MM. So will wait and see the indepth reviews of the quality obtainable from the Nikon.
What's the point of advanced controls without RAW? Step it up, Nikon. I'm looking at buying a point and shoot with advanced controls and RAW, guess this camera's not for me.
No RAW - no deal.
So sorry...
Sorry, I already purchased the S95 3 months ago. And it has RAW.
Agree - no RAW, no purchase. With RAW I'd be one of the first customers.
Looks like nothing has changed. Canon for P&S and Nikon for DSLR. I'm waiting for the Fuji finepix F550 which does shoot RAW and has high spped video @ 320fps. and has 15X zoom.
without seeking to reignite the endless arguments about jpeg vs raw, just let me say that i publish images regularly, in both newspapers and magazines, with gently processed jpegs out of every camera i own, from p&s to dslr. i have entered a number of competitions, including extremely detailed judging in professional competitions, including 16x20 prints from 'only' 4mp cameras. in all my years, i have never once had an editor or judge ask for more clarity or resolution out of my images. i offer this not to brag in any way; just to illustrate that jpegs offer plenty of opportunity for quality images.
I don't think the argument is what you can do with jpeg only, it rather asks the question: why doesn't an advanced P&S like this have the ability to shoot raw like the other half a dozen models this camera is competing with? Sounds like a marketing/R&D mix up which will yield lower sales until the update is released.
I'm not so sure the lack of RAW shooting capability was a "mistake." The P&Ss with RAW capture invariably have significantly larger sensors, which usually means wider dynamic range. Back-illuminated CMOS or not, the tiny sensor probably limits any advantage RAW capture might have over in-camera processing.
Hmm. It seems the P300 isn't quite the pocket camera that I want ... but it's close. It really is just a nice P&S. I'm itching for Nikon to create the follow up to the P7000. As soon as Nikon get out a smaller, faster P7000, I think that they'll have a winner. Until then, I'll lug around my (much beloved) D200 everywhere, and continue to drive that groove into my left shoulder.
Copyright © 2012 Bonnier Corp. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.
Cmon Nikon, you had me until you left RAW out. I'll hazard an unscientifically determined opinion that many photographers who want the other advanced features, probably want RAW capability.
No RAW - No Interests!
I have to agree about the lack of Raw. I love the idea of the fast lens and full manual controls, but without Raw, its just another point-and-shoot. Sorry.
This is like going to the twelfth grade but not graduating.
Shame!!!!!!
Submitted by Norman Creighton on February 10, 2011.
What's the sensor size compared to the Canon and Pansonic? Smaller?
No View finder . like many of my friends would not
buy the camera without one
I have the canon S90 and am making exceptionally good 20X30 prints from the JPEG images I shoot. Per the prior reviews of the S90 there was little advantage to using its raw images. What I don't like about the Nikon P300 is its use of the std snapshooters sensor size, 1/2.5 vs the 1/1.7 bigger sized sensor in the S90 and S95, which I see as a major issue/problem with noise reduction and color accuracy. Nonetheless, I like the 24MM (eq.) lens compared to0 the Canon's 28MM. So will wait and see the indepth reviews of the quality obtainable from the Nikon.
What's the point of advanced controls without RAW? Step it up, Nikon. I'm looking at buying a point and shoot with advanced controls and RAW, guess this camera's not for me.
No RAW - no deal.
So sorry...
Sorry, I already purchased the S95 3 months ago. And it has RAW.
Agree - no RAW, no purchase. With RAW I'd be one of the first customers.
Looks like nothing has changed. Canon for P&S and Nikon for DSLR. I'm waiting for the Fuji finepix F550 which does shoot RAW and has high spped video @ 320fps. and has 15X zoom.
without seeking to reignite the endless arguments about jpeg vs raw, just let me say that i publish images regularly, in both newspapers and magazines, with gently processed jpegs out of every camera i own, from p&s to dslr. i have entered a number of competitions, including extremely detailed judging in professional competitions, including 16x20 prints from 'only' 4mp cameras. in all my years, i have never once had an editor or judge ask for more clarity or resolution out of my images. i offer this not to brag in any way; just to illustrate that jpegs offer plenty of opportunity for quality images.
I don't think the argument is what you can do with jpeg only, it rather asks the question: why doesn't an advanced P&S like this have the ability to shoot raw like the other half a dozen models this camera is competing with? Sounds like a marketing/R&D mix up which will yield lower sales until the update is released.
I'm not so sure the lack of RAW shooting capability was a "mistake." The P&Ss with RAW capture invariably have significantly larger sensors, which usually means wider dynamic range. Back-illuminated CMOS or not, the tiny sensor probably limits any advantage RAW capture might have over in-camera processing.
Hmm. It seems the P300 isn't quite the pocket camera that I want ... but it's close. It really is just a nice P&S. I'm itching for Nikon to create the follow up to the P7000. As soon as Nikon get out a smaller, faster P7000, I think that they'll have a winner. Until then, I'll lug around my (much beloved) D200 everywhere, and continue to drive that groove into my left shoulder.