Nikon P7700 -- What's the Story?

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by john_n._wall, Nov 28, 2012.

  1. I'm interested in a point-and-shoot for when I do not want to take out the SLR.
    The Nikon P7700 seems to have a lot going for it, but I can't find much serious discussion of its quality.
    Sure, the Sony RX100 has a bigger sensor, but the 7700 has a faster -- and longer -- lens.
    What do folks make of this new Nikon?
     
  2. I googled "P7700 review" and didn't find a lot of takes on it either. There are some reviews out there. It would give you a start.
     
  3. PhotographyBlog liked it:
    http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/nikon_coolpix_p7700_review/conclusion/
     
  4. While there is obviously much to like about this camera, it is also obvious that the P7700 is no where near the Fujifilm X100 in high ISO performance. That is not good. There are also some pictures on flickr that shows that sky is rendered in white in overcast weather. It might be the photographer, it might be the camera. I don't know. But good high ISO performance, good rendering of the sky and fast autofocus is important to me. I have spent a lot of time (re)placing the sky in my old Coolpix pictures, and I do not want to do have to do that with another generation of Coolpix pictures.
    Here is some info, but I wouldn't put too much trust in the information. I am not sure about "the quality" of it. Until we know more about the quality of it's performance, I would not want to place an order for it.
    Here is a picture of it with an external 3rd party optical viewfinder in the hotshoe.
     
  5. it is also obvious that the P7700 is no where near the Fujifilm X100 in high ISO performance​
    Why is everyone so concerned with high ISO performance now? There was a time when everyone used ISO 100 and 400 film, now it seems that a camera has to have good results at ISO 128,000 or it's useless.
    I suppose everyone is taking pictures of black cats in coal cellars now.
     
  6. With high ISO you don't have to use flash which results in more natural results.
     
  7. There are quite a few places where flash photography is not allowed. And shooting outdoors when it is getting dark doesn't always look good with an in-camera flash. Even with a Nikon flash.
    There was a time when everyone used ISO 100 and 400 film, now it seems that a camera has to have good results at ISO 128,000 or it's useless.​
    It is not useless, Steve. But:
    Nikon only has ISO 80-1600 on this camera (ISO 3200/Hi 1 - equivalent to 6400).
    The Fuji X100 has ISO 200 - 6400 (extended output sensitivity equivalent ISO 100 or 12800)
    Nikon has been sleeping in class when it comes to this, IMO. Or maybe it is not possible to get better results with the smaller sensor size of the P7700? The (APS-C) CMOS size sensor in the X100 seems to be several hundred percent larger then the 1/1.7" CMOS sensor in the P7700.
    Chart comparing sensor sizes.
     
  8. To be presize, the sensor in the X100 is 867% larger than the sensor in the P7700. 8,67 times the size of the P7700. Wow, that is a huge difference. I didn't know until now that the difference was that big.
     
  9. Lots of good features for the Fuji X100, but you have to be ready to live with a 35 mm lens for all your shots. I would think the real competition for the P7700 would be the Sony RX100, which has a larger sensor, but a slower lens. Or the Canon G1.
    Both of the latter are also a lot more expensive.
     
  10. Yes, John. And the Fuji X100 is the first generation of this camera type and there seem to be quite a few things that can be improved on it.
    The Sony RX100's sensor would be 2.7 times bigger than the P7700's sensor, and the Canon G1's sensor would be 6.09 times bigger.
    Nikon P7700
    Focal length: 6.0 - 42.8mm (35mm format equivalent – 28-200mm)
    Maximum aperture: F2.0 - F4.0
    Optical zoom: 7.1x
    Sensor size: 43mm2
    Sony RX100
    Focal length: 28 – 100 mm (35mm format equivalent - )
    Maximum aperture: F1.8 - F4.9
    Optical zoom: 3.6x
    Sensor size: 116.16mm2
    Canon G1
    Focal length: 15.1–60.4 mm (35mm format equivalent - 28–112 mm)
    Maximum aperture: F2.8–F5.8
    Optical zoom: 4x
    Sensor size: 261.80mm2
    Fujifilm X100
    Focal length: Fixed lens - 23mm (35mm format equivalent – 35mm)
    Maximum aperture: F2.0
    Optical zoom: None
    Sensor size: 372.88mm2
     
  11. Correction:

    Sony RX100
    Focal length: 10.4–37.1 mm (35mm format equivalent - 28–100 mm)
     
  12. Nikon's compacts have never really been serious contenders to the other cameras. I first experienced Nikon compact digicams in their Coolpix 4300 and Coolpix 5000 days, and the last camera I used was a P7100 which I borrowed from a friend. Except for the fact that it can use my SB600's and SB800's, it had relatively nothing going for it compared to the competition: Canon G12, Canon S100, Olympus XZ-1or XZ-2, Panasonic LX5 or LX7 (rebranded as a Leica digilux as well), Fuji X10, etc. Consider one of those cameras, and join me in keeping our fingers crossed, hoping that Nikon decides one day to take compact cameras more seriously.
    The Canon G1X, Sony RX100, and especially the Fuji X100 are all cameras in a completely different class, and I'm not sure why they're being compared here. Of course they're going to beat the P7700.
     
  13. ..join me in keeping our fingers crossed, hoping that Nikon decides one day to take compact cameras more seriously.​
    Absolutely, Ariel!
    The Canon G1X, Sony RX100, and especially the Fuji X100 are all cameras in a completely different class, and I'm not sure why they're being compared here. Of course they're going to beat the P7700.​
    The point is to compare the P7700 with better options for those who would like that. What is the point of comparing it with lesser options?
    If you by 'completely different class' are referring to the prize, the prize might not be the crucial factor for everyone. I, for one, is looking for a compact camera that will give me the best possible pictures. I can get a lot of different compact cameras for a prize around $400 - $500, but if there is a camera that will take much better pictures than those in that prize range, I would pay more to get the better quality pictures.
    The Fuji X100 is one of the cameras I have been considering. John is considering the other two in addition to the P7700.
     
  14. It's not just price. You don't have to compare it with lesser options, what about other comparable in-class options? All those cameras are larger sensor, significantly higher cost, etc. The other cameras I mention from Canon, Fuji, Olympus, and Panasonic are the same kind of ideology: a "super point and shoot" camera. Also, John never mentioned the X100; you did.
     
  15. Why would you mention Canon G12 when the G15 is already out there?
    I don't want an Olympus or a Panasonic camera. I want a Nikon camera - but that is not an option yet. They have to get better than this.

    As for Fujifilm, I would buy that brand. But not the Fuji X10 when the Fuji X100 is better. If there is a Canon out there better than the Fuji X100, I am all ears.
    Also, John never mentioned the X100; you did.​
    I didn't say that. You did.
     
  16. Y'all don't fuss, please. This is all good conversation.
    Its about the tradeoffs between size, image quality, convenience, range, etc among alternatives to carrying around a DSLR.
    I have a D700 which I love, except when I don't want to carry it around, like on a trip, at least some of the time.
    I have a Panasonic LX-3, which I've made images with practically in the dark that I can print up to 12x18 and am very happy with. So for me the sensor size limitation is perhaps acceptable, other things being OK.
    One attraction of the P7700 is the speed of the lens and the range of the lens.
    I guess I'm waiting for DP Review to review the P7700 and compare it with the alternatives at $600 and up like the Sony RX100 and the Canon G1, as well as the Fuji models that have zoom lenses and the other models in this category closer in price to the P7700 like the LX-7 and the Canon G15.
     
  17. The Canon G15 sensor size is only 43mm2. It is the same as the P7700.

    I think I will go for a considerably larger sensor size. If you look a some of the photos on flickr shot with the P7700, IMO the quality leaves a bit to be desired.
    I was disappointed with DP Review when the photo samples of the preview of the P7700 mostly was shot with good lighting and at ISO 80. Most cameras will deliver quite well under those lighting conditions and at ISO 80.
     
  18. you cant really compare the p7700 to the x100. they're not even in the same class. the X100 costs more than 2x as much and has a fixed lens. i bought a p7000 on closeout for $250 and at that price it's ok. ironically for a nikon, the ergonomics of it aren't all that great. if it had two control wheels it would be much better. i do like that you can stick an sb-400 on it, but unfortunately, you can't use the manual flash options, which sort of negates the usefulness of that particular flash.
    anyhoo, the p7700 IMO is about 1 1/2 or 2 full generations behind current compact cameras. the faster aperture is nice, but nikon could have done that with the p7100. the p7700 should have had a larger sensor like the Canon G1X. if i was looking at point and shoots today, i'd consider the Sony RX100 first. but if you're going to spend $500+ on a compact these days, you also have to look at mirrorless options, which aren't much more expensive, or even less expensive. you can get an older model Olympus Pen on deep discount for under $300 with lens. if you want a superzoom-like range, the field narrows considerably.
    I, for one, is looking for a compact camera that will give me the best possible pictures​
    that would be the RX100 or the G1X. or maybe the Ricoh GRIV, which also has a fixed lens.
     
  19. Canon G1 X - DP Review
    The AF is rather slow, when compared to contemporary mirrorless system cameras, such as the Panasonic GX1or the latest models of the Olympus PEN series. Combine this with the camera's dead-slow 1.9 frames continuous shooting rate and it's clear that the G1 X is not the tool of choice for any type of photography involving fast moving subjects.
    Another limitation of the focus system is its (lack of) close focusing capability. You'll need to get used to switching frequently into Macro mode when shooting close-up portraits or other nearby subjects. At focal lengths of more than 50mm you have to switch to macro mode to focus closer than one meter. This slows the AF down even further.​
    I won't have that. Missing photos because of slow AF is not an alternative for me if I can avoid it. Been there...lost many "once in a life time photos".
     
  20. I was looking at the image samples of RX100 on DP Review. I don’t understand why they would think that the image quality is that good. Look at the rendering of the sky in most of the samples. I want better image quality than that. The Ricoh GR IV has a sensor size of 43mm2 only . I would like a bigger sensor size. Fujifilm X100 – jpegs strait from the camera. Look at this great little flickr set by S.H.Chow. There is the image quality I am looking for.
     
  21. pge

    pge

    DP Review has reviewed this camera link
    Compare the high iso of the p7700 and the rx100, you will be surprised dispite the sensor size difference.
    Quite a few comments here are from people who have not tried the P7700 but are satisified to say that Nikon has not been the leader in this class of camera. Check out the DP review and see for yourself. The P7700 is a great little camera, very nice image quality, quite reasonable high iso performance, pretty fast. I am quite certain you will not be disappointed.
     
  22. pge

    pge

    Here is some crazy old guy swimming in Lake Ontario in Toronto on November 18th at 200mm (equiv) right out of the camera.
    00b4qO-506367684.jpg
     
  23. Phil, DP Review has not reviewed the Nikon P7700 yet.
     
  24. pge

    pge

  25. Phil, I noticed the link.
     
  26. Yes, that's a link to a PREVIEW, not a REVIEW, sadly.
    They did a group review a couple of days ago of a group of 5 cameras in this category, but did not include the P7700.
     
  27. For the price of the Fuji X-100, I could get a Nikon D7000 and kit lens, these days. I'm not sure the X-100 would win that fight. So, I don't think it is quite fair to compare the Fuji to the Coolpix P7700 either. The price sets the target audience and the FEATURES that Nikon can put in the camera and still make money. If Nikon was silly enough to make a fixed lens, point and shoot that sells for more than many of their DSLRs, I'm sure they could do a good job of matching features with the X-100.
     
  28. If you are trying to find the best compact camera for your needs and wallet, why would you be concerned about whether the comparison was fair or not, John W.? I will leave the fair comparison to DP Review. That is part of their job.
    I am waiting for Nikon to do just that, John W. - make a fixed lens extraordinary good compact camera. I am just wondering why they haven't thought of that idea before Fujifilm did.
    What if the big DSLR's will be gone in a short while? What if no one wants to buy them anymore, in let's say 5 to 10 years from now. IMO Nikon has to start thinking very differently very fast if they are thinking along the same lines as you are, John W.
     
  29. John, I've been very happy with my Fuji X10 when leaving the Nikon D5000 outfit home. Now that the "orbs" issue has been resolved with a new sensor and prices have slightly dropped, a good deal could be found. A user owning both the P7700 and the X10 makes his comments after experiencing both in the field, here: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50372731 You might find it helpful.
     
  30. pge

    pge

    What if the big DSLR's will be gone in a short while?​
    Ergonomics alone will not let this happen. Have you ever taken a few hundred shots of a model with a camera the size of a phone?
     
  31. Ergonomics alone will not let this happen.​
    Maybe the weight of the DSLR's and the weight of the lenses will?
    Have you ever taken a few hundred shots of a model with a camera the size of a phone?​
    No, I am still using my DSLR. Maybe not for long, though. There almost seem to be a photo equipment revolution going on right now. A lOT is happening. Very exiting times. I like what I see.
    My ancient Nikon Coolpix 800, that I happily used for many years, had very good ergonomics. But is was bigger than many of the other point and shoots.
    Are the compacts today really bad when it comes to ergonomics? I haven't had my hands on any of them yet.
     
  32. Wow, did this thread go sideways! John what is your DSLR? If you already have a Nikon DSLR and a flash or two, the P7700 would likely be a nice companion on your 'light days'. It's controls are Nikon in design and labeling so the familiarity would be nice. We have a P7100 in the family to compliment a D7000 and a D200. There is also an SB800, SB600 and an SB400 in the mix. It was a logical choice for us (my wife and I) and it takes surprisingly good photos. Enough so that once we used it, I began to see the age and shortcomings of my D200, which prompted the purchase of the D7000. The P7100 is a pretty smart camera with a lot of useful, creative control. The P7700 adds a better lens and a CMOS sensor. Both good things. Nikon also corrected a design flaw in the placement of the front command dial. Seeing the specs, I would have preferred the P7700 but it wasn't out when we purchased. It won't be a great fast-action camera but will be well built and familiar if you are already a Nikon user. If you don't currently use a Nikon DSLR, the advantages diminish a bit.
    Good luck on your search.
    Tom
     
  33. Ann, out of the 30 responses in this thread, about half of them are made by you. Maybe you should take a deep breath, step back, and look at the other side of the coin. Many people have now pointed out the fallacy of bringing the X100 into this discussion, which puts you into a (very) vocal minority. This is akin to someone asking about the capability of a consumer-level car like a Toyota Camry, and you barge in here discussing the Lotus Elise. The lens doesn't zoom, it's fully 3 times the price of most cameras in the P7700's class, it DEFINITELY does not lend itself to "pointing and shooting," etc. The X100 is a rewarding camera, but is very much a niche camera. You also keep talking about "fast autofocus,"which is strange. Photo.net must span multiple universes, because here in my parallel dimension, the X100 is not a fast-focusing camera. My dinky Panasonic G2 handily beats it in focusing speed, and it's not exactly a speed demon itself, doesn't even compare to the cheapest DSLR, or the current crop of NEX and micro 4/3 cameras. Although, the image quality is nowhere in the same league, as the X100 is pretty much a D90 sensor with a Fuji fixed lens. If someone is looking for the things that a P7700 provides, then while it does have better image quality, it absolutely does not deliver the same capabilities as the cameras that started this thread. You seem to be trying to justify your recent purchase to yourself, in a thread completely unrelated to the X100.
     
  34. Boy, you complain a lot, Ariel.
     
  35. pge

    pge

    Like Tom suggests, it is a nice bonus of the P7700 that it will fire your sb's wirelessly.
     
  36. I did mention that my usual and customary camera is a D700.
    Good point about cross-body compatibility of gear.
     
  37. Do you think you would be satisfied with the image quality of the P7700, John? You are already used to the image quality of the D700.
     
  38. pge

    pge

    I also own a D700 and a P7700. I think the P7700 is really quite good.
     
  39. Do you have any image samples for us, Phil?
     
  40. pge

    pge

    Of course there is the one that I posted above.
    In response to your question I took a shot of a dimly lit corner of a storage room, one with each camera. I kept the iso to 800 to be fair to the p&s. Funny thing is that the vr on the P7700 got a clear shot whereas I blew the D700 shot without vr.
    Both shots were at 50mm, iso800. Aperture and shutter speeds were different.
    00b54F-506507684.jpg
     
  41. pge

    pge

    d700
    00b54G-506507784.jpg
     
  42. Both Nikon and Canon still think there's a market in 2012 for a pricey, underwhelming, teensy sensor p&s. The Sony NEX 5n killed that format with a great 16mp sensor and the ability to use almost any lens 2 years ago. Nikon can't seem to do better than the DOA J1 and V1 and the NEX look-a-like V2--historically, a somewhat unfortunate name:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuCRVx9CYRw
     
  43. I bit the bullet and bought the P7700. As far as ISO it is good to 1600 and great at 400-800 in low light. The thing to remember is that the VR gives you a 4 stop advantage. Combined with the fast and very sharp zoom lens... the low light capabilities are very good. The camera handles like a dream,.. good ergonomics/grip, great access to menu items via function buttons and 2 scroll wheels. If you like nikon DSLR controls then you'll like this camera. It's a great camera... there is more to it's performance than meets the eye. Read this assessment: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3372770
    Autofocus is fast enough. It goes from 28-200mm in 2 seconds. You can set the zoom to stop at 35,50,85,105,135,200. Choose any by checking a box in the menu. I bought the helios viewfinder which has view lines at 35,90,135mm. So I designate these lens settings when I'm using the viewfinder. The LCD screen is ultra sharp and the articulating feature is useful. Function buttons are good... I set one for VR and the other for the ND filter. This is a killer camera with its good handling, magnesium body, and Leica M6 feel. Reminds me of my old Leica.
    I prefer this to my D300 as i'm getting better photos. The review link is interesting in pointing out the IQ strengths versus Sony RX100 and the Canon....
     

Share This Page