Comments on: Nikon Coolpix P90 Review

By: Gerry Smart

Gerry Smart — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 11:52:20 +0000

Many thanks for a thorough review

I’ve had my P90 for some time now.

Your review helped me find menu options I used on my previous P80.

As I only view photos on the PC monitor, image quality is okay, if not stunning.

I bought a spare battery with the camera, so this slips into the money pocket of my jeans on all outings (perfect size).

By: sharina van den berg

sharina van den berg — Wed, 16 Mar 2011 16:41:00 +0000

I have a P90 I charged the battery. But when I insert it back in the camara it shows that the battery is not charged and I charged it for 3 hours.
I bought a new battery thinking that is the problem but it does the same thing. please advise what the problem can be?

By: jaison

jaison — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 11:05:28 +0000

you should’ve gone for slr cams where you can satisfy your requiremaents.nikon is the most opted for photography.

By: Simalar feeling

Simalar feeling — Tue, 25 May 2010 03:04:32 +0000

I have the P90, and I agree with the review. I was doing a photo shoot today and seriously disappointed with the camera. Granted, I should have done a little more research before I bought it, but I got caught up in the looks and the 24x zoom. (today I found out that it didn’t work with external flash units…which was another downer). The camera worked great for me on my trip through Mexico to Costa Rica and back (I got soem AMAZING photos)…but never realized all the great photos were based on the fact that I was always OUTSIDE! Now, taking pics INSIDE is really no good (was doing a furniture shoot). I think I might just sell it after today.

There was lots of visible noise and it left me trying all kinds of different setting to try to get rid of it. Every once in a while I’d luck out but that’s really not good enough for a camera that looks this legit. DON’T DO WHAT I DID! Don’t get THIS Nikon.

By: Linda B

Linda B — Tue, 11 May 2010 00:13:25 +0000

Why hello all, I have a certain question about the camera Coolpix P90. I’m looking how to find and use the histogram on this certain camera. I need to know where it is at and how to find its location. Can anyone please help me? Thanks

By: Arjun

Arjun — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 16:48:33 +0000

I saw pic of canon sx20 (99.9% same quality of sx1) and Nikon p90 and i am very determined that P90 is a big upset with Nikon Brand!! Dont just go by the P90 looks and Nikon brand (though i feel it may be best in DSLRs).. I feel we buy camera for getting pictures and P90 has everything good other than its pictures

By: avishek barman

avishek barman — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 12:13:52 +0000

i intend to buy a camera.i have shortlisted two cameras.they are nikon p90 and cannon sx1 is.which one do you suggest for better image quality?

By: Brad

Brad — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 13:31:28 +0000

Hi Sam, so far I think the SX1 has a marginal advantage at higher ISO (the noise advantage is very slight but you will notice that saturation doesn’t drop as much) and that its widescreen vari-angle LCD will help if you’re using wide-screen settings (ie 1080p movie mode).

I have a retail model SX20 with me now and I’d say its just an SX10 with a 12 MP sensor from early-2009 models stuffed in. The SX20′s burst mode is slower than the SX10 (1.4 FPS on SX10 vs around 1.0 FPS on SX20). The SX1, of course, beats both with its 4 FPS burst mode. The SX20 also uses slightly more noise reduction and the resolution increase of 10 MP vs 12 MP is not a big leap.

Overall, deciding between the two is a matter of whether you need RAW and a very fast 4 FPS burst mode of the SX1, and the type of application you’ll be using movie mode for (in my opinion, 720p is more than enough for the average Joe)

Hope this helps. If you have any further questions, do not hesitate to reply – Brad

By: Sam Thomas

Sam Thomas — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 17:24:12 +0000

Thanks so much for your help. Do you think the difference between the SX1 and the SX20 is worth the extra $100 or so for the SX1? Also, what about the other pros and cons to each? Some of the research I’ve done suggests the SX20 may be the better buy. Otherwise, why would Canon come out with the SX20? Some researchers suggest the CMOS sensor in the SX1 actually produces less quality photographs even though the CMOS sensor is the sensor used in many DSLR cameras. The CMOS is faster though for continuous shooting, which is important to me. The 1080p (SX1) verses 720p (SX20) HD video recording is not as impressive to me because both are excellent. I do wish the SX1 offered 720p as an option to reduce file sizes. Both feature the Digic 4 processor, 20x optical zoom with image stabilization and many other usable features. The SX20 delivers 12 megapixels verses SX1′s 10 megapixels. The SX20 has a smaller LCD monitor at 2.5 inches verses the SX1′s 2.8 inch monitor but both are vari-angle. Some also suggest the EVF in the SX20 is much better than the SX1. Since the SX20 is so new, I haven’t found a comparable analysis to base my decision upon although at this point I am decided on one or the other. I would love to get your reaction to these differences and which would be your pick.

By: Brad

Brad — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 22:24:06 +0000

You should consider looking at something like the Canon PowerShot SX10 (recently replaced by the SX20), Panasonic Lumix FZ28/FZ35 or Olympus SP590 (for shooting in good light only), or if you can afford the extra price, Canon SX1. These cameras do perform faster, have more features (ie flash hotshoes, etc) and deliver better images overall.