is it better than the olympus sp-590uz? DOES the image stabilization even compare? and does the iso really provide great images in the dark?
646654
I'm also trying to decide between the Nikon Coolpix P90 and Olympus sp590uz. I mostly take pictures of wildlife, but need an occasional picture of family or knitting projects in doors. Can someone point me in the right direction? Thanks,
646655
It does not provide great images in the dark. It is actually overly plagued with noise. I returned mine yesterday after a week.
1611414
I have had both versions of the lens and definitely preferred the one with IS. With that said, the difference in price is significant and the non-stabilized version produces superb images. If you are shooting outdoors with plenty of light it is perfect. If light is an issue when shooting I would definitely save up for the IS version.
488637
I originally bought the Sony W90 based on specs. My first one was defective. It took pictures, but only the pictures in very bright light were acceptable. I exchanged for another W90 and although better, it still had VERY high levels of noise even with flash. I returned that one and bought a Canon 800IS. The Canon has taken EXCELLENT pictures even in low light. The image stabilization works well and the pictures taken with ISO 1600 are about the same noise level as the sony at 400 and 800 ISO. At 800 ISO the Canon produces better pictures than the Sony at 100 ISO. For my money...The Canon is better hands down.
1736482
For me, yes (well, I bought mine used for $360).However, you're the only one who can decide whether it's worth it to you. How much do you value control over out-of-focus background (bokeh) or having a "3-dimensional" look? Do you like being able to shoot indoors and in other low-light situations without using a flash or high ISO settings?If these characteristics or important to you, then the $450 may be worth it.
556763
Why not? This camera is great at night shots...excellent in low light. We just got back from Tahiti with 500 or so wonderful pictures.
19800
It has performed very well for me in low light situations. I have been startled a few times by the brightness of the recorded image. I usually use a Pentax 18-250mm lens.
2066794
What about low light performance? I took SD900 to Japan for cherry blossom viewing. Flash is definitely a big no no for taking those kinds of pictures at night, so I used Hi-ISO or ISO 3200 all the way. The night cherry blossom pictures turned out to be amazing. Video was fantastic too. I haven't yet read any comment on how SD800 performed in low light situations. Any experience?
515400
I don't have the 100 or the 300. My last one was the 500HS. It is smaller now and lighter. The night picture without the flash are all nice. I took lots of them during the Holiday lights event, and they all very clear. Also it has anti shaking mode, it snaps and processing very quick so much less blurry when moving. I think that is a major difference for this camera. Battery life is very short that is the only draw back to me. I like it overal all but be sure to get extra battery.
1542165
I bought this camera right after Christmas of last year, and it performs very well. In terms of low light, the body can expand to 3200 ISO. Low light conditions is also dependent on the lens you are using and not just the camera body.
1138633
I am a home inspector and take many photos in dark attics and crawlspaces. I have used many cameras over the years and am very happy with the quality of the pictures it takes in dark areas. My suggestion to ensure good performance is to set the flash to always come on when taking pics in the dark. The auto flash sometimes will not come on if there is a light source present. In my case if I have my flashlight on in a dark area. Not only does it take good low light pictures but I have found that it is very durable and the mechanical lens seems to hold up very well to dust and dirt. Overall in this price range this is the best camera I have found that does not carry the expense and inconvenience of battery packs. I hope this has been a helpful answer.
660620
The difference for me was the group focus feature, it seemed to lock in focus quicker and track subjects better. Low light is just awesome I have always hesitated cranking up the ISO too high because of the noise potential. It is simply amazing how you can take clean shots in low light situations like bars, parties, sports arenas. If most of your shooting involve low light venues you will see a difference. Wether this is enough to drive an upgrade is up to you. Regarding general picture quality I can't say there is a significant difference other than low light situation I mentioned. I own a d800 as well and use it when picture quality is absolutely critical. These are the 2 cameras in my bag and handles every situation I am faced with. If pic quality is what you seek you can grab a used d800 for under 2k. You will not be disappointed. Just my opinion.
2060109
I own one, and have taken it everywhere since Olympus net it to me to review. I think the UW shots are pretty good, not as sharp as the Hero, but as sharp as my Lumix TS5. I have not tried night shots of the sky, but have shot outdoor parties. Samples: http://digital-photography-school.com/review-olympus-tg-850-tough-waterproof-camera/
1487958
The pictures are excellent. It has a shake resistant feature that works well. I have taken pictures from a cruise ship of a home on an island and it was clear and not blurry. As far as pictures in the dark, the flash is very bright and they do not come out dark. The camera comes with everything you need and the charger is the same set up as a phone, you do not remove it. Hope this helps your decision. This is actually my second Nikon Coolpix. I had an earlier one and upgraded to this one. Still us the other every now and then.
1199108
takes great pictures in low light. I find all I need to use is the "auto" mode. Shoots fast as well, no distortion. The 20x zoom is fantastic. I did own a Panasonic Lumix which was 4 years old. I researched Panasonic, Nikon, Fuji and this was the best and I have now owned it for over three months.. Also the battery lasts a long time as well!
1507232
Like the S90, it's decent at wide angle. At 24mm, it supports a maximum aperture of f/1.8 (so a little better). Plus, the newer processor will help reduce noise at higher ISO settings (again, a little better).For low light photography, you might look at a camera with a larger sensor like the Sony RX100 or RX100 II. I'd also look at the Panasonic LX7 if you need decent low light performance throughout the zoom range.
839108
Hi Allison, I think this is a very good DSLR camera, and also the smallest. I love Olympus cameras since they have one of the best algorithms to process light into pixels, thus ensuring excellent picture quality.Regards,Andras Heimann
1613604
Hi there, I own this camera since this April and took around 8000 pics since, about half of them in very low light. With this camera, you do not even need to use the flash in 99.9% of the cases. (this is why I chose this camera in the first place) In case it's really dark and you don't have any lightsource, you can use the flash and it is sufficiently strong so your photos will look good. But usually, you really don't need the flash at all. I made perfect shots (photo and video) in dark dimmed pubs as well as beautiful nightshots walking around NYC all without using the flash. But if you insist, it's there, and it's perfectly fine.