Lee Yuan Sheng
06-01-2011, 05:30 PM
<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikonp300/' target='_blank'>http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikonp300/</a><br /><br /></div><p><em>"Although at first glance it looks a lot like the Canon Powershot S95 and Olympus XZ-1, the P300 is a significantly different camera in a couple of important ways. It offers higher resolution, at 12MP rather than the 10MP common in that class. It also offers Full HD video (1080p as opposed to 720p), but its true colors are betrayed by a lower price-point, a smaller sensor (1/2.3" as opposed to 1/1.6" or 1/1.7"), and the inability to record RAW files."</em></p><p><img height="358" src="http://images.thoughtsmedia.com/resizer/thumbs/size/600/dht/auto/1306945058.usr15670.jpg" style="border: 1px solid #d2d2bb;" width="520" /></p><p>When the P300 was first leaked, it looked like a LX5 or S95 competitor; turns it it is closer to a glorified IXUS competitor. A compact camera with a bit more features than a compact point-and-shoot, but not as fully-featured as a premium compact. I am not sure where Nikon is going with this half-and-half strategy, because I think point-and-shoot users would want something simpler to use (or their phones, for the matter), while more advanced users will not want a P300's smaller sensor and lack of RAW. The P300's images are actually not bad, which makes me wonder what Nikon could have done with a better package surrounding the sensor.</p>