TrustedReviews

Home
TVs & Entertainment
Cameras
Laptops & Computing
Mobile & GPS
Video Reviews

Home » Cameras » Digital Camera » Samsung WB650 » Compare prices

Compare Prices for Samsung WB650

More Photos

In many ways the super zoom Samsung WB650 is a better camera than the Panasonic TZ10. It has a better zoom range, a more accurate GPS system, a sharper monitor and crucially longer battery life. Also, build quality, design and handling are all excellent, but it can't quite match its rival on low ISO image quality. Read full review

Overall

9/10

Write your own review

By Cliff Smith
Reviewed 03 June 2010
Updated 19 May 2011

Price as reviewed

£149.95

$300 Buy now

	$300	Buy now

compare more prices

Review
User Reviews
Comments
Specs
29 Photos
Compare Prices

Price comparison powered by

Prices, delivery and availability at 1 retailer
	$300	Go

Awards

Samsung WB650 details

Value: 9/10
Image Quality: 7/10
Build Quality: 8/10
Overall: 9/10

Pros & Cons

Pros

Longer than average zoom
Accurate GPS
Sharp monitor
Good battery life
Good build quality

Cons

Image quality not quite as good as rivals
Ugly design
Quite heavy

Price as reviewed

£149.95

Manufacturer

Samsung

Digital Camera round-ups

Best Digital Cameras

A comprehensive list of the 10 best digital cameras currently on the market, with direct links to our reviews.
Best Waterproof Cameras

A round up of the best waterproof, shockproof, and generally all-round bombproof 'tough' compact digital cameras currently available.
Digital Camera Of The Year 2011

We reveal the winner of Best Digital Camera of 2011.

More Digital Camera Round-ups

TrustedReviews newsletter

Get TrustedReviews' award-winning reviews, opinions and advice delivered to your inbox for free!

Three of the best Mid range Digital Cameras

Canon PowerShot SX130 IS

Our rating:

9/10

This 12x optical zoom compact is family friendly in terms of shape, operation and, most importantly, price.
Casio Exilim EX-FH100

Our rating:

9/10

Casio's new top compact is packed with clever features
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-TX5

Our rating:

9/10

How can a waterproof camera look this good?

User reviews & comments

Comments

To leave a comment log in or sign up

Please wait while we process your request

Please wait while we retrieve the user's information

Bio

Your bio is currently empty. Now is a great time to fill in your profile.

This profile is private.

This profile is only shared with friends.

This profile is under review.

We were unable to request friendship with this user.

We were unable to request friendship with this user. Are you logged in?

Your friendship request has been sent to this user.

We were unable to terminate friendship with this user.

We were unable to terminate friendship with this user. Are you logged in?

You are no longer friends with this user.

We were unable to ignore this user.

We were unable to ignore this user. Are you logged in?

This user is now ignored.

We were unable to stop ignoring this user.

We were unable to stop ignoring this user. Are you logged in?

This user is no longer ignored.

We encountered a problem recommending this user.

pluck_user_recommend_permission

You have recommended this user.

Type Comment
(optional)

pluck_user_mp-abuse_too_long_err

Send Cancel

Please wait while we perform your request.

Name withheld

Fiqqer

2:28 PM on 3 June, 2010

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Fiqqer. Show Details Hide Details

This is a camera, right?

How can it be given an overall score of 9 when its score for image quality is 7? Does that mean the other issues over and above it primary purpose makes it somewhat better.

I don't see how a camera with 7 for image quality is better than another with suitable but less features should get a higher rating than another camera with 9 for image quality but less features.

Features are a factor but they are not what I would buy a camera for.

Abuse reported Report abuse

Score:

0 replies1 reply

Please wait while we perform your request.

Name withheld

MJ

11:53 PM on 3 June, 2010

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore MJ. Show Details Hide Details

Darn! Why can't compact superzooms like this one sport a peep-through viewfinder? Even given the shortcomings noted in this review, I would have bought this camera if it had a viewfinder.

Abuse reported Report abuse

Score:

0 replies1 reply

Please wait while we perform your request.

Name withheld

Martin Daler

12:49 AM on 4 June, 2010

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Martin Daler. Show Details Hide Details

a medium format camera will doubtless have better image quality, if it gets the shot. Sometimes getting the shot is a function of the camera features, like zoom range, or pocketability. Getting the shot is the ultimate arbiter of image quality - no shot = zero quality. I'd give a camera extra points for features which translate into getting the shot.

Abuse reported Report abuse

Score:

0 replies1 reply

Please wait while we perform your request.

Name withheld

ChrisC

9:14 AM on 4 June, 2010

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore ChrisC. Show Details Hide Details

I like the "GPS - For Digital Nomad" - highly amusing!

I'd consider buying this when the price drops. Although the images look a bit like an oil painted up close, thanks to the processing, I think the overall lens quality, colour reproduction and DR outweigh this. I tend to keep most of my point & shoot photos 'as shot' anyway, so this wouldn't be an issue for me. Maybe they'll release a firmware update to improve this, but its Samsung, so I wouldn't hold my breath!

Abuse reported Report abuse

Score:

0 replies1 reply

Please wait while we perform your request.

Name withheld

Ian Porter

7:27 PM on 4 June, 2010

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Ian Porter. Show Details Hide Details

@ Fiqqer, Martin & Chris... I'm looking for a high quality point & shoot/travel camera in the £200 arena. As soon as I saw the 7/10 for image quality I immediately dismissed this camera, it could be voice controlled, have artificial intelligence, run battery free and double up as an emergency phone.. I still wouldn't buy it. Sorry Cliff.

Abuse reported Report abuse

Score:

0 replies1 reply

Please wait while we perform your request.

Name withheld

alan1302

11:15 PM on 4 June, 2010

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore alan1302. Show Details Hide Details

Totally agree with Fiqquer...how on earth can a camera that has 7/10 for image quality get a 9/10 score? If the images are no good then neither is the camera.

Abuse reported Report abuse

Score:

0 replies1 reply

Please wait while we perform your request.

Name withheld

markma

1:04 AM on 5 June, 2010

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore markma. Show Details Hide Details

really depend. my family hardly print any photo. and if we do, most are just 5*7. for this size, really does not matter. and we most only view photo and share with people on computer. we hardly post photo online using any size bigger than 2 or 3mp.

so that is the point. now we are judge it by its full size. but we should always ask ourself that in pratical do we need full size photo?

at least for many people they do not need at all.

Abuse reported Report abuse

Score:

0 replies1 reply

Please wait while we perform your request.

Name withheld

WokingWounded

10:53 AM on 5 June, 2010

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore WokingWounded. Show Details Hide Details

When are manufacturers going to give us the option in pocket cameras of taking photos in RAW? Then we won't be dependent on their clunky in-camera processing and, given the availabilty of reasonably priced software like Photoshop Elements, the user can do his or her own processing in RAW and then save as jpeg (or whatever) as needed. In camera storage limitations are no longer an issue with huge capacity SD cards available so why insist on creating jpeg in the camera?

Abuse reported Report abuse

Score:

0 replies1 reply

Please wait while we perform your request.

Name withheld

toni

10:31 AM on 6 June, 2010

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore toni. Show Details Hide Details

I have been using this camera ( WB 660, Malaysia ) for 2 months now and find it very competent and easy to use. I have no issues with the image quality as I shoot mostly in daylight. The 15X zoom & HD video are superior to the TZ7 which I had previously. It is a much better camera than TZ7 tho I have not compared it to the TZ10

Abuse reported Report abuse

Score:

0 replies1 reply

Please wait while we perform your request.

Name withheld

Hancock

11:02 PM on 4 August, 2010

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Hancock. Show Details Hide Details

I have created an account just so I can comment on this thread.

Have just posted the WB650 back to the seller for a refund.

In short this camera is the DB's and much more, in reality the photos are CRAP.Some photos turn out OK but most resemble blotchy oil paintings.

A great shame as I would have liked this camera to have worked at taking great photos but it does not. The rest of the Camera functions are brill, but what is the point of brill add ons when the image quality is crap?

Just to say some photos have come out OK , so why not a mode where the image destruction can be switched off?

Abuse reported Report abuse

Score:

0 replies1 reply

Please wait while we perform your request.

What Do You Think?

To leave a comment, you need to sign up.

Please wait while we file your abuse report.

Report Abuse

We're sorry. We were unable to report abuse at this time.

We limit the number of reactions an individual user can submit over a given period for quality reasons. You have currently reached that limit. Please try resubmitting your abuse report again later.

Comment is too long. Enter 500 characters or less.