Coolpix 5000 - Your thoughts

SFPhoto1 said:

algor said:

But as someone already notice, the next step in overal camera
improvement is lens. This is what Sony understood (F505/F707) and
Nikon
still have to catch.

Click to expand...

what? are you saying that nikon doesn't know how to make good
lenses? for your info. nikon was making some of the best lens in
the world while sony was still in the cradle. just because the
lenses are small on the nikon coolpix series doesn't mean they're
bad lenses. they're actually world class lenses.

Click to expand...

Still it's this lens that's people's main complaint about the 5000. Too short....well that's a matter of preference. But lack of speed i think that's really what's got people frowning. The sony F707 is twice as fast at twice the focallength !

Take the CZ lense of the f707 and put it on the 5000 and you'd have IMO a killer camera !

cj

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1009&page=1&message=1703722

AVJason said:

Dub said:

I own the F707 and it has worked great since day one so if there is
a recall I still don't know what its about - the famous blue flash
problem is no different than problems I have had with my Coolpix
995 and Olympus E-10 in some flash shots.

AVJason said:

In Sony forum, more people are talking about an "official" RECALL
of the current 707 --- just beware if you want to buy 707 for the
time being !!!

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1009&page=1&message=1695401

To me, both 5000 & 707 are good camera --- just depend on what
features you "weigh" more !

I owned a 995 since July, and is still getting more and more happy
with its picture quality and handling --- don't found any immediate
need to upgrade to 5000 --- maybe Coolpix 5500/6000 to be released
next year !

Jason.

Brian said:

In general, what do you think about the soon-to-be-released CP5000.
For some reason I have seen some negative comments from Nikon fans.

Brian

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

fshoe said:

The G2 beats current 99x in 3 huge ways:

1. RAW
2. faster lens
3. sharper lens.

Click to expand...

But you forgot to mention:

1. 4MP versus 5MP
2. Have you seen the 995 samples with just 3.34MP? versus 4MP Canon?
3. It's a Nikon.
4. It's a Nikon.

Member said:

The 5000 falls short in 1 and 2, 3 is yet to be seen

Brian said:

In general, what do you think about the soon-to-be-released CP5000.
For some reason I have seen some negative comments from Nikon fans.

Brian

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Scooter said:

fshoe said:

The G2 beats current 99x in 3 huge ways:

1. RAW
2. faster lens
3. sharper lens.

Click to expand...

But you forgot to mention:

1. 4MP versus 5MP
2. Have you seen the 995 samples with just 3.34MP? versus 4MP Canon?
3. It's a Nikon.
4. It's a Nikon.

Scott66322 said:

The 5000 falls short in 1 and 2, 3 is yet to be seen

Brian said:

In general, what do you think about the soon-to-be-released CP5000.
For some reason I have seen some negative comments from Nikon fans.

Brian

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Just thought I'd mention, that for all fans who love to 'zoom in' on their subject, you can purchase an 8x32 monocular (8x optical and 32mm apurature) and with a 3x optical lens, can give 24x optical zoom!) from CKC Power. It will fit most Digi's and comes with the most common adapters. Check out this website for the details, and it is a slight $150.

Let me know what you think..

http://www.steves-digicams.com/sharpshooter.html

The recall is for a problem with the white balance when flash is used. They have set up a repair for this problem for current owners and all F707's shipped after 11-5-01 will not have this problem. I've owned the F707 for about two weeks now and I love the camera even with the BFS problem! I strongly suggest before buying the 5000 to at least compare the two side by side. That statement about the disposable camera is a joke, I get compliments all the time about the quality and resolution of the F707 and most people prefer Sony's colors including me. I think they are very realistic.

Nathan

Dub said:

JohnM said:

Dub said:

Yeah sure he did - this is the same junk posted on the Sony forum
on a regular basis but when people ask for details the posters
slink away.

Click to expand...

I suppose all those people made up those problems??

I was thinking of buying a 707, but my brother bought one first. I
have a cp 880 Nikon that I'm not particularly happy with & was
considering the Sony myself.

I am now waiting for a Nikon 5000, & if I'm not happy with that I
will be the first one to post that info here.

I just saw a posting stating that B&H isn't even carrying the 707
for now because too many have been returned.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

My biggest disappointment was not getting a bigger lens. I really like sports and what I call 'history' photograpy, picture of historical things. A longer lense would have been very welcome.

WSLam said:

ws

Brian said:

In general, what do you think about the soon-to-be-released CP5000.
For some reason I have seen some negative comments from Nikon fans.

Brian

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Scooter said:

fshoe said:

The G2 beats current 99x in 3 huge ways:

1. RAW
2. faster lens
3. sharper lens.

Click to expand...

But you forgot to mention:

1. 4MP versus 5MP
2. Have you seen the 995 samples with just 3.34MP? versus 4MP Canon?
3. It's a Nikon.
4. It's a Nikon.

Click to expand...

I'll wait until I see the actual images the Nikon can produce with 5 MP.

I have downloaded and printed identical images from the 995 and G2 from Steve's Digicams. The G2 totally blows away the 995 in terms of resolution, contrast, and tonality- The G2 also comes extremely close to the Sony 707's 5MP resolution. Hey, lets also get over the commercial in our heads that "Its a Nikon". Lets look at the image rather than get stuck on what we have been led to believe is THE camera. My first camera was a Canon Ftb - great camera. Then I went to a Pentax 6X7 - then looked for something that was more like my Canon Ftb - and purchased my current camera, a Nikon F3 with the best Nikkor lenses.This has also been a great camera - but in many respects I don't think I have neccessarily captured any "better" images than on my Ftb with standard 28mm "el cheapo" Vivitar lens. Are any of these camera: Nikon, Canon, Pentax Sony, Minolta - going to give you a better photographic eye? Although I 'll be the first to admit that I get sucked in by bigger and supposedly better technology - is this what photography is all about?

John McMurdo said:

Scooter said:

fshoe said:

The G2 beats current 99x in 3 huge ways:

1. RAW
2. faster lens
3. sharper lens.

Click to expand...

But you forgot to mention:

1. 4MP versus 5MP
2. Have you seen the 995 samples with just 3.34MP? versus 4MP Canon?
3. It's a Nikon.
4. It's a Nikon.

Click to expand...

I'll wait until I see the actual images the Nikon can produce with
5 MP.
I have downloaded and printed identical images from the 995 and G2
from Steve's Digicams. The G2 totally blows away the 995 in terms
of resolution, contrast, and tonality- The G2 also comes extremely
close to the Sony 707's 5MP resolution. Hey, lets also get over
the commercial in our heads that "Its a Nikon". Lets look at the
image rather than get stuck on what we have been led to believe is
THE camera. My first camera was a Canon Ftb - great camera. Then I
went to a Pentax 6X7 - then looked for something that was more like
my Canon Ftb - and purchased my current camera, a Nikon F3 with the
best Nikkor lenses.This has also been a great camera - but in many
respects I don't think I have neccessarily captured any "better"
images than on my Ftb with standard 28mm "el cheapo" Vivitar lens.
Are any of these camera: Nikon, Canon, Pentax Sony, Minolta - going
to give you a better photographic eye? Although I 'll be the first
to admit that I get sucked in by bigger and supposedly better
technology - is this what photography is all about?

Click to expand...

I have looked at hundreds of samples from the G2, f707, 990, and the 995, though I must say that the G2 is a close second, the 995 is just a better picture. So we agree to disagree on this =)

invited to NIKON on monday night - GMT+2 - to look at the CP5000. i won't make any promises but i'll ask a friend working there if i could sneak in a CF and take some pics - if allowed. since it's a probably sample they're usually not too keen on such ideas.

regards,

Nik

http://www.pbase.com/nik

Brian said:

In general, what do you think about the soon-to-be-released CP5000.
For some reason I have seen some negative comments from Nikon fans.

Brian

Click to expand...

Shouldn't we wait for the review on this site??

I will go tomorrow to Photp Expo Plus in New York and will ask Nikon representative to make few pictures and send email..... interesting how he react..
But let face it:

Nikon is using Sony(I guess) CCD, Nikon is not electronic company like Sony

(Sony btw is using, as I know, low current chips , draining less power compared to major camera makers camera implementations)

So what we expecting from Nikon: using no better than other hardware ?

To apply some miracle algorithm to get better sensitivity / noise ratio ?

To produce higher quality electronics than other?
I do not think Noikon can get outstanding results using standard hardware..
Nicon digicams according forums not problem free as any other digicam maker

May be the only hope is: the color reproduction will be more reasonable
but not anything else...

Strange that everybody's nitpicking on a lens they haven't even seen pictures from. OK, lens speed matters, but so does quality. Even thoug a Lamborghini is faster than a Mercedes, does it mean that the Merc is a mediocre car?

Let's wait and see how it performs, and how the camera as a whole performs, also regarding higher ISO's. I have noticed that the new lens is a construction with fewer elements than the previous 3x zoom on the 990, but with as much as 3 aspheric glass elements. Maybe they have something up the sleeve worth waiting for after all...

Toralf

cj said:

Still it's this lens that's people's main complaint about the 5000.
Too short....well that's a matter of preference. But lack of speed
i think that's really what's got people frowning. The sony F707 is
twice as fast at twice the focallength !

Take the CZ lense of the f707 and put it on the 5000 and you'd have
IMO a killer camera !

cj

Click to expand...

So Nikon is not an electronics company, eh? Who have been the leading developer of dedicated camera electronics for decades now? I think few, if any other companies have better experience in designing and tuning in-camera computers and circuits. Sony IMHO is a walkman company etc. A digital camera is not an electronic device, it's a photographers tool. Look around, in spite of making friends with big name German lens makers so they can get Hoya or who-it-might be to build brand name lenses from WunderOptik drawings, the digicams from electronic and computer manufacturers are not up to the standards set by Nikon, Canon and others who know from decades what photography is about.

Be honest, it would be very suprising if a toaster manufacturer suddenly should be as good in making photographers tools as the leading camera giants.

Toralf

algor said:

I will go tomorrow to Photp Expo Plus in New York and will ask
Nikon representative to make few pictures and send email.....
interesting how he react..
But let face it:

Nikon is using Sony(I guess) CCD, Nikon is not electronic company
like Sony
(Sony btw is using, as I know, low current chips , draining less
power compared to major camera makers camera implementations)

So what we expecting from Nikon: using no better than other hardware ?

To apply some miracle algorithm to get better sensitivity / noise
ratio ?

To produce higher quality electronics than other?
I do not think Noikon can get outstanding results using standard
hardware..
Nicon digicams according forums not problem free as any other
digicam maker

May be the only hope is: the color reproduction will be more
reasonable
but not anything else...

Click to expand...

That is why all the higher end sony digi cams use a carl zeiss lens.

nathan

Toralf Sandåker said:

Be honest, it would be very suprising if a toaster manufacturer
suddenly should be as good in making photographers tools as the
leading camera giants.

Toralf

algor said:

I will go tomorrow to Photp Expo Plus in New York and will ask
Nikon representative to make few pictures and send email.....
interesting how he react..
But let face it:

Nikon is using Sony(I guess) CCD, Nikon is not electronic company
like Sony
(Sony btw is using, as I know, low current chips , draining less
power compared to major camera makers camera implementations)

So what we expecting from Nikon: using no better than other hardware ?

To apply some miracle algorithm to get better sensitivity / noise
ratio ?

To produce higher quality electronics than other?
I do not think Noikon can get outstanding results using standard
hardware..
Nicon digicams according forums not problem free as any other
digicam maker

May be the only hope is: the color reproduction will be more
reasonable
but not anything else...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

nathan60276 said:

Toralf Sandåker said:

So Nikon is not an electronics company, eh? Who have been the
leading developer of dedicated camera electronics for decades now?
I think few, if any other companies have better experience in
designing and tuning in-camera computers and circuits. Sony IMHO is
a walkman company etc. A digital camera is not an electronic
device, it's a photographers tool. Look around, in spite of making
friends with big name German lens makers so they can get Hoya or
who-it-might be to build brand name lenses from WunderOptik
drawings, the digicams from electronic and computer manufacturers
are not up to the standards set by Nikon, Canon and others who know
from decades what photography is about.

Be honest, it would be very suprising if a toaster manufacturer
suddenly should be as good in making photographers tools as the
leading camera giants.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

algor: Sony is recognized professional videoequipment maker
and Nikon using Sony CCD in their digicoms.
So why why Nikon as leading camera maker not putting in 5000 decent lens?

nathan60276 said:

nathan60276 said:

Toralf

algor said:

I will go tomorrow to Photp Expo Plus in New York and will ask
Nikon representative to make few pictures and send email.....
interesting how he react..
But let face it:

Nikon is using Sony(I guess) CCD, Nikon is not electronic company
like Sony
(Sony btw is using, as I know, low current chips , draining less
power compared to major camera makers camera implementations)

So what we expecting from Nikon: using no better than other hardware ?

To apply some miracle algorithm to get better sensitivity / noise
ratio ?

To produce higher quality electronics than other?
I do not think Noikon can get outstanding results using standard
hardware..
Nicon digicams according forums not problem free as any other
digicam maker

May be the only hope is: the color reproduction will be more
reasonable
but not anything else...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Scott66322 said:

I have looked at hundreds of samples from the G2, f707, 990, and
the 995, though I must say that the G2 is a close second, the 995
is just a better picture. So we agree to disagree on this =)

Click to expand...

Scooter,

I noticed when I first started comparing the G2, 995, and 707 that it was very difficult to evaluate differences between these cameras on a computer screen. After I printed a few images of identical subjects for each camera, the differences became much more apparent. Can you point me to any such identical images on the net that would show the superiority of any of these cameras? For your own interest you may want to check out and --print- - the images of the brick building for each of these cameras on Steve's digicams.

Oh, Oh - I'm getting hung up on technology again - instead of the image. Dammit, I must admit that I like crisp, sharp, high res, saturated images.

Waiting for the Coolpix 5000 review like a lot of other people - but too bad about the slow lens - dunno.... NIce to hear also that the Sony 707 also remains a possibility now that they have rectified some of the bugs.

To take a digital picture, you need to pass through (at least) the following components :- Lens, CCD, Signal Processing Unit ...etc.

All involve different "technical-know-how" : how to produce a Lens; how to produce a CCD; how to process the picture signal ...etc.

AND the "technical-know-how" to combine all these components to obtain the final result.

Hence, picture quality is NOT SOLELY depend on CCD itself !

Take a simple example :-

Sony made a lot of CD Transport (including the Laser Pickup) for other brand CD manufacturers, but Sony brand CD Player NOT NECESSARY sound better than others !

Also, different brand CD Players may use the same "Burr-Brown" D/A Converter, but they may sound differently (some are good, some are bad !)

Furthermore, if you ever studied Computer Graphics / Signal Processing, you will know that an Intelligent Alogrithm can make MIRACLE COME TRUE !!!

Jason.

AVJason said:

Hence, picture quality is NOT SOLELY depend on CCD itself !...........
Also, different brand CD Players may use the same "Burr-Brown" D/A
Converter, but they may sound differently (some are good, some are
bad !)

Click to expand...

true but Nikon is known for its lenses. So why did they not put a comparitive lens on the 5000? I can only assume that Nikon knows what it is doing....their 995 and other digitals are quite good from what I read.

I use a Nikon N80 and FM10 with Nikon lenses (my better informed friends requested me to stay away from the Tamrons and Sigmas even though they might have better paper specs.). BeforeI purchasing the N80 I did exhaustive studies of the Canon Elan 7E. The N80 had fewer features but took better pictures that the 7E with less fuss (hunting, low light capability etc..). Lenses used were (Canon 24-85 f3.5-4.5 v/s Nikon 28-105 f3.5-4.5 and Canon 75-300 f4-5.6 v/s Nikon 75-300 f4-5.6 ED).

This might not be a true analogy but if in the SLR 35mm print/film world if paper specs dont tell the full story then it might be that the same is true for the digital world....hence another argument to wait for the 5000 review before "flaming/torching" it.

Hope this makes sense. email me at [email protected] if you think it dont.

Regards
navin

Hi navin !

This maybe a bit off-topic !

Since owned my 995, I have been getting more and more interested in Photography !!!

However, I still found the "handling" and "speed" of film-based SLR better than digicam (of course, except those VERY EXPENSIVE D-SLR !)

I am considering of setup a film-based alternative, and is also deciding between Nikon F80 vs Canon EOS 30 (these are the model no.s in Hongkong) --- hence, I would like to share your "end-user" experience on your selection process !

Please e-mail me or re-direct me to another thread in this site if you would like to discuss it further !

Looking for any input / suggestion / advice !

Jason.

navin advani said:

AVJason said:

Hence, picture quality is NOT SOLELY depend on CCD itself !...........
Also, different brand CD Players may use the same "Burr-Brown" D/A
Converter, but they may sound differently (some are good, some are
bad !)

Click to expand...

true but Nikon is known for its lenses. So why did they not put a
comparitive lens on the 5000? I can only assume that Nikon knows
what it is doing....their 995 and other digitals are quite good
from what I read.

I use a Nikon N80 and FM10 with Nikon lenses (my better informed
friends requested me to stay away from the Tamrons and Sigmas even
though they might have better paper specs.). BeforeI purchasing the
N80 I did exhaustive studies of the Canon Elan 7E. The N80 had
fewer features but took better pictures that the 7E with less fuss
(hunting, low light capability etc..). Lenses used were (Canon
24-85 f3.5-4.5 v/s Nikon 28-105 f3.5-4.5 and Canon 75-300 f4-5.6
v/s Nikon 75-300 f4-5.6 ED).

This might not be a true analogy but if in the SLR 35mm print/film
world if paper specs dont tell the full story then it might be that
the same is true for the digital world....hence another argument to
wait for the 5000 review before "flaming/torching" it.

Hope this makes sense. email me at [email protected] if you think it
dont.

Regards
navin

Click to expand...

Oh, yes Sony has a good reputation in other businesses, like pro video. But stills photography is quite different. Nikon tried to enter the video market also, but failed, with all their stills photo experience. Sony, and others, are not focused on stills photography as Nikon, Canon etc. That's why these companies over and over again make the best products, only rarely being challenged by an electronics company on a lucky day.

The CCD is important. As is film. But the rest of the camera; lens, coating, couplings, mechanics, electronics, design, controls, minimizing vibration, and of course the software/firmware. Nikon has shown with its hight-end digicams that they are masters in this field, together with Kodak, only now getting tough competition from Canon.

And the CP 5000's lens, how do you know it's not "decent"? Have you actually tried it, taken pictures with it? There are plenty of examples how faster, glass-heavy lenses are outperformed by a bit slower lenses from serious manufacturers. We don't know this yet.

I have been taking almost 5000 pictures with my CP 990, a good bunch of which have been printed in magazines, also photo mags. In real life this 8 mm f:2.5–24 mm f:4 lens has performed extremely well.

Tests aren't everything. When did you last see a comparison between digicams w pictures taken at full f-stop, two f-stops down and so on? Probably you haven't beacuse they don't really test the optics. Som cameras are also unable to control the aperture.

So the conclusion? Two of them: 1) Wait and see the facts. 2) Judge the camera as a total product, and don't be too hung up with the various specs.

algor said:

algor: Sony is recognized professional videoequipment maker
and Nikon using Sony CCD in their digicoms.
So why why Nikon as leading camera maker not putting in 5000 decent
lens?

Click to expand...