Review = OUCH

I think Phil did an excellent job as many of the people in this forum have said. But if you ask me, I think he was extremely harsh. I have not made a purchase yet since my 3MP, and was waiting for this review. I wonder if the delay in Phil acquiring a CPK5000 played a role in him giving it the review he did?

However, Phil does support his conculsion, but I just thought I'd raise the possibility. As for me, I will still await the Pro90 Upgrade.

I was of course waiting for someone to make this comment.

I'd like to make it very clear that I treated the 5000 no differently than any other camera, nor the review. The 5000 had a lot to live up to, from its inheritance to the competition. I don't believe I was harsh but simply factual in reporting what our tests revealed, the same tests all reviewed cameras have to go through.

If I allowed a delay here or there to alter my conclusion I'd soon loose credibility.

Also, interestingly, although I gave the camera an overall 'Recommended' rating some people here seem to think that was bad.. If I were to represent it as a percentage (say 85%) instead of a word would it be better?

Joe Griffo said:

I think Phil did an excellent job as many of the people in this
forum have said. But if you ask me, I think he was extremely
harsh. I have not made a purchase yet since my 3MP, and was
waiting for this review. I wonder if the delay in Phil acquiring a
CPK5000 played a role in him giving it the review he did?
However, Phil does support his conculsion, but I just thought I'd
raise the possibility. As for me, I will still await the Pro90
Upgrade.

Click to expand...

Glad this review is finally out of the way..

Phil Askey said:

I'd like to make it very clear that I treated the 5000 no
differently than any other camera, nor the review. The 5000 had a
lot to live up to, from its inheritance to the competition. I
don't believe I was harsh but simply factual in reporting what our
tests revealed, the same tests all reviewed cameras have to go
through.

If I allowed a delay here or there to alter my conclusion I'd soon
loose credibility.

Also, interestingly, although I gave the camera an overall
'Recommended' rating some people here seem to think that was bad..
If I were to represent it as a percentage (say 85%) instead of a
word would it be better?

Joe Griffo said:

I think Phil did an excellent job as many of the people in this
forum have said. But if you ask me, I think he was extremely
harsh. I have not made a purchase yet since my 3MP, and was
waiting for this review. I wonder if the delay in Phil acquiring a
CPK5000 played a role in him giving it the review he did?
However, Phil does support his conculsion, but I just thought I'd
raise the possibility. As for me, I will still await the Pro90
Upgrade.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Two things come to mind regarding your response Phil:

1. I think people's impression of the 'Recommended' result comes off as bad because there was so much hype surrounding this one given the delays and the history of the CP line.

2. As for the point/percentage rating, there are pluses and minuses to doing it either way. I guess the question is "what differentiates a highly recommended vs. just recommended?" I personally use your individual ratings of Image Quality, Construction, etc. to judge.

Teski

Phil Askey said:

I'd like to make it very clear that I treated the 5000 no
differently than any other camera, nor the review. The 5000 had a
lot to live up to, from its inheritance to the competition. I
don't believe I was harsh but simply factual in reporting what our
tests revealed, the same tests all reviewed cameras have to go
through.

If I allowed a delay here or there to alter my conclusion I'd soon
loose credibility.

Also, interestingly, although I gave the camera an overall
'Recommended' rating some people here seem to think that was bad..
If I were to represent it as a percentage (say 85%) instead of a
word would it be better?

Joe Griffo said:

I think Phil did an excellent job as many of the people in this
forum have said. But if you ask me, I think he was extremely
harsh. I have not made a purchase yet since my 3MP, and was
waiting for this review. I wonder if the delay in Phil acquiring a
CPK5000 played a role in him giving it the review he did?
However, Phil does support his conculsion, but I just thought I'd
raise the possibility. As for me, I will still await the Pro90
Upgrade.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

teski said:

Two things come to mind regarding your response Phil:

1. I think people's impression of the 'Recommended' result comes
off as bad because there was so much hype surrounding this one
given the delays and the history of the CP line.

2. As for the point/percentage rating, there are pluses and
minuses to doing it either way. I guess the question is "what
differentiates a highly recommended vs. just recommended?" I
personally use your individual ratings of Image Quality,
Construction, etc. to judge.

Teski

Click to expand...

Another potential problem with a numerical rating is that of grade inflation. If you give camera x an 85% and its succesor is indeed better, you're forced to give a higher grade, but that can't go on very long. You'd hit 100 and you'd have no place to go when the next camera came out...

Isaac

Teski said:

Phil Askey said:

I'd like to make it very clear that I treated the 5000 no
differently than any other camera, nor the review. The 5000 had a
lot to live up to, from its inheritance to the competition. I
don't believe I was harsh but simply factual in reporting what our
tests revealed, the same tests all reviewed cameras have to go
through.

If I allowed a delay here or there to alter my conclusion I'd soon
loose credibility.

Also, interestingly, although I gave the camera an overall
'Recommended' rating some people here seem to think that was bad..
If I were to represent it as a percentage (say 85%) instead of a
word would it be better?

Joe Griffo said:

I think Phil did an excellent job as many of the people in this
forum have said. But if you ask me, I think he was extremely
harsh. I have not made a purchase yet since my 3MP, and was
waiting for this review. I wonder if the delay in Phil acquiring a
CPK5000 played a role in him giving it the review he did?
However, Phil does support his conculsion, but I just thought I'd
raise the possibility. As for me, I will still await the Pro90
Upgrade.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Henry wrote:

I found Phil's review to be very factual and unbiased. The evidence is right there for us to see. I own a CP5K and I knew the camera wasn't perfect when I bought it. There were a number of things I liked about it (eg. phsical size and number of manual features) and I still like these. I like this review because it tells me the strong and weak points of my camera so I can use it more effectively.

As well, I think reviews like this keep the camera manufacturers honest and improving their cameras. Evidence for this lies in Phil's conclusion in his D1X review where he states that most of the imperfections he mentioned in his D1 review were corrected in the D1X. I think the CP5100 will be a better camera because of these kind of credible reviews.

I am happy with this review and I am happy with my CP5000. I will buy other and better cameras in the future.

Thank you Phil

Phil Askey said:

I'd like to make it very clear that I treated the 5000 no
differently than any other camera, nor the review. The 5000 had a
lot to live up to, from its inheritance to the competition. I
don't believe I was harsh but simply factual in reporting what our
tests revealed, the same tests all reviewed cameras have to go
through.

If I allowed a delay here or there to alter my conclusion I'd soon
loose credibility.

Also, interestingly, although I gave the camera an overall
'Recommended' rating some people here seem to think that was bad..
If I were to represent it as a percentage (say 85%) instead of a
word would it be better?

Joe Griffo said:

I think Phil did an excellent job as many of the people in this
forum have said. But if you ask me, I think he was extremely
harsh. I have not made a purchase yet since my 3MP, and was
waiting for this review. I wonder if the delay in Phil acquiring a
CPK5000 played a role in him giving it the review he did?
However, Phil does support his conculsion, but I just thought I'd
raise the possibility. As for me, I will still await the Pro90
Upgrade.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Hi Phil,

I think your reviews are top notch, and I believe that you do your best to be objective. Your idea of using a rating system, say from 0-100 might be better than 'recommended' or 'highly recommended'. Perhaps people perceive the two as an 'A' grade and a 'B' when in fact they are closer than that.

I tend to place more weight on your reviews than I do on owners oppinions largely because people who have spent money on something have a vested interest in what the bought. (which is natural of course)

One thing that I did notice. You gave the Canon D30 very high marks in your words, but you did not grade it with your 0-10 system on Image quality, features, ease of use, value for the money, etc. Any reason for that?

Keep up the good work.

r, Scooter

Phil Askey said:

I was of course waiting for someone to make this comment.

I'd like to make it very clear that I treated the 5000 no
differently than any other camera, nor the review. The 5000 had a
lot to live up to, from its inheritance to the competition. I
don't believe I was harsh but simply factual in reporting what our
tests revealed, the same tests all reviewed cameras have to go
through.

If I allowed a delay here or there to alter my conclusion I'd soon
loose credibility.

Also, interestingly, although I gave the camera an overall
'Recommended' rating some people here seem to think that was bad..
If I were to represent it as a percentage (say 85%) instead of a
word would it be better?

Click to expand...

Henry Christiansen said:

I think the CP5100 will be a better camera because of
these kind of credible reviews.

Click to expand...

Just how often does nikon upgrade their camera? will a so called 5100 be coming out in the near future or more like a year?

Your point about eventually reaching 100% is not accurate. Again, like the recommended vs. highly recommended, Phil doesn't judge based on the previous model. Rather, he judges based on what is in the current market with similar features (CP5000 vs. F707 vs. Dimage7 not CP5000 vs. CP995)

He would just need to add an overall column to his current table that he uses in his conclusion and give the camera an overall rating.

Teski

Isaac Crawford said:

teski said:

Two things come to mind regarding your response Phil:

1. I think people's impression of the 'Recommended' result comes
off as bad because there was so much hype surrounding this one
given the delays and the history of the CP line.

2. As for the point/percentage rating, there are pluses and
minuses to doing it either way. I guess the question is "what
differentiates a highly recommended vs. just recommended?" I
personally use your individual ratings of Image Quality,
Construction, etc. to judge.

Teski

Click to expand...

Another potential problem with a numerical rating is that of grade
inflation. If you give camera x an 85% and its succesor is indeed
better, you're forced to give a higher grade, but that can't go on
very long. You'd hit 100 and you'd have no place to go when the
next camera came out...

Isaac

Isaac Crawford said:

Phil Askey said:

I'd like to make it very clear that I treated the 5000 no
differently than any other camera, nor the review. The 5000 had a
lot to live up to, from its inheritance to the competition. I
don't believe I was harsh but simply factual in reporting what our
tests revealed, the same tests all reviewed cameras have to go
through.

If I allowed a delay here or there to alter my conclusion I'd soon
loose credibility.

Also, interestingly, although I gave the camera an overall
'Recommended' rating some people here seem to think that was bad..
If I were to represent it as a percentage (say 85%) instead of a
word would it be better?

Joe Griffo said:

I think Phil did an excellent job as many of the people in this
forum have said. But if you ask me, I think he was extremely
harsh. I have not made a purchase yet since my 3MP, and was
waiting for this review. I wonder if the delay in Phil acquiring a
CPK5000 played a role in him giving it the review he did?
However, Phil does support his conculsion, but I just thought I'd
raise the possibility. As for me, I will still await the Pro90
Upgrade.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I do not question Phil's credibility. The fact that he responded to my observation shows me that he truly cares. Just as a general note, I have delayed a new purchase in order to read Phil's review first.

Digital camera's are in an age right now that is on the cusp of major improvement, but still not yet there. The one parallel I can draw to this is cell phones during the 1980's. Besides the service issue, a cell phone was fairly expensive, and improvements were on the way, just took some time.

Right now, it's possible to purchase a CPK5000 for around $700 (If you shop around), as well as a DSC 707 for about $700.

However, an E-20 is atleast $1,169, and yet it's fairly agreed that the 707 is a better camera.

Does MicroDrive make itanother $400? Of course not. But what does drive price difference right now is the fact that digital cameras are still in a new phase of development.

If anyone is still reading this post, the one prediction I would like to offer is that only those companies producing cameras who offer similarities to memory, as well as features, will succeed. I believe the future of DigiCams lies in those companies that strive for quality, and not to be first in when an item is released. I believe Nikon is guilty of that, as well as Sony. Both required fixes. Remember, buying a Digicam is a significant investment. And those who produce these cameras must not lose sight of that.

Personally, I have hoped to see a higher quality by now, but it seems competition is ruling the market right now, but not quality competition.
Just my two cents.

No worries Phil! I'm in complete agreement w/ your fair and HONEST review. So many Nikonphiles feel that it's blasphemous to say anything negative against Nikon . However, the credibility of a reviewer's is to always tell it like it is. Which I think yo have done here. I've had this camera for a week and though it delivers acceptable results it didn't win me over at all.

I find myself using the CP990 more often and happily so.

zpixxx

Phil Askey said:

I'd like to make it very clear that I treated the 5000 no
differently than any other camera, nor the review. The 5000 had a
lot to live up to, from its inheritance to the competition. I
don't believe I was harsh but simply factual in reporting what our
tests revealed, the same tests all reviewed cameras have to go
through.

If I allowed a delay here or there to alter my conclusion I'd soon
loose credibility.

Also, interestingly, although I gave the camera an overall
'Recommended' rating some people here seem to think that was bad..
If I were to represent it as a percentage (say 85%) instead of a
word would it be better?

Joe Griffo said:

I think Phil did an excellent job as many of the people in this
forum have said. But if you ask me, I think he was extremely
harsh. I have not made a purchase yet since my 3MP, and was
waiting for this review. I wonder if the delay in Phil acquiring a
CPK5000 played a role in him giving it the review he did?
However, Phil does support his conculsion, but I just thought I'd
raise the possibility. As for me, I will still await the Pro90
Upgrade.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Hey,

Care to make a donation of your unused CP5K to me ?, I am suffering from "no new camera in two yearsitis" and really need a feature filled camera to master into taking excellent photos. I heard the CP5K is perfect for that !

What do you say?

Dsl

zpixxx said:

I find myself using the CP990 more often and happily so.

zpixxx

Phil Askey said:

I'd like to make it very clear that I treated the 5000 no
differently than any other camera, nor the review. The 5000 had a
lot to live up to, from its inheritance to the competition. I
don't believe I was harsh but simply factual in reporting what our
tests revealed, the same tests all reviewed cameras have to go
through.

If I allowed a delay here or there to alter my conclusion I'd soon
loose credibility.

Also, interestingly, although I gave the camera an overall
'Recommended' rating some people here seem to think that was bad..
If I were to represent it as a percentage (say 85%) instead of a
word would it be better?

Joe Griffo said:

I think Phil did an excellent job as many of the people in this
forum have said. But if you ask me, I think he was extremely
harsh. I have not made a purchase yet since my 3MP, and was
waiting for this review. I wonder if the delay in Phil acquiring a
CPK5000 played a role in him giving it the review he did?
However, Phil does support his conculsion, but I just thought I'd
raise the possibility. As for me, I will still await the Pro90
Upgrade.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--DSL

As mentionned earlier the pb with % is that even if camera improve dramaticaly you cannot go above 100%. An index would be better.

example (probably nobody would agree with my rating but..)

prosumer
CP5000 90
G2 100
707 130

SLR
E20 140
D1 210
D30 250
D1x 400
1D 500

I have a G1 and let's say it is rated 80, I could decide to upgrade when the index would reach 160 (prosumer camera). I think it would be quite uselful

Phil Askey wrote:
(snip)

Member said:

Also, interestingly, although I gave the camera an overall
'Recommended' rating some people here seem to think that was bad..
If I were to represent it as a percentage (say 85%) instead of a
word would it be better?

Click to expand...

Personally, I interpret a "Highly Recommended" rating to mean "This one's a winner"; a "Recommended" means "Look for a 'Highly Recommended' one instead". Anything less, means "Yawn, no thanks". That might not be your intent but that's what it says to me....and that's not bad either ;-)

Jim
http://www.pbase.com/jiml

Fully agree Henry,

I love Phil's factual reviews. The final words when selecting a camera is always yours. Look at the conclusions, pick out items that are important to you and decide whether you can live with the Cons. If not, buy something else, or wait for a "better" DC.
Pierre

Henry Christiansen said:

Thank you Phil

Phil Askey said:

I'd like to make it very clear that I treated the 5000 no
differently than any other camera, nor the review. The 5000 had a
lot to live up to, from its inheritance to the competition. I
don't believe I was harsh but simply factual in reporting what our
tests revealed, the same tests all reviewed cameras have to go
through.

If I allowed a delay here or there to alter my conclusion I'd soon
loose credibility.

Also, interestingly, although I gave the camera an overall
'Recommended' rating some people here seem to think that was bad..
If I were to represent it as a percentage (say 85%) instead of a
word would it be better?

Joe Griffo said:

I think Phil did an excellent job as many of the people in this
forum have said. But if you ask me, I think he was extremely
harsh. I have not made a purchase yet since my 3MP, and was
waiting for this review. I wonder if the delay in Phil acquiring a
CPK5000 played a role in him giving it the review he did?
However, Phil does support his conculsion, but I just thought I'd
raise the possibility. As for me, I will still await the Pro90
Upgrade.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Phil's reviews are worth the wait. Although I also rely on Imaging Resource, Steve's Digicams, and other good, unbiased digital photography sites, DPReview offers the most information to base an informed decision on.

The 28mm wide angle of the Coolpix 5000 was the most appealing feature to me, but it was offset by the very slow f2.8 to 4.8 lens. With so many cameras offering faster f2 to 2.5 lenses, I'm really suprised Nikon hasn't followed suit. Lens speed is especially important when you're dealing with "bright sun"-level ASA 100 sensitivity in less than optimal light.

Sorry Nikon, I'm getting a Canon G2.

Steve S.

Phil Askey said:

... If I were to represent it as a percentage (say 85%) instead of a
word would it be better?

Click to expand...

No, I wouldn't use a word (like "recommended") nor a percentage.

Your conclusions end up with the detailed pros and cons and with a final comment on these. This gives every reader a complete final impression of the camera and now it's his turn, to weigh this pros and cons for his own purposes ...

By the way, I always wondered, when conclusion was "Above Average", where are the "Below Average"-cameras. Never seen one here ... ;-)--EberhardGallery: http://home.t-online.de/home/E_Streib/

It was a good review, I should think. As an amateur, I cannot pick at the technical judgements, so I would assume them to be on the mark. But as an amateur I couldn't help but experience a brief period of buyer remorse ... should I have gotten the Sony instead (since it was so adjulated)? (I didn't like the E20 AT ALL.) I thought I had looked at the options. A lot. Beforehand. So i returned to the sample images here and elsewhere and despite the many technical passions about them (i.e., the Sony), I just don't like them as well. I'm not an expert, and maybe I'm wrong, but I don't like them. The colors aren't as pleasing. The focus doesn't seem so wonderful to me. The 5000 seems crisp and colorful how, where and when I want it. (Yes, I'm beating back the negative, questioning forces trying to convince me I made the wrong decision.)

I guess it comes down to personal preference and perception. To be sure there are technical measures which cannot be disputed (or are not subject to opinion), but I can't help but think there is a lot of subjectivity. Otherwise, we'd all know what is the best and there would be little competition (or forum debates, reviews, etc.).

I'll return to my fun 5000 now. It's a whole lot better than my inadequate 950 or worse yet (gasp), my older film cameras (N65 and a hopelessly dark Canon AE1).

I don't rate digital SLR's with the 1-10 rating simply because (a) I never have and (b) some of the ratings depend on lens quality, it wouldn't make sense.

Scooter said:

I think your reviews are top notch, and I believe that you do your
best to be objective. Your idea of using a rating system, say from
0-100 might be better than 'recommended' or 'highly recommended'.
Perhaps people perceive the two as an 'A' grade and a 'B' when in
fact they are closer than that.

I tend to place more weight on your reviews than I do on owners
oppinions largely because people who have spent money on something
have a vested interest in what the bought. (which is natural of
course)

One thing that I did notice. You gave the Canon D30 very high marks
in your words, but you did not grade it with your 0-10 system on
Image quality, features, ease of use, value for the money, etc. Any
reason for that?

Keep up the good work.

r, Scooter

Phil Askey said:

I was of course waiting for someone to make this comment.

I'd like to make it very clear that I treated the 5000 no
differently than any other camera, nor the review. The 5000 had a
lot to live up to, from its inheritance to the competition. I
don't believe I was harsh but simply factual in reporting what our
tests revealed, the same tests all reviewed cameras have to go
through.

If I allowed a delay here or there to alter my conclusion I'd soon
loose credibility.

Also, interestingly, although I gave the camera an overall
'Recommended' rating some people here seem to think that was bad..
If I were to represent it as a percentage (say 85%) instead of a
word would it be better?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Eberhard said:

By the way, I always wondered, when conclusion was "Above Average",
where are the "Below Average"-cameras. Never seen one here ... ;-)

Click to expand...

I'm selective about what I review, there are plenty of cameras which would get below average ratings but I don't see the point in wasting my time on them when I can be reviewing the really important cameras.

Anyhow here are some average rated cameras:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/kyoceras3/page14.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fuji40i/page11.asp