cool pix 80 advice

I would like to hear from ayone out there who is using this camera and what are their conclusions plus or minus. I am shopping for a small inexpensive SLR with a long zoom.
Pap

I have a D300, D80, P5000, P80 & S210...

I like the P80... It is not a DSLR, It is large for a compact but smaller than a DSLR. The zoom is great... I use it when I do not want to carry the DSLR and want a something bigger than a small compact... In it's manual mode you can control it almost to the degree of a DSLR... With a large SD card you can shoot some nice TV Movies... It also has an electronic viewfinder in addition to the nice 2.7" LCD. At $400 msrp it might not be considered inexpensive though.

JMHO....Dennis

thanks, Dennis. as as long time Nikon user (Nikon F and onward) I'm not put off by the price but wanted something smaller that would give quality results for up to 8x10 prints. My knowledge of digital is non existant for the most part. I've been using a Kodak 3900 for the last several years but want to move up to something closer to my Nikon SLR's.
Pap

Back in the 70s, I used to carry a suitcase with 3 Nikon F bodies for different films and 6 lenses from 28mm to 500mm including a macro lens. The thing I like best about the P80 is that it can do all of the things the suitcase full did in the one compact camera with no time wasted in changing lenses or bodies.

Most of my photography is outdoor nature and scenic so I rarely use flash or indoor available light. I frequently use the widest angle, the longest telephoto, and the macro focus. I sometimes use the flash for macro-photography. If I did more indoor work, I would probably regret the inability to attach a separate bounce flash. I have added a +1 diopter closeup lens and a Raynox 150 to allow me to take macros at the longest telephoto setting so I can take, say, butterflies from 8-30 inches away.

You will have no difficulty making crisp 8x10s or much larger. Pictures get quite grainy/noisy at more than ISO 400, but that is true of all the competitors also.

If all you want is to take the kinds of pictures your Kodak allowed you to take, there are now much more compact cameras with 3X to 6X zooms and much higher resolution images than your Kodak (including some from Kodak). If you want to significantly expand the range of subjects you can take with a single camera and lens, the P80 does an excellent job.

Thanks Greystone. You summed it up for me pretty well. I want something that can emulate what I can do with the Nikon SLR’s. At least in part. I don’t want to go into debt and I want something reasonably small that can produce good images. My problem is as mentioned. A lack of knowledge in regards to digital. I loved the 20 mm Nikors for scenic shots and the longer (400mm) for sports and nature. The fact that the P 80 lacks RAW isn’t something that I understand. What is RAW? I read a bit on it but can’t grasp the need. I am so far in the past (film) I guess it will take a lot of catching up. The Kodak does well for what it was intended. But it’s time to move up a little.
Pap

RAW is the image that comes from the sensor. JPG is the processed version. You lose quite a bit of data in the conversion process. Many people think they can do a better job than the camera by using a program on a PC to do the same job. A computer has more processing power and you can try different settings until you get the results you want.

If you use RAW you have to postprocess before yo can use the image for something. If you want RAW you could look at Olympus Sp570 UZ or Sp565 UZ which are very similar cameras, or the Panasonic models (FZ18/Fz28).

Thank you Svein! That helps explain why some/many prefer RAW. What PC programs exist for converting RAW to the finished pictures? Also thanks for including the list of similar cameras that have RAW.
Pap

All cameras that support RAW also comes with a program that will convert images from RAW to JPG (or TIF). Some of these programs are very basic, others have more functions, but I haven't seen any bundled program that are really powerful and easy to use. The most popular Photo editors/Raw-converters are (as far as I know) the ones from Adobe: Photoshop, Photoshop Elements and Lightroom.

Btw, RAW-conversion is something that takes a some effort to master. And it's not necessarily easy to improve on the JPG from the camera. Particulary high ISO images from small sensor cameras require a lot of noise reduction, and the cameras handle this very well compared to default settigs in a raw converter.

Thanks again. I guess I won't be concerned with the lack of RAW on the P80. I looked at the P80 today (at Best Buy) but didn't pull the trigger. Also looked at the Kodak 1015 IS which runs about $100.00 less but didn't think that was what I wanted.
Pap38

I have had my P80 for several months now and I like it quite a bit.

It's not perfect - the focus is slower than my older Canon S400, but considering the difference in lenses, probably to be expected. Also, for some reason it doesn't have an orientation sensor!! I shoot a lot and it is a pain rotating all those photos.

I was always able to get good shots with my old 4 Mp camera, but its 3x zoom (from 35mm) was obviously a limitation. I can now get SPECTACULAR portraits with wonderfully blurred backgrounds (not sure if they qualify as bokeh), and the extra wide angle is great too.

The electronic viewfinder is great too - I can now hold the camera up to my face like I used to do with my old SLR, and really lose myself in the photo - hard to do when holding a camera out in front if using only the LCD. The refresh rate on the EVF is better than on some Panasonics that I considered.

All in all, it is the best compromise of features vs. ease of use and ergonomics - it feels really good in MY hands, it is a good fit for me but may not necessarily be for you.

No regrets - but I am looking forward to the P90 (I hope Nikon does an upgrade!)