I wasn't trying to start a flame war or anything - which is why I started out by admitting I'm a Canon owner. It's just that I was wondering if perhaps I was overlooking something in the Nikons, which some of you might be able to point out to me.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
You mean because of Nikon's more extensive selection of accessory lenses, or because you think the standard Nikon lenses are shaprper and more distortion-free than Canon's?
Gary Stark137586
Leading Member
Mike,
Plus Nikons are, in my experience, a far more robust piece of equipment than Canons. Over the years I've had the pleasure to own and use both, both for pleasure and in a professional capacity.
When the Canons happenned to be dropped, they broke. Winders stopped working. Lenses were knoocked out of alignment.
By way of contrast, when my Nikons had the misfortune to be dropped, the got dented. A filter broke. a mirror jarred itself out of its at-rest positiion, but was able to be reseated very easily.
But they were, and remain, usable. The Canons, as much as I enjoyed using them, didn't.
As a pro, that's a most important factor, and while I don't consider the 5700 to be a pro camera, it's bloody good, and it certainly feels as robust as any of the modern Nikon SLRs.
And the glass on mine is as good as that on an SLR.
--
g.
Gary Stark
[email protected]
Down under in Sydney, Oz.
CP5700, CP950, F801, FE2, Nikkormat FTN
Both.
Plus Nikons are, in my experience, a far more robust piece of equipment than Canons. Over the years I've had the pleasure to own and use both, both for pleasure and in a professional capacity.
When the Canons happenned to be dropped, they broke. Winders stopped working. Lenses were knoocked out of alignment.
By way of contrast, when my Nikons had the misfortune to be dropped, the got dented. A filter broke. a mirror jarred itself out of its at-rest positiion, but was able to be reseated very easily.
But they were, and remain, usable. The Canons, as much as I enjoyed using them, didn't.
As a pro, that's a most important factor, and while I don't consider the 5700 to be a pro camera, it's bloody good, and it certainly feels as robust as any of the modern Nikon SLRs.
And the glass on mine is as good as that on an SLR.
--
g.
Gary Stark
[email protected]
Down under in Sydney, Oz.
CP5700, CP950, F801, FE2, Nikkormat FTN
Uncle Frank
Veteran Member
Please excuse me if I find your remarks to be disingenuous, Mike. You've re-opened an old thread on NTF, and listed all of the alleged problems with Nikons, and there's only one logical direction that kind of provocation can take.
I like my Nikon 995 because I get great pictures out of it. If you're doing the same with your G3, we've each made the right decision. But I haven't found a single picture in your long archive of posts, and can only conclude you're more interested in technology and debate than photography.
--
Best regards,
Frank R. ( The CP995 is discontinued, not obsolete!)
http://www.pbase.com/unclefrank/cp995&page=all
Gary Stark137586
Leading Member
Mike,
It's an issue, but I can get around it, and I'm learning that by changing my settings on the camera, it's quickly becoming a non-issue. I recently had a situation where I could barely see the image in the EVF, but got a perfectly focused AF image. I was impressed.
I have a 950 and a 5700. For the 5700, the proprietary LiIon battery is just $10 more expensive than the off-brand, which costs just $100. Which would you buy? And I can wander into the local KMart and buy off-the-shelf disposable batteries that slot right in for less than $18 each! I carry a couple of these around in my bag permanently, just in case.
I can almost fill a 128MB CF card on one standard LiIon battery's charge. A second battery is barely larger than a CF card really, carrying a couple of cards and a spare battery is not an issue.
And I can use standard (or NiMH) AA batteries in either camera too. For around $10 I made a holder for 6 AAs that plugs into the external power socket.
Yes, the 5700 has a massive learning curve to overcome before you can come to grips with all of its features. I guess that if it didn't have the features, then there wouldn't be the learning curve, but then it wouldn't have the features ...
But how long does it take one to master the features on a top end SLR? What's the difference; this is a top end digicam, after all.
Which is it to be? It cannot be both. To help you a little, let me say that I agree with your assessment that Nikons are very well engineered ergonomically.
--
g.
Gary Stark
[email protected]
Down under in Sydney, Oz.
CP5700, CP950, F801, FE2, Nikkormat FTN
Fair enough. Everyone has their own personal preferences.
Yep.
I too acknowledge the lowlight AF issues, but they're not a show stopper. I shoot many photos in dimly lit (dimly decorated) bars, shooting bands on poorly lit stages. Focusing is difficult at times. Bloody hard.
It's an issue, but I can get around it, and I'm learning that by changing my settings on the camera, it's quickly becoming a non-issue. I recently had a situation where I could barely see the image in the EVF, but got a perfectly focused AF image. I was impressed.
I'm afraid that you're either wrong or severely misinformed on this issue.
I have a 950 and a 5700. For the 5700, the proprietary LiIon battery is just $10 more expensive than the off-brand, which costs just $100. Which would you buy? And I can wander into the local KMart and buy off-the-shelf disposable batteries that slot right in for less than $18 each! I carry a couple of these around in my bag permanently, just in case.
I can almost fill a 128MB CF card on one standard LiIon battery's charge. A second battery is barely larger than a CF card really, carrying a couple of cards and a spare battery is not an issue.
And I can use standard (or NiMH) AA batteries in either camera too. For around $10 I made a holder for 6 AAs that plugs into the external power socket.
Again, you're wrong or misinformed.
Yes, the 5700 has a massive learning curve to overcome before you can come to grips with all of its features. I guess that if it didn't have the features, then there wouldn't be the learning curve, but then it wouldn't have the features ...
But how long does it take one to master the features on a top end SLR? What's the difference; this is a top end digicam, after all.
On the one hand you acknowledge the Nikons' ergonomics, but then you state that everything is labelled rather cryptically and buried between many layers of menus, and that you need to use two buttons at once.
Which is it to be? It cannot be both. To help you a little, let me say that I agree with your assessment that Nikons are very well engineered ergonomically.
It certainly requires a good deal of time and effort to learn and master its use. Why is that a problem for you?
What drawbacks are you referring to? Looking at the facts of the situation, you've really presented none at all.
Lots, I suspect.
--
g.
Gary Stark
[email protected]
Down under in Sydney, Oz.
CP5700, CP950, F801, FE2, Nikkormat FTN
marek k
Veteran Member
Umm mike... the G3 is somewhat more removed from the d30/d60/new replacmenet than the 5700 is from the d100. Its about as close as you can get before the lenses start coming off.
You seem to have some personal vendetta against the 5700... why don't you go outside and play with your G3... after all it makes you so happy.
I did start writing a long reply to your earlier posts asking about why the 5700 appeals... but it just didn't seem worth it.
-marek
cp5700, 801s
You seem to have some personal vendetta against the 5700... why don't you go outside and play with your G3... after all it makes you so happy.
I did start writing a long reply to your earlier posts asking about why the 5700 appeals... but it just didn't seem worth it.
--
-marek
cp5700, 801s
Ron T
Veteran Member
Yes you're right, you might be missing something. I don't find nearly as many problem issues with Nikon as you seem to. The 5700 battery life is very good in my opinion, 150-200 shots per charge. The 8x f/2.8 lens is "very" fast considering it's zoom range (only about 1 stop variation over the 8x range). In regards to the AF issue: it's blown out of proportion.
Ron T
Ron T
Nice lion pic, Frank. I see that this forum is probably not open to discussions of this type without things getting out of hand so I'll leave it at that.
Please excuse me if I find your remarks to be disingenuous, Mike.
You've re-opened an old thread on NTF, and listed all of the
alleged problems with Nikons, and there's only one logical
direction that kind of provocation can take.
I like my Nikon 995 because I get great pictures out of it. If
you're doing the same with your G3, we've each made the right
decision. But I haven't found a single picture in your long
archive of posts, and can only conclude you're more interested in
technology and debate than photography.
--
Best regards,
Frank R. ( The CP995 is discontinued, not obsolete!)
http://www.pbase.com/unclefrank/cp995&page=all
Nice to see someone doesn't mind discussing this.
Although this seems like something of an Achilles heel for Nikons, low light AF is a problem with almost any digital camera. One solution I've found is to use my camera's custom settings to store parameters to allow me to place my camera into a point and shoot mode, using zone focusing. This lets me take candid people pictures quickly in parties.
I believe the Nikons have this feature as well, so you might want to give it a try, if you aren't already using it.
You can pick up aftermarket 1500 mah batteries for the Canon for about $50, which may give you enough power for over 400 shots or 4.5 hours of shooting. I don't see anywhere near this on the Nikons (see Phil's battery tests.) I'm not saying this is reason enough to write off the camera, but I do think it's a drawback and I don't get why the performance isn't better.
Yes, but you could probably fill up a MicroDrive on a single charge with a Canon or Sony lithium-powered camera. I don't understand the reason for this difference.
I didn't know you could use AAs on the 5000/5700...
I don't mind the learning curve so much as the time and complexity required to change common settings even after you've mastered the camera's functions. Depends on your shooting style, I'm sure, but I think that settings should be within quick and easy reach and not require navigating a long menu. It seems to me, at times, as if Nikon's menu structures are tantamount to an Indy race car with the shift lever hidden in the glove compartment, if you know what I mean.
Can you point out some unique functions and settings in the Nikons that aren't available in Canons? I know you have a bit more control over in-camera contrast, sharpening, white balance, etc. But I'm not aware of anything really significant missing in the G3.
Let me explain. I like the ergonomics of the Nikon 5000/5700 body itself - the shape, grip, and balance of the camera. The way it feels in my hand. But I don't like the way controls are operated or the complexity of the menus. I feel the same way about Olympus. It seems like the same operations and settings require more time and fumbling around.
Well, I don't mind the learning part so much. But I dislike the idea that, even after mastering the camera, one must still spend a lot of time and concentration digging around for many settings that perhaps should be made more readily accessible. It just seems to me that in the time it takes to locate and adjust all the desired settings, the photo opportunity may be lost. Someone mentioned to me that Nikon's implementation of Custom settings is one area that can be maddeningly complex and time consuming to operate.
Well, there's the battery life, which according to Phil's tests is about one fourth that of Canon or Sony cameras in this class. There's the slower lens, which can be very limiting when you need a fast shutter speed or when shooting indoors or in any other low light situation. There's the AF system, which is reportedly more problematic than that of other cameras in this class, along with the lack of the AF assist lamp. And there's the complexity of the controls and menus that, even once mastered, take more time and effort to adjust than in other cameras.
Can you give me some examples of what I'm missing? I guess that was really the point of my original question - to find out what I was overlooking...
You say that the 5700's battery life is very good - but compared to what? It may be ok for your own needs, but you can't really say it's very good compared to the alternatives, which offer up to four times the performance with batteries costing half as much.
Regarding the lens, at the wide end, I think f2.8 is rather limiting. And at the 8x tele end, there's nothing to compare with directly, but Sony's f717 gives f2.4 at 5x.
As far as the AF goes, it really depends on teh type of shooting you do. If you're doing lots of macro and tripod shots, then it's not a biggie. But if you like action and candid shots and shooting indoors, it can be a handicap.
You know, if someone came to the Canon forum asking similar questions about the G3, I don't think most people would mind telling them how they feel about the camera's good and bad points without getting all defensive about it. What's the big deal? We're just having a friendly discussion.
Hell, as much as welike the G3, there are long threads discussing areas where we'd like to see changes and improvements from Canon. There's no harm in a little constructive criticism, and in the process, we often discover the reasons why certain shortcomings exist.
I wasn't speaking of SLRs. From what I've read, even though the Canon digital cameras use more plastic and seem less sturdy than the higher end Nikons (can't say the same about the lower end Nikon models which look like toys), I've read more reports about camera failures with Nikons than with Canons. The only complaint I rad about the G2 over the last uear was regarding a small, comsmetic crack that appeared in some models. In contrast, I've read numerous reports about more serious problems cropping up in the Coolpix cameras.
It's a littel bit like comparing quality between a Toyota and a BMW - The BMW certainly seems better finished and with higher quality materials and more sophisticated designs, yet Toyotas are infinitely more reliable.
My last car was a Ford Explorer and in the 4 years I owned it, all I did was change the oil, brake pads, and tires. In contrast, my current 3 year old Land Rover has had two batteries replaced, plus the thermostat, radiator, digital clock, and driver's seat control.
I'll take the Land Rover over the Explorer any day, but I wouldn't go around claiming that the Land Rover is more reliable.
Can you point me to any image samples demonstrating the Nikon's better optical quality compared to the G3's? I've seen beautiful pictures taken with both cameras, and the 5700 obviously has a bit of an edge due to its larger CCD and higher resolution, but I haven't seen any dramatic illustrations of the Nikon's superior optics.
Ron T
Veteran Member
Why is f/2.8 limiting? Most long zoom lenses are in that range. Besides 1/stop is not going to be a make or break in most situations. Suppose you are shooting in low light with f/2.8 at 1/2 sec. if you go to f/2.0 you can use a shutter of 1/4 sec. not much help when hand-held. The DOF at f/2.0 is more shallow also, what about the weight and size of those bigger diameter lenses, now that's limiting.
Ron T
Ron T
Gary Stark137586
Leading Member
Mike,
So the only things left to alter on a per-shot basis are compositional items - focus and zoom range - and they're both just one finger controls that one can use with the camera at eye level or anywhere else.
What I can say is that I want for almost nothing on the 5700.
What would I like to see on the 5700? Revision of the stupid focus distance indicators is essential.
Apart from that, focus distance recording in the image info.txt file would be a nice touch, a pc (external flash synch) socket, an AF assist light, a user selectable timeout on the LCD backlight, and a little more wide angle on the lens.
--
g.
Gary Stark
[email protected]
Down under in Sydney, Oz.
CP5700, CP950, F801, FE2, Nikkormat FTN
Yes it is, although not so much with the DSLRs though. Of course, they're often using much faster optics.
I switch to either A or M modes, and set the aperature for maximum DOF. It becomes less of an issue, and takes no time at all.
400 shots ?? Hmmm .... the only time I've come near that number in a day is when I was shooting weddings. While I'm not shooting at maximum resolution, I have no problems with my 128MB CF cards or batteries running "dry" as it were. I'm comfy with the capacities that I have.
Don't forget that the 5700 has two EVFs, and no optical VF. That would certainly be a power drain of some sort.
I can't speak about the 5000, but for the 5700 Nikon make an add-on adapter that uses 6 AA cells, and as I said, I made one up for around $10. I just put it in my fanny pack and plug it into the external power socket on the camera. I have 6 1800mAh NiMHs that I use in this.
I rarely need to go near the menu settings, so I'm somewhat puzzled by your comments. The mode switch lets me switch between P/M/A/S, the thumbwheel lets me select settings (shutter speed etc) when appropriate, size (resolution), ISO, and focus mode will generally remain constant through a shooting session (and are each just one button settings anyway), likewise wb and focus mode, and while they're menu settings, I rarely see a need to vary them.
So the only things left to alter on a per-shot basis are compositional items - focus and zoom range - and they're both just one finger controls that one can use with the camera at eye level or anywhere else.
In reality, I find the menus are fairly easy to navigate when I need to navigate them, but that's not all that often. I think that my most frequent menu task, really, is reformatting the CF card.
I wish I could, but I'm not familiar enough with the Canon to be authoritative on this aspect. I do think that the eye level EVF is a nice touch though, because you have full access to everything even in the brightest of conditions. Likewise the dioptre adjustment on the EVF. And the twist and swivel LCD panel is great.
What I can say is that I want for almost nothing on the 5700.
What would I like to see on the 5700? Revision of the stupid focus distance indicators is essential.
Apart from that, focus distance recording in the image info.txt file would be a nice touch, a pc (external flash synch) socket, an AF assist light, a user selectable timeout on the LCD backlight, and a little more wide angle on the lens.
And that's the point. Were discussing high end digicams, and they are very well specified, despite some shortcomings. No camera is ever going to be perfect. I'm very satisfied with the 5700. I'm certainly happy if you're satisfied with a Canon, and would see no reason to change your mind; I'm happy to accept that there are many good high end digicams in the market place, and this is only a good thing for us.
OK, but I suspect you're worrying too much about the menus. In reality, you don't use them all that much. Or at least I find that I don't. Just the visible controls.
I simply don't find this to be the case. The controls I use most of all will be focus and zoom, plus exposure control settings. They're all readily available in a somewhat similar manner to that on my SLRs, and digging around doesn't happen.
I would never consider a Sony simply because they're using memory sticks. It's brain dead technology, and compatible with little else unless you live in a Sony household. I have quite a bit of Sony gear, but ....
The lens could be faster, but I don't think that, all said and done, there is any other camera in the same class as the 5700. I'm almost of the opinion that the overall combination of features takes it into a different realm.
--
g.
Gary Stark
[email protected]
Down under in Sydney, Oz.
CP5700, CP950, F801, FE2, Nikkormat FTN
Olympus 5050z f1.8
Canon G3 f2.0
Sony F717 f2.0
Nikon 5000/5700 f2.8
Sometimes that little bit can make the difference between sharp shot and a blurred one. I admit it's not an earth shaking difference, but I think it's significant.
And at telephoto the differences are considerably more significant...
Olympus 5050z f2.6 (105mm)
Sony F717 f2.4 (190mm)
Canon G3 f3.0 (140mm)
Nikon 5000 f4.8 (85mm)
Nikon 5700 f4.2 (280mm)
What about going from 1/15 to 1/30? Still insignificant?
How much extra do some people happily pay for a 50mm SLR lens that's f1.4 or f1.2 instead of f1.8 or f2? The brighter viewfinder image and greater low light flexibility can be very valuable at times. I'm happy with the G3's f2.0 lens but I admit I'd rather have the Olympus' f1.7 lens, or the Sony's f2.4 at telephoto instead of Canon's f3.0.
I weighed all the pros and cons and picked my camera, but I readily admit areas where my camera could be improved. I think it's important to put pressure on these companies to deliver the features we want.
If there's one thing these cameras have in abundance, it's depth of field. Too much, usually. If you want less, you can always use a smaller f-stop.
I think most people would gladly sacrifice a few extra grams of weight for a faster lens. A longer zoom is what adds significantly more weight and size.
Gary Stark137586
Leading Member
Mike,
Me ? I have a few old Alfas.
--
g.
Gary Stark
[email protected]
Down under in Sydney, Oz.
CP5700, CP950, F801, FE2, Nikkormat FTN
I realise and accept this, but that was where my experience base is coming from, and it's from there that I would be making my judgement calls.
This reflects my experiences as well.
While I've heard of some problems, in my ownership of, I guess, 8 or 9 Nikons, I've yet pay anything in repair costs. That's not been my experience with Canons, and I had to return a Mamiya for a refund beacuse it was so unreliable as to be virtually useless.
But the BMW will be built of more durable materials, and the ownership paradigm of the two cars is very different. BMW and Mercedes, for instance, try to train their owners towards the practice of preventative maintenance, and longevity of product, especially MB. Toyota and Honda, by way of contrast, work more towards obsolescence and disposability.
Me ? I have a few old Alfas.
But the Landy had electrics by Lucas, the Prince of Darkness.
Ok, what you're saying here may well be relevant in terms of CCD size, but the end result is still the same - I'm very happy with the images I get, where the primary problem is the person squeezing the shutter!
--
g.
Gary Stark
[email protected]
Down under in Sydney, Oz.
CP5700, CP950, F801, FE2, Nikkormat FTN
Ron T
Veteran Member
But the point is none of the cameras you mentioned have a 280mm zoom except the 5700, so the comparison falls short. The 5700 has an f/2.8 lens but twice the zoom of the G3 f/2.0 for example. If you want the long zoom like I do then the f2.8-f4.2 is worth it for me, this lens is very compact. The extra weight of the faster but shorter zoom of the 717 was too much bulk for me but others don't mind, matter of choice. Also, the G3 is only 4MP, I would like to have even more than the 5MP of the 5700, after all resolution is what's it's all about. Seems we both have the cameras we want, have fun...regards.
Ron T
Ron T
marek k
Veteran Member
I know, its just this has been done so many times around here, I just didn't have the energy last night to write such a long reply! Theres a lot about the 5700 that is really to like, and its shortcomings - I think I've been able to get used to them and work around them quite happily. Though it wouldn't focus on the shadow of a tree on my room wall last night at 1am (duh 
)
I will try to get around to a proper reply
-marek
cp5700, 801s
)I will try to get around to a proper reply
--
-marek
cp5700, 801s
marek k
Veteran Member
For the good of fruitfull discussion here are my 2c worth...
I got into the market for a digicam last year. Had enough of the costs and time lost associated with playing around with film. Takes too long, you make mistakes you pay. I beleive digital is the perfect learning ground, and well .. the future really. PS is such a wonderful toy Anyway, I started off looking at the 4500, basically I wanted something with as much manual control as possible, but had too keep a budget in mind. So the competitors there were G2 and 4500 (G3 had just come out and was a trouch too expensive). Didn't really look at the olympus range 4040 5050 etc as there aren't too many of them around in Melbourne, and not being able to handle them sorted that question out quickly. Anyway, ended up deciding that as I'll be keeping the camera for a long time, I should step up a level - the decision then was f717, 5700, G3 and minolta 7xx.
Didn't really like the sony, its form factor or excessive size (a camera that you don't feel like carrying around is one that you don't take pics with). The minolta never really got a look in - it seems too flawed based on reviews. And the G3 didn't feel right in my hand, was down on pixels and zoom. So I guess that brings me to what I like/dislike about the nikon.
). Basically the camera suits MY needs. THats why I bought it. And its downsides don't really bother me that much, most can be worked around or hopefully improve with a firmware release.
BTW what is the maximum bulb duration on the G3?
Mike Hunt wrote:
--
-marek
cp5700, 801s
I got into the market for a digicam last year. Had enough of the costs and time lost associated with playing around with film. Takes too long, you make mistakes you pay. I beleive digital is the perfect learning ground, and well .. the future really. PS is such a wonderful toy
Anyway, I started off looking at the 4500, basically I wanted something with as much manual control as possible, but had too keep a budget in mind. So the competitors there were G2 and 4500 (G3 had just come out and was a trouch too expensive). Didn't really look at the olympus range 4040 5050 etc as there aren't too many of them around in Melbourne, and not being able to handle them sorted that question out quickly. Anyway, ended up deciding that as I'll be keeping the camera for a long time, I should step up a level - the decision then was f717, 5700, G3 and minolta 7xx.Didn't really like the sony, its form factor or excessive size (a camera that you don't feel like carrying around is one that you don't take pics with). The minolta never really got a look in - it seems too flawed based on reviews. And the G3 didn't feel right in my hand, was down on pixels and zoom. So I guess that brings me to what I like/dislike about the nikon.
- Build quality; pretty rock solid, you can't really fault it. It feels very reasuring in the hand and the Mg body stands out. (btw the G2/G3 felt somewhat plasticy in comparison)
- Glass; one of nikon's real strengths and the lens produces a very high quality image. I don't think the others were that far behind here, but enough. The 8X zoom is great - name another camera that gives you so much range with such a compact size - this goes back to being able to carry it around happily - one of my major criteria. Wouldn't mind a bit more aperture at both wide and telephoto but I wouldn't trade that for less zoom.
- Macro shots; thought these would be a nice touch, but they really bring in a whole new aspect to photos. TYoo bad its winter here in warsaw atm and the bugs are all in hiding! I'll have to go back to shooting screws like jarrell is atm
- Ergonomics; the camera looks good and feels right in my hand. It might be due to experience with the 801s but the buttons feel rightly placed. You stated that they're badly placed etc. Now keeping in mind i have large hands, with the right I can easily change zoom, program mode/exposure settings, metering (func button), exposure bias. With the left ISO, focus setting, flash, AE lock. This all feels very natural without bringing the camera down from my eye, even in the dark. I'm sure this however is a question of personal preference and getting used to any given camera. For me though, the size/quality button is a bit of a waste. I usually shoot fine/full size.
- Menus; not sure why you say these are so complicated. Theres 4 pages (yes there are a heap of settings) and options that need to be changed quickly (WB, noise reduction, sharpening, saturation etc) are quite easily accessed at the 1st level. Flash bias is a bit deep however. Again, I beleive I'm quite proficient with these, and don't have any real complaints here. Again you can change these without bringing the camera down as they're all displayed in the EVF.
- All those above settings, a godsend for toying around and having full control.
- EVF; Good for the aforementioned reason though more resolution would be good and in very low light shots it can be a hit and miss affair. This is hwoever a problem with any non SLR camera with a large zoom - the tech just hasn't caught up yet.
- Shutter speed range; quite wide i beleive compared to the competition. 1/4000 to 5min.
- Images; like the feel of nikon digital images. THey have a natural look to them. To me at least, some of the others seem oversaturated.
- MF; ok so theres no focus ring which would have been great. I can live with the dial, but what was nikon thinking with that bar??? Even with the table handy, it makes using manual focus a real pain. Though the glimmering focal plane in the EVF/LCD is very useful to see what you have focused on (it makes up for a lack of resolution quite a lot).
- AF; ok theres no assist light. In good light the system is good, in low light it could be faster but usually finds what its looking for - I've found that the most important aspect here is to keep the camera steady and to give it some contrast. After having practised quite a bit, I beleiove that this issue although not perfect has been greatly blown out of proportion. Hopefully the firmware update will adress it (as with the focus bar in MF).
- Battery; I'm getting 200 shots with no flash, and just under 150 with. Doesn;t seem too bad. I'm usually shooting near my place, but a 2nd battery wouldn;t go astray when away from home. I'm sure nikon could make a EN-EL1s or something and up the mAh rating on the battery. Its quite low and current tech should be able to improve on it.
- Hot shoe; don't really use an external flash atm. but I'm saure a lack of full features is disconcerning to those that do. Again I hope that this can be addressed with firmware.
). Basically the camera suits MY needs. THats why I bought it. And its downsides don't really bother me that much, most can be worked around or hopefully improve with a firmware release.BTW what is the maximum bulb duration on the G3?
Mike Hunt wrote:
--
-marek
cp5700, 801s
Anthony White
Active member
--I am just wondering, this picture, some thing seem to be a bit odd:
The form-factor seems to be the same as the 5700, which makes sense
because it will reduce costs, but than :
of the same size claims to do F1.4-1.5, which would be a magical
- considering the lens of the 5700 which does F2.8-F3.5, this lens
performance for a 4-500mm lens.
didn't put relative mm's on cams earlier, and above that on the
- 4-500mm it says on the front of the lens, strange since nikon
5700 it is place on the left side (seen from the front) of the lens.
is not turned on or in play back mode, the 'laser light' is burning
- the lens isn't popped out, which for a 5700 means that the camera
in this state... sounds a bit strange to me
-the AF and DOF button seem to be on a strange location, if I hold
my 5700 and imagine where these buttons should be, I would hardly
be able to press them
for blinking for timed exposures, if this one is used for AF, where
- the place where the laserlight is placed is used at the 5700 used
is the blinking light gone?
--
=======
JL
CP5700 and trying
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum