CP990: Sometimes it...

Hi Andreas:

When artifacts are discussed, nobody is alwasy "right" (although, with a little effort, one can be always "wrong"). You have both cameras - and you have looked at many similar pictures recorded with both cameras. When convenient, please feel free to share your valuable insight on both cameras - I really appreciate it.

Thanks again for your important inputs to this forum.

Sincerely,

Joe Kurkjian

BTW - your English is excellent!

Andreas P. said:

Rick,

I have reread the review of the 505V here on this site. There is written
that the F505V does a significantly better job in aspects of CA than its
competitors. Well, i have to confess that my english isn't perfect but...

A statement of Mr. Askey would be helpful.

Best regards,

Andreas

BTW: (I will never state again something against the macro capabilities
of the
Coolpix

Click to expand...

Andreas, I thought your humor was great. Personally when I saw the picture the first thing I thought was what an ideal place for a blue halo. I can not think of a more appropriate place for one. Why would we remove it?

Andreas P. said:

Well,

It seems nobody understood me. So shame on my humour
I was refering to the purple (or blue) fringing in the center of the pic.

Click to expand...

Joe,

Thanks for your kind comments. This thread not was to meant to be another
attack against the Coolpix. I bought one, so why should i trash it.

Thanks again

Andreas

Greg Biggs said:

Andreas, I thought your humor was great. Personally when I saw the
picture the first thing I thought was what an ideal place for a blue
halo. I can not think of a more appropriate place for one. Why would we
remove it?

Click to expand...

Smile. Yes you are right. Sometimes the pictures of the CP990 become an
"holy" touch.
Well, i think it was my fault. Different cultures.

Best regards,

Andreas

Dear Andreas,

I'm sorry I missed your reference to Phil's review page in our earlier exchanges. I think you have may have misinterpreted Phil's comment.

Here it is verbatim ...

"Carl Zeiss strikes again! As expected the F505V does significantly better than the competition for chromatic aberrations. :

No where does Phil say the F505V does significantly better than the Nikon CP990 in the area of chromatic aberation. You make the assumption that Phil meant the CP990 when he referred to 'the competition'. Given the data that Phil has published in his reviews of both the CP990 and the F505V I don't think he was including the CP990 in that statement.

The CP990 is not a perfect camera by a long shot. There are many compromises that have to be made to market a camera like this. CCD/amplifier noise is a major issue in this and every other camera in this classs.

I'm not trying to beat a dead horse here, I just want to make sure that the casual reader who comes to this forum looking for information is not mislead by erroneous statements.

I am sorry if english is not your primary language and we have a cultural/language barrier that's causing confustion. Although I can be polite in several languages besides english, I am not fluent in them. ;-)

best regards,
Rick Stirling

Andreas P. said:

Manuela,

Take a look here:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydscf505v/default.asp?page=12

Nothing to add.

Best regards,

Andreas

Click to expand...

Rick,

Member said:

I'm not trying to beat a dead horse here, I just want to make sure that
the casual reader who comes to this forum looking for information is not
mislead by erroneous statements.

I am sorry if english is not your primary language and we have a
cultural/language barrier that's causing confustion. Although I can be
polite in several languages besides english, I am not fluent in them. ;-)

Click to expand...

Well no problem i have some basic skills in english so i can divide pros and cons. Okay he didn't explicitly name the CP990 in his statement.
But when you take look in the conclusion of both reviews you will read in
the CP990 conclusion under Cons: Chromatic abberation visible at wide angles.

In the 505V review you will read under Pros: Very little chromatic aberrations (thanks to the quality of the glass).

I think the logical conclusion is that the CP990 suffers more from this CA problem. Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

Best regards,

Andreas

Nothing has been demonstrated except there are two subjective statements ... you must measure those subjective statements against the physical evidence. The truth could be just the opposite of your supposition.

It is possible that the CP990 chromatic aberation although equal to or less than the Sony F505V, was at the time considered to be a negative for that camera. Months later the same amount of aberation is considered a plus in the Sony. It just depends on what your expectations are and how they might change with time. I don't think that it was unreasonable for Phil to have higher expectations for the Nikon CP990 at the time.

Rick

Andreas P. said:

Well no problem i have some basic skills in english so i can divide pros
and cons. Okay he didn't explicitly name the CP990 in his statement.
But when you take look in the conclusion of both reviews you will read in
the CP990 conclusion under Cons: Chromatic abberation visible at wide
angles.
In the 505V review you will read under Pros: Very little chromatic
aberrations (thanks to the quality of the glass).
I think the logical conclusion is that the CP990 suffers more from this
CA problem. Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

Best regards,

Andreas

Click to expand...

Good luck. Denial is just the first stage of grief. You still have a long way to go.

John

Rick Stirling said:

It is possible that the CP990 chromatic aberation although equal to or
less than the Sony F505V, was at the time considered to be a negative
for that camera. Months later the same amount of aberation is considered
a plus in the Sony. It just depends on what your expectations are and
how they might change with time. I don't think that it was unreasonable
for Phil to have higher expectations for the Nikon CP990 at the time.

Rick

Andreas P. said:

Well no problem i have some basic skills in english so i can divide pros
and cons. Okay he didn't explicitly name the CP990 in his statement.
But when you take look in the conclusion of both reviews you will read in
the CP990 conclusion under Cons: Chromatic abberation visible at wide
angles.
In the 505V review you will read under Pros: Very little chromatic
aberrations (thanks to the quality of the glass).
I think the logical conclusion is that the CP990 suffers more from this
CA problem. Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

Best regards,

Andreas

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

That's why I don't buy a Mercedes.

John

Frances said:

Frances.

Andreas P. said:

Frances said:

Andreas the memory stick....
works only with Sony,that what is wrong !!!

Click to expand...

Oh my Sony DSC- D770 accepts CF too, so it is quite tolerant isn't it ?

Best regards,

Andreas

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I can not speak for the F505V however I have had a F505 and I had the Coolpix 950 and now have the Coolpix 990. Being that I took over 2500 pictures with the F505 and now nearly 2000 with the 990, I believe it is fair to say my 990 produces more of the chromatic abberation than my F505 did. If someones primary concern in a digital camera was to avoid CA then they would be well advised to get something besides a 990 or about any digital with an optical zoom. But if they are able to deal with the CA and they also want what I personally believe is the best 3.34 mega pixel camera available to date, I would strongly advise getting the Nikon Coolpix 990 complete with one of them old fashioned but proven fangdangled gizmos called a viewfinder to assist in producing some darn fine images. Now, I have the 990 and I do not have the F505 anymore. That pretty well tells you all how much of an issue the CA is for me. BTW, I appreciate the humor intended by Andreas P. when he pointed out the halo. That is one way to make use of what some view as a major flaw in an otherwise great camera.

John Burns said:

John

Rick Stirling said:

It is possible that the CP990 chromatic aberation although equal to or
less than the Sony F505V, was at the time considered to be a negative
for that camera. Months later the same amount of aberation is considered
a plus in the Sony. It just depends on what your expectations are and
how they might change with time. I don't think that it was unreasonable
for Phil to have higher expectations for the Nikon CP990 at the time.

Rick

Andreas P. said:

Well no problem i have some basic skills in english so i can divide pros
and cons. Okay he didn't explicitly name the CP990 in his statement.
But when you take look in the conclusion of both reviews you will read in
the CP990 conclusion under Cons: Chromatic abberation visible at wide
angles.
In the 505V review you will read under Pros: Very little chromatic
aberrations (thanks to the quality of the glass).
I think the logical conclusion is that the CP990 suffers more from this
CA problem. Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

Best regards,

Andreas

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...