5700

Nigel Bisset · Mar 17, 2003

While I have only had my 5700 for a month I am finding the EVF as good as I had hoped it would be. Prior to the 5700 I owned 4 other Coolpix's 900, 900S, 950 & 990 and loved them all, although I never really liked the 990 as much as the 950 which was just great.

What I mis is the swivel body of the 900 serias which while making the camera somewhat odd looking and often the subject of critism from doubters, was in my opinion a truely great feature providing an ease of use in hundreds of odd way and perfect for candid shots.

But, back to the 5700, when I first got it I used the fold out LCD much as I had with the 9xx serias cameras but over a period of a couple of weeks I find myself using the EVF almost exclusively unless I can't get my eye to it.

I also read some reports of it being hard to use in bright sunlight, well I wear reading glasses and have had no problems in the very bright Australian summer sunlight.

I have also found that I have had great success in using the manual focus mode under very low light levels, the trick seems to have focus confermation off and allow a little time for each focus adjustment to appear on the EVF.

In fact, about the only real critisism I have is the placement of the neck strap fitting in the right hand side of the camera body and like many others would like to see focus distance readout instead of the stupid bar graph..

marek k · Mar 18, 2003

Nigel Bisset said:
I also read some reports of it being hard to use in bright
sunlight, well I wear reading glasses and have had no problems in
the very bright Australian summer sunlight.

Nigel,

Ive had some problems with sunlight when the sun is on my left, a little can get between my eye and the viewfinder. Not a big problem, rarely happens and you either move your eye closer or cup yoru hand over it.

Thomas also posted a link to a little rubber lenshood that does the trick

--
-marek

Some of my photos: http://members.optusnet.com.au/~okocim/photos/
Photosig: http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=67375

Ed Nazarko · Mar 18, 2003

I think it depends on the individual, and ones own eyes. I couldn't do it now, but I could have 30 years ago, and for some young friends of mine starting out to try to build a career in photography, they don't see it as that much of a problem. I agree on the used SLR option, though; I've watched and listen to some of the portfolio review critiques, and one of the things that you do unknowingly with hard to see viewfinders is leave little triangles of "oops that doesn't really belong in the picture" in the corners of your images. It's just too hard to see, and they usually don't cover 100% of the final image.

marek k said:
Ed Nazarko said:

Most low end film slrs use a mirror finder - and they tend to be
small, and dark. That big hunk of optical glass that's used in
high end cameras is very expensive, so if you're trying to get to a
low price point, it's one of the easier compromises.

Click to expand...

And one I don't think I could make... it was horrid looking through
that. (im comparing mainly to f801s, minolta XG-M (circa 1981), and
the 5700)
A used SLR would be a better option I think.

--
-marek

Some of my photos: http://members.optusnet.com.au/~okocim/photos/
Photosig: http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=67375

--
Ed

Make pictures, don't take them - it leaves more for others.

Ed Nazarko · Mar 18, 2003

RE candids with the 9XX versus 5700 - with the 9XX, when you were shooting waist level, you had the advantage of it not looking like a real fancy camera, so people didn't watch you. You can do the waist level thing with the 5700 - I do often - but because it's so SLR looking, people focus on you longer, long enough often to figure out you're intending to take their picture, and they strike a pose.

I'm learning to develop that "I'm just looking at old images" look on my face when shooting waist level with the 5700. It helps. I get fewer self-conscious poses.

Nigel Bisset said:
While I have only had my 5700 for a month I am finding the EVF as
good as I had hoped it would be. Prior to the 5700 I owned 4 other
Coolpix's 900, 900S, 950 & 990 and loved them all, although I never
really liked the 990 as much as the 950 which was just great.

What I mis is the swivel body of the 900 serias which while making
the camera somewhat odd looking and often the subject of critism
from doubters, was in my opinion a truely great feature providing
an ease of use in hundreds of odd way and perfect for candid shots.

But, back to the 5700, when I first got it I used the fold out LCD
much as I had with the 9xx serias cameras but over a period of a
couple of weeks I find myself using the EVF almost exclusively
unless I can't get my eye to it.

I also read some reports of it being hard to use in bright
sunlight, well I wear reading glasses and have had no problems in
the very bright Australian summer sunlight.

I have also found that I have had great success in using the manual
focus mode under very low light levels, the trick seems to have
focus confermation off and allow a little time for each focus
adjustment to appear on the EVF.

In fact, about the only real critisism I have is the placement of
the neck strap fitting in the right hand side of the camera body
and like many others would like to see focus distance readout
instead of the stupid bar graph..

--
Ed

Make pictures, don't take them - it leaves more for others.

Ed Nazarko · Mar 18, 2003

97% is important - I've learned to be obsessive about little triangles of junk in the corners of the picture. It truly, truly is a mark of the amateur, it's one thing that every pro I've taken a class from zeroes in on to beat up the students. That 3% hides a lot of weird corner junk. (Sadly, as you can see on my web site, it still happens to me, but not as often any more.) And for some reason, I have found that I often miss the composition I'm seeing in my head when I use the EVF to shoot. I'm not sure why, but I do; if I shoot from the EVF and then check it on the LCD, I am often unhappy with the result. It's happening less, but it still happens. So when I'm really concerned and being critical, I use the LCD.

I also have light crop marks drawn on my LCD for 8.5x11, 13x19 inches, two sizes I often print to, so that I can compose with that knowledge. It's a great cheating tool...

marek k said:
Ed Nazarko said:

The evf doesn't show 100% of the image, just as most slrs don't
show 100% of the image when you're looking through the finder. I
find it easier to do tricky compositions by looking at the lcd on
the back, because what you see there is pretty much what you're
going to get. If I know that the image is going to be needed in a
specific format or shape, I find it easier to visualize it on the
LCD. As others have told me, the more I use the EVF, the less
frequently I'll rely on the LCD; I'm finding that to be true.

Like most new things, even spectacularly wonderful new things, it
takes getting used to.

Click to expand...

--
-marek

Some of my photos: http://members.optusnet.com.au/~okocim/photos/
Photosig: http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=67375

--
Ed

Make pictures, don't take them - it leaves more for others.

Octopuzz · Mar 18, 2003

Something very useful with lens vs LCD swivels is that with lens swivel, you could put the body on a flat surface and swivel the lens to the subject. perfect for low light and for still macros. for lcd , you will need to depend on a steady hand or tripod. My experience... if you do a lot of walking and don't want your subjects to suspect too much, 5700 is great; at waist level with a waist pouch for support, it can go by with less attention.

Ed Nazarko said:
RE candids with the 9XX versus 5700 - with the 9XX, when you were
shooting waist level, you had the advantage of it not looking like
a real fancy camera, ..

--
~ Nenee

marek k · Mar 18, 2003

I think I've gotten a feel for where 97% is now, stilll the crop tool in PS is useful

Good suggestion with the crop marks. How did you draw them on the lcd?

Ed Nazarko said:
I also have light crop marks drawn on my LCD for 8.5x11, 13x19
inches, two sizes I often print to, so that I can compose with that
knowledge. It's a great cheating tool...

marek k said:

Ed Nazarko said:

The evf doesn't show 100% of the image, just as most slrs don't
show 100% of the image when you're looking through the finder. I
find it easier to do tricky compositions by looking at the lcd on
the back, because what you see there is pretty much what you're
going to get. If I know that the image is going to be needed in a
specific format or shape, I find it easier to visualize it on the
LCD. As others have told me, the more I use the EVF, the less
frequently I'll rely on the LCD; I'm finding that to be true.

Like most new things, even spectacularly wonderful new things, it
takes getting used to.

Click to expand...

--
-marek

Some of my photos: http://members.optusnet.com.au/~okocim/photos/
Photosig: http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=67375

Click to expand...

--
Ed

Make pictures, don't take them - it leaves more for others.

--
-marek

Some of my photos: http://members.optusnet.com.au/~okocim/photos/
Photosig: http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=67375

Ed Nazarko · Mar 18, 2003

extremely pointy soft grease pencil - sorry i don't know if they're referred to differently in Aussie. It's the kind of thing you use to mark up prints for retouching, really soft crayon-like. Didn't write on the screen, but put little crop marks on the plastic around the screen. Because of the lens' pretty serious barrel distortion at wide angle, I center the image, and get it away a bit from the edges, so the marks assume I'm centering the image.

marek k said:
Good suggestion with the crop marks. How did you draw them on the lcd?

Ed Nazarko said:

I also have light crop marks drawn on my LCD for 8.5x11, 13x19
inches, two sizes I often print to, so that I can compose with that
knowledge. It's a great cheating tool...

marek k said:

Ed Nazarko said:

The evf doesn't show 100% of the image, just as most slrs don't
show 100% of the image when you're looking through the finder. I
find it easier to do tricky compositions by looking at the lcd on
the back, because what you see there is pretty much what you're
going to get. If I know that the image is going to be needed in a
specific format or shape, I find it easier to visualize it on the
LCD. As others have told me, the more I use the EVF, the less
frequently I'll rely on the LCD; I'm finding that to be true.

Like most new things, even spectacularly wonderful new things, it
takes getting used to.

Click to expand...

--
-marek

Some of my photos: http://members.optusnet.com.au/~okocim/photos/
Photosig: http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=67375

Click to expand...

--
Ed

Make pictures, don't take them - it leaves more for others.

Click to expand...

--
-marek

Some of my photos: http://members.optusnet.com.au/~okocim/photos/
Photosig: http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=67375

--
Ed

Make pictures, don't take them - it leaves more for others.

Jonathan White · Mar 18, 2003

I bought the 5700 because it has an evf. True slr viewfinder would be nice, but then it would be an slr. The evf is the next best thing. With optical vf like g3 or 5000 you can't see the result of your filters (like CP) without the lcd.

Jonathan

Jon Schiller · Mar 20, 2003

But I assume the LCD of the 5700 is no better in bright lite than the LCD on my 995? And I still wonder about laying in the snow--what do you mean? I appreciate your responses. Thanks

Ed Nazarko said:
Like most new things, even spectacularly wonderful new things, it
takes getting used to.

Jon Schiller said:

Ed Nazarko said:

Other than that, I have to admit that the EVF has grown on me. I
was firmly in the necessary evil camp when I got the camera. I'm
now in the generally indifferent camp. Forward progress. It's not
as crisp, sharp, and high res as a good glass pentaprism on an slr;
but it's way better than many of the cheaper mirror finders on slrs.

Unlike viewfinders, it also does give you a feeling for what the
limitations of the digital pixels may be in capturing the image
your eyes see.

As a 995 owner, you'll relate to this...the biggest downside of the
5700 is that it doesn't twist in the middle. The lcd screen moves,
and it's OK, but I don't get the great angles and experimentation
that I used to do with the 9XX series cameras. I'm forcing myself
to work with it, and I'm getting near as adventurous - but the
SLR-ish-ness of the 5700 still makes my brain think that getting a
unique angle involves laying in the snow in my business clothes.

Jon Schiller said:

I have a 995 which I love, but was shown a 5700 by another
photographer I met. In addition to the zoom which is impressive, I
was particularly impressed by the EVF, since using the the LCD
monitor is useless in bright light, (I just purchased one of those
covers you velcro on which is slightly better.) I only looked at
the 5700 for a few minutes. In reading various expert reviews of
the camera, "necessary evil" seems to be standard for the EVF, but
I'm still not sure why. In lower light I always use the LCD. The
optical view in the 995 is useful only because the LCD can't be
seen in daytime. Isn't the combination of EVF with the LCD monitor
a good combination. Or am I missing something?

Click to expand...

--
Ed

Make pictures, don't take them - it leaves more for others.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Ed

Make pictures, don't take them - it leaves more for others.

Ed Nazarko · Mar 21, 2003

The LCD isn't much better on the 5700, maybe a touch worse because it's a touch smaller I think, but it's what's there.

Because of the (seemingly) infinite twistability of the 995, I could put it on the ground and twist the lens to almost any angle, even make it work vertical or horizontal, and only have to kneel down. The 5700 isn't quite as flexible. Because it was so easy with the 995, I used the LCD, and unusual composition angles, almost all the time. I also found the viewfinder very annoying because I often found that the resulting image captured was not at all what I saw in the viewfinder - both because of the limited dynamic range of the CCD, and because of parallax errors and the fact that the viewfinder wasn't exactly the same crop as the eventual image.

With the 5700, and with SLRs, because the "normal" shooting position is camera to eye, there's a tendency to shoot standing up, almost all the time, so all your images are at your eye level. (Think about how seldom you see 35mm or SLR images taken from anything other than standing or kneeling levels. Is that really the most interesting perspective on the world?)

The EVF is better than the viewfinder in the 995, so I tend to use it more. I have to stop and remind myself that I do have the option of swinging the LCD out to use it for composition. I also have learned to "work" an image or lighting condition by trying lots of angles and exposures and crops. So, I shoot, shoot, shoot with camera to eye, going around whatever I'm shooting, camera to eye...and then when I want to try low levels, I'm down on the ground, camera to eye, snow soaking into my suit (I always have a camera with me...) which is what I'd have to do with an SLR, and the 5700 feels and works just like a Nikon SLR - and then remember I COULD have folded out the screen.

Sometimes what's called "muscle memory" wins out. Looks like an SLR, feels like an SLR, so I must have to get down on the ground.

And I have another drycleaning bill. And another story for co-workers to tell about me.

I keep my F3 because it has a removable prism and waist level finder. Net/Net, keeping it in repair is cheaper than drycleaning.

Jon Schiller said:
But I assume the LCD of the 5700 is no better in bright lite than
the LCD on my 995? And I still wonder about laying in the
snow--what do you mean? I appreciate your responses. Thanks

Jon Schiller said:
Jon Schiller said:

Jon Schiller said:

Jon Schiller said:

As a 995 owner, you'll relate to this...the biggest downside of the
5700 is that it doesn't twist in the middle. The lcd screen moves,
and it's OK, but I don't get the great angles and experimentation
that I used to do with the 9XX series cameras. I'm forcing myself
to work with it, and I'm getting near as adventurous - but the
SLR-ish-ness of the 5700 still makes my brain think that getting a
unique angle involves laying in the snow in my business clothes.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Ed

Make pictures, don't take them - it leaves more for others.

Jon Schiller · Mar 21, 2003

Ed Nazarko said:
Because of the (seemingly) infinite twistability of the 995, I
could put it on the ground and twist the lens to almost any angle,
even make it work vertical or horizontal, and only have to kneel
down. The 5700 isn't quite as flexible. Because it was so easy
with the 995, I used the LCD, and unusual composition angles,
almost all the time. I also found the viewfinder very annoying
because I often found that the resulting image captured was not at
all what I saw in the viewfinder - both because of the limited
dynamic range of the CCD, and because of parallax errors and the
fact that the viewfinder wasn't exactly the same crop as the
eventual image.

With the 5700, and with SLRs, because the "normal" shooting
position is camera to eye, there's a tendency to shoot standing up,
almost all the time, so all your images are at your eye level.
(Think about how seldom you see 35mm or SLR images taken from
anything other than standing or kneeling levels. Is that really
the most interesting perspective on the world?)

The EVF is better than the viewfinder in the 995, so I tend to use
it more. I have to stop and remind myself that I do have the
option of swinging the LCD out to use it for composition. I also
have learned to "work" an image or lighting condition by trying
lots of angles and exposures and crops. So, I shoot, shoot, shoot
with camera to eye, going around whatever I'm shooting, camera to
eye...and then when I want to try low levels, I'm down on the
ground, camera to eye, snow soaking into my suit (I always have a
camera with me...) which is what I'd have to do with an SLR, and
the 5700 feels and works just like a Nikon SLR - and then remember
I COULD have folded out the screen.

Sometimes what's called "muscle memory" wins out. Looks like an
SLR, feels like an SLR, so I must have to get down on the ground.

And I have another drycleaning bill. And another story for
co-workers to tell about me.

I keep my F3 because it has a removable prism and waist level
finder. Net/Net, keeping it in repair is cheaper than drycleaning.

Jon Schiller said:

But I assume the LCD of the 5700 is no better in bright lite than
the LCD on my 995? And I still wonder about laying in the
snow--what do you mean? I appreciate your responses. Thanks

Click to expand...

Member said:

Member said:

Member said:

Member said:

As a 995 owner, you'll relate to this...the biggest downside of the
5700 is that it doesn't twist in the middle. The lcd screen moves,
and it's OK, but I don't get the great angles and experimentation
that I used to do with the 9XX series cameras. I'm forcing myself
to work with it, and I'm getting near as adventurous - but the
SLR-ish-ness of the 5700 still makes my brain think that getting a
unique angle involves laying in the snow in my business clothes.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Ed

Make pictures, don't take them - it leaves more for others.

Jon Schiller · Mar 21, 2003

Oh, I just got the snow reference! I actually rarely use the body twist--I probably should do moie, but I've the 900 series for 3 years and still usually forget to use it. Which is why I forgot about the snow...The 5700 LCD is smaller, but I keep coming back to the same question to myself. Shooting in the sunlight or snow with the 995 means I have to use the viewfinder or some weird add-on to the LCD which never works very well. So, isn't the EVF better?

Jon Schiller said:
Ed Nazarko said:

Because of the (seemingly) infinite twistability of the 995, I
could put it on the ground and twist the lens to almost any angle,
even make it work vertical or horizontal, and only have to kneel
down. The 5700 isn't quite as flexible. Because it was so easy
with the 995, I used the LCD, and unusual composition angles,
almost all the time. I also found the viewfinder very annoying
because I often found that the resulting image captured was not at
all what I saw in the viewfinder - both because of the limited
dynamic range of the CCD, and because of parallax errors and the
fact that the viewfinder wasn't exactly the same crop as the
eventual image.

With the 5700, and with SLRs, because the "normal" shooting
position is camera to eye, there's a tendency to shoot standing up,
almost all the time, so all your images are at your eye level.
(Think about how seldom you see 35mm or SLR images taken from
anything other than standing or kneeling levels. Is that really
the most interesting perspective on the world?)

The EVF is better than the viewfinder in the 995, so I tend to use
it more. I have to stop and remind myself that I do have the
option of swinging the LCD out to use it for composition. I also
have learned to "work" an image or lighting condition by trying
lots of angles and exposures and crops. So, I shoot, shoot, shoot
with camera to eye, going around whatever I'm shooting, camera to
eye...and then when I want to try low levels, I'm down on the
ground, camera to eye, snow soaking into my suit (I always have a
camera with me...) which is what I'd have to do with an SLR, and
the 5700 feels and works just like a Nikon SLR - and then remember
I COULD have folded out the screen.

Sometimes what's called "muscle memory" wins out. Looks like an
SLR, feels like an SLR, so I must have to get down on the ground.

And I have another drycleaning bill. And another story for
co-workers to tell about me.

I keep my F3 because it has a removable prism and waist level
finder. Net/Net, keeping it in repair is cheaper than drycleaning.

Jon Schiller said:

But I assume the LCD of the 5700 is no better in bright lite than
the LCD on my 995? And I still wonder about laying in the
snow--what do you mean? I appreciate your responses. Thanks

Click to expand...

Jon Schiller said:

Jon Schiller said:

Jon Schiller said:

Jon Schiller said:

As a 995 owner, you'll relate to this...the biggest downside of the
5700 is that it doesn't twist in the middle. The lcd screen moves,
and it's OK, but I don't get the great angles and experimentation
that I used to do with the 9XX series cameras. I'm forcing myself
to work with it, and I'm getting near as adventurous - but the
SLR-ish-ness of the 5700 still makes my brain think that getting a
unique angle involves laying in the snow in my business clothes.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Ed

Make pictures, don't take them - it leaves more for others.

Click to expand...

Ed Nazarko · Mar 22, 2003

The EVF is better, if you're standing up, and that's the angle you want. Sometimes it's not the angle I want. Until very recently, the ability to detach the eyepiece/prism was a requirement to me when I selected SLRs, for that very reason.

Jon Schiller said:
Oh, I just got the snow reference! I actually rarely use the body
twist--I probably should do moie, but I've the 900 series for 3
years and still usually forget to use it. Which is why I forgot
about the snow...The 5700 LCD is smaller, but I keep coming back to
the same question to myself. Shooting in the sunlight or snow with
the 995 means I have to use the viewfinder or some weird add-on to
the LCD which never works very well. So, isn't the EVF better?

--
Ed

Make pictures, don't take them - it leaves more for others.

http://www.onemountainphoto.com

Search

5700

Nigel Bisset

Active member

marek k

Senior Member

Ed Nazarko

Guest

Ed Nazarko

Guest

Ed Nazarko

Guest

Octopuzz

Leading Member

marek k

Senior Member

Ed Nazarko

Guest

Jonathan White

Well-known member

Jon Schiller

Member

Ed Nazarko

Guest

Jon Schiller

Member

Jon Schiller

Member

Ed Nazarko

Guest

Keyboard shortcuts