I bought a Nikon 5700

[rglass]

I bought it for its size and zoom...I made myself use it for three weeks
without touching my E-20...I got my E-20 out yesterday and I have never
missed a camera so much..there is on comparison at all...The viewfinder
alone is worth the differance in price and image out of E-20 is superior also

The Nikon is a good throw around and carry camera but don't compare
to the E-20

Robert Glass

Also never seen a camera focus as slow as Nikon...In trying to get
marco shots of insects the insects die of old age before it focus or they
fly away

 

[Brian Mackey]

R, does it have pc cord connection? Jono slack bought one also.. No delare here has one yet

regards..

I bought it for its size and zoom...I made myself use it for three
weeks
without touching my E-20...I got my E-20 out yesterday and I have
never
missed a camera so much..there is on comparison at all...The
viewfinder
alone is worth the differance in price and image out of E-20 is
superior also

The Nikon is a good throw around and carry camera but don't compare
to the E-20

Robert Glass

Also never seen a camera focus as slow as Nikon...In trying to get
marco shots of insects the insects die of old age before it focus
or they
fly away

--
Oly E-20's? -- Aint no doubt about it!
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/mackey135/njdigitalservices.htm
http://www.pbase.com/mackey
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=3459

 

[David Grabowski]

I bought it for its size and zoom...I made myself use it for three
weeks
without touching my E-20...I got my E-20 out yesterday and I have
never
missed a camera so much..there is on comparison at all...The
viewfinder
alone is worth the differance in price and image out of E-20 is
superior also

The Nikon is a good throw around and carry camera but don't compare
to the E-20

Robert Glass

Also never seen a camera focus as slow as Nikon...In trying to get
marco shots of insects the insects die of old age before it focus
or they
fly away

Are you sure the insect is flying off ? Or you just think so by the sound of the zoom lens ? Pretty close match, I always said the 5000s lens sounded like a kids wind up toy running ! I owned the 5000 before my E10 and the sound of the lens alone, not to mention focus speed and focus quirks were enough to turn me off. But the real clinker was the top jpeg having 1:8 compression and layers of menus to work through.

THey say the 5700 is improved from the 5000, but I still read of these complaints at the NIkon forum .
David

 

[Adam-T]

You'd have been better off getting a C2100UZ as a "throwaround" - 10X, Image stabilization and very cheap in the USA.. if you can find one that is.. No silly "extend-a-lens" and it works with the E20s FL40 better than the 5700 works with Nikon Speedlites..

Its quality fart exceeds it's 2mp and the fun far exceeds almost anything bar an E100RS ;-)

--
Olympus C2100UZI +B300, E10, Canon D60.

My Ugly mug and submitted Photos at -------->
http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=27855

 

[rglass]

already have two uzi's and your right they do exceed there 2meg
quailty....well I really have only one my wife took one and want give
it back

 

[Terry Thorn]

I bought it for its size and zoom...I made myself use it for three
weeks
without touching my E-20...I got my E-20 out yesterday and I have
never
missed a camera so much..there is on comparison at all...The
viewfinder
alone is worth the differance in price and image out of E-20 is
superior also

The Nikon is a good throw around and carry camera but don't compare
to the E-20

Robert Glass

Also never seen a camera focus as slow as Nikon...In trying to get
marco shots of insects the insects die of old age before it focus
or they
fly away

AMEN! That's EXACTLY what happened to me. I bought one of those 5700s and found the same things you did. I like EVFs but I just couldn't hack the slow operation of that camera. I missed out on some great bee shots last weekend because the camera was just too slow. To get it to focus more quickly and reliably, you have to turn off the focus area but then you have no reference marks at all. It seems though that the 5700 is enjoying the same popularity on the Nikon forum that befell the 2100 and anything negative said there about it is quickly challenged.

 

[Terry Thorn]

R, does it have pc cord connection? Jono slack bought one also.. No
delare here has one yet

regards..

No, it doesn't have a pc connection point. You have to buy their hot shoe adapter.

 

[Terry Thorn]

already have two uzi's and your right they do exceed there 2meg
quailty....well I really have only one my wife took one and want give
it back

I got an UZI for my wife last Christmas and now she's eyeing my E-10! I think I've created a monster.

 

[Glenn A]

I bought it for its size and zoom...I made myself use it for three
weeks
without touching my E-20...I got my E-20 out yesterday and I have
never
missed a camera so much..there is on comparison at all...The
viewfinder
alone is worth the differance in price and image out of E-20 is
superior also

The Nikon is a good throw around and carry camera but don't compare
to the E-20

Robert Glass

Also never seen a camera focus as slow as Nikon...In trying to get
marco shots of insects the insects die of old age before it focus
or they
fly away

The 5700 is a VW beetle. The E-20 is a Cadillac. There is no comparison.

Glenn A

 

[David M.]

Surprising thread.

I have never played with a 5700 but I've seen numerous posts on here, from the likes of Jason Busch even!! To wit:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=2979348

Now this!!
I am so disappointed and dismayed!!
(The previous sentence is not intended for the ironically challenged).

From the very introduction of that cam, I could tell by a short perusal of the specs that it could never hold a candle to the Exx. It was difficult enough just to get past the fact it uses an EVF over a TTL VF (which is my main concern with the Minolta D7i). At the very least, I'd think for an Exx owner to buy one would be a serious downgrade, unless you are just flummoxed by a real camera and in need of only point and shoot operation as Teri & Tyler were.

It looks like a decent cam otherwise, but no match for a real DSLR (which I don't consider the 5700 to be so). Why, with all these drawbacks including a slow AF, Phil would bother giving it a "highly recommended" rating in this day and age of much better cams with similar pricing I have no clue whatsoever except to theorize that he has a serious Nikon bias.

Still looks like only the higher-end DSLR's continue to be the only real competition to the Exx, and that's after you get the needed glass and spend about a grand or two more.

So if and when Oly does decide to introduce a new and better model I still think they'll have the market by the ......err, well, you know.
D.

I bought it for its size and zoom...I made myself use it for three
weeks
without touching my E-20...I got my E-20 out yesterday and I have
never
missed a camera so much..there is on comparison at all...The
viewfinder
alone is worth the differance in price and image out of E-20 is
superior also

The Nikon is a good throw around and carry camera but don't compare
to the E-20

Robert Glass

Also never seen a camera focus as slow as Nikon...In trying to get
marco shots of insects the insects die of old age before it focus
or they
fly away

The 5700 is a VW beetle. The E-20 is a Cadillac. There is no
comparison.

Glenn A

 

[Jim K53618]

I bought it for its size and zoom...I made myself use it for three
weeks
without touching my E-20...I got my E-20 out yesterday and I have
never
missed a camera so much..there is on comparison at all...The
viewfinder
alone is worth the differance in price and image out of E-20 is
superior also

The Nikon is a good throw around and carry camera but don't compare
to the E-20

Robert Glass

Also never seen a camera focus as slow as Nikon...In trying to get
marco shots of insects the insects die of old age before it focus
or they
fly away

Pretty funny! I have a CP5700 too, and I agree the AF speed is up there with paint drying & insects dying in low contrast or low light. However in bright sunny days it is a lot of fun to use, and where I disagree with you is the image quality is simply excellent, but the resolution is indeed just below the E20. I bought the 5700 for it's size and weight. I don't regret it, but if that was my only camera I might. I took 1000 pictures with it the first week, after that I'm back to using my F707, UZI, and yes, even my trusty old E20!

Regards!
Jim K

--
Every Camera Has Short Comings,
some camera's fall short of coming!

 

[Jim K53618]

It looks like a decent cam otherwise, but no match for a real DSLR
(which I don't consider the 5700 to be so). Why, with all these
drawbacks including a slow AF, Phil would bother giving it a
"highly recommended" rating in this day and age of much better cams
with similar pricing I have no clue whatsoever except to theorize
that he has a serious Nikon bias.

I've NEVER heard Phil being accused of being Nikon Biased. The first camera he ever reviewed was the Pro70 and ever since he has from time to time been accused of being Canon Biased. Any way, if you ignor all of Phil's ratings and final recomendations, and just go by his actual reviews, there you will find all the information you need. He gives excellent reviews, but confuses everything by his conclusions and recomendations. I have been following Phil's reviews very closely for the past year and a half. I was expecting Phil to be a lot more critical of the 5700 then he was. I can only assume he is trying to appear as nonbiased as possible. He was very critical of the CP5000, and took a lot of heat over his D100 review. Perhaps he was trying to show he really does not have anything against Nikon. Phil is way too serious in his work to let such things slide by so easily, so there must be a reason.

The E20N should have been HIGHLY RECOMENDED, and IMHO the 5700, and the D7i should have only been Recomended, not just because that's what I think, but going by Phil's reviews that's what they deserve! But I think we should cut Phil some slack, he's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. Just read the reviews and skip the conclusions and you will get all the right information ; )

Kindest Regards!
Jim K
--
Every Camera Has Short Comings,
some camera's fall short of coming!

 

[David M.]

Fair enough Jim, and thankyou for the feedback.

What I really don't get about Phil's review conclusion is that, in my opinion, the 5700 has all the same reasons to get only a "recommended" conclusion today that he gave the E20 one when he did. And even more so actually. When the E20 came out, of course it had competition and it was high on the price end, but no other cam besides it's bro, the E10, could come close to it IN IT'S CLASS. Now, practically every cam out there in it's class is serious competition to the 5700, including the D7i, but the cam gets a "highly recommended" anyway. Go figure.

I know you said to ignore the conclusion and stick to the meat of his reviews, but then how in the world does he justify his final conclusions then? And why are they not consistent?

I do know that in most reviews, I wish that cost would not be a factor. If a product is clearly superior to it's competition, then I'll be interested, period, unless it's GROSSLY overpriced. This was not the case completely with the E20, but clearly Phil declined to give it a highly recommended primarily because of it's original asking price. Now, almost a year later, the E20 still stands alone practically in it's class, and is hundreds cheaper. I also noticed with dismay that the original E10 was compared to the likes of the Canon D30......a good comparison. But Phil opted instead with the E20 to compare it to lesser cams such as the Sony F707. Go figure again. What was the reasoning for comparing a DSLR to a non-DSLR? Megapixels? Got me.

I am not trying to slam Phil's reviews. I think he does one of the finest jobs on the net. And perhaps the 5700 deserves it's recommendation, for it's class (certainly not it's price point). But the reality check says that the only real review of any cam is the one you do for yourself. This thread and preceding ones regarding the 5700 bear this out succinctly.
Thankyou for your time and take care,
D.

It looks like a decent cam otherwise, but no match for a real DSLR
(which I don't consider the 5700 to be so). Why, with all these
drawbacks including a slow AF, Phil would bother giving it a
"highly recommended" rating in this day and age of much better cams
with similar pricing I have no clue whatsoever except to theorize
that he has a serious Nikon bias.

I've NEVER heard Phil being accused of being Nikon Biased. The
first camera he ever reviewed was the Pro70 and ever since he has
from time to time been accused of being Canon Biased. Any way, if
you ignor all of Phil's ratings and final recomendations, and just
go by his actual reviews, there you will find all the information
you need. He gives excellent reviews, but confuses everything by
his conclusions and recomendations. I have been following Phil's
reviews very closely for the past year and a half. I was expecting
Phil to be a lot more critical of the 5700 then he was. I can only
assume he is trying to appear as nonbiased as possible. He was very
critical of the CP5000, and took a lot of heat over his D100
review. Perhaps he was trying to show he really does not have
anything against Nikon. Phil is way too serious in his work to let
such things slide by so easily, so there must be a reason.

The E20N should have been HIGHLY RECOMENDED, and IMHO the 5700, and
the D7i should have only been Recomended, not just because that's
what I think, but going by Phil's reviews that's what they deserve!
But I think we should cut Phil some slack, he's damned if he does
and damned if he doesn't. Just read the reviews and skip the
conclusions and you will get all the right information ; )

Kindest Regards!
Jim K
--
Every Camera Has Short Comings,
some camera's fall short of coming!

 

[Bernie Ess]

after that I'm back to using my F707, UZI, and yes, even my trusty
old E20!

Jim - or everyone else - this one interests me. I have noticed on photosig and other sites, that ´many excellent photos are being made with the E-10/20, however the dpreview tests seem to show that resolutionwise the F707 seems to be a more capable camera.
Can you say what you think about it´?

I intend to upgrade my Cann G1 after photokina, and I am thinking about the Sony F707 (successor) or an Olympus.

Greetings Bernie

 

[Beth]

Hey Glenn,
Watch out! I own a VW Beetle.

Beth

I bought it for its size and zoom...I made myself use it for three
weeks
without touching my E-20...I got my E-20 out yesterday and I have
never
missed a camera so much..there is on comparison at all...The
viewfinder
alone is worth the differance in price and image out of E-20 is
superior also

The Nikon is a good throw around and carry camera but don't compare
to the E-20

Robert Glass

Also never seen a camera focus as slow as Nikon...In trying to get
marco shots of insects the insects die of old age before it focus
or they
fly away

The 5700 is a VW beetle. The E-20 is a Cadillac. There is no
comparison.

Glenn A

--
Olympus E-10, TCON, MCON, WCON and Fl-40
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/galleries/cokids

 

[David M.]

Well, it seems rather subjective since the Minolta D7, Sony F707 and the Oly E20 ALL use the same Sony sensor!!
Go figure.
I find the Sony over-saturated due to the way it in-house processes it's files.
The Minolta D7i is a great camera with horrible ergonomics and a lousy EVF.

The E20 is slow and heavy, but IMHO produces the best images, in as far that they are well balanced with a much wider color gamut to play in.

All three have highlights and drawbacks. The only real way to tell is to hold each in your hand and judge for yourself.
But again, IMHO, the Sony is not in the same class as the Oly. Not even close.
D.

after that I'm back to using my F707, UZI, and yes, even my trusty
old E20!

Jim - or everyone else - this one interests me. I have noticed on
photosig and other sites, that ´many excellent photos are being
made with the E-10/20, however the dpreview tests seem to show that
resolutionwise the F707 seems to be a more capable camera.
Can you say what you think about it´?
I intend to upgrade my Cann G1 after photokina, and I am thinking
about the Sony F707 (successor) or an Olympus.

Greetings Bernie

 

[David Grabowski]

after that I'm back to using my F707, UZI, and yes, even my trusty
old E20!

Jim - or everyone else - this one interests me. I have noticed on
photosig and other sites, that ´many excellent photos are being
made with the E-10/20, however the dpreview tests seem to show that
resolutionwise the F707 seems to be a more capable camera.
Can you say what you think about it´?
I intend to upgrade my Cann G1 after photokina, and I am thinking
about the Sony F707 (successor) or an Olympus.

Greetings Bernie

I owned the 707 for a short time. My experience with it was that in terms of pure resolution and in terms of focus, yes it was good. IMO, that's where the fun ended: everything is Sony proprietary, from memory to the flash you are required to use, to power. Work arounds for other brands of flash were very clunky. Regarding color, the colors were as far off as you could get from what you may have expected ( not neutral as with the Exx cameras) and to top off the fact that Sony really likes to punch up reds in an un-natural way, mine also had a slight blue bias. Manual color balancing always produced good subject results though, but everything else would then be out. The short story? Strange rig all around IMO. The Nikon 5000 was better in this regard, but can't hold a candle to the color balance of the Exx cameras.

There is more than just resolution to a camera,and actually if you really look at the test charts, one camera in a given class is not so far off from the other anyway. Remember nobody really magnifies in print what the charts and test clips show.

David

 

[Jim K53618]

Fair enough Jim, and thankyou for the feedback.
What I really don't get about Phil's review conclusion is that, in
my opinion, the 5700 has all the same reasons to get only a
"recommended" conclusion today that he gave the E20 one when he
did. And even more so actually. When the E20 came out, of course
it had competition and it was high on the price end, but no other
cam besides it's bro, the E10, could come close to it IN IT'S
CLASS. Now, practically every cam out there in it's class is
serious competition to the 5700, including the D7i, but the cam
gets a "highly recommended" anyway. Go figure.
I know you said to ignore the conclusion and stick to the meat of
his reviews, but then how in the world does he justify his final
conclusions then? And why are they not consistent?
I do know that in most reviews, I wish that cost would not be a
factor. If a product is clearly superior to it's competition, then
I'll be interested, period, unless it's GROSSLY overpriced. This
was not the case completely with the E20, but clearly Phil declined
to give it a highly recommended primarily because of it's original
asking price. Now, almost a year later, the E20 still stands alone
practically in it's class, and is hundreds cheaper. I also noticed
with dismay that the original E10 was compared to the likes of the
Canon D30......a good comparison. But Phil opted instead with the
E20 to compare it to lesser cams such as the Sony F707. Go figure
again. What was the reasoning for comparing a DSLR to a non-DSLR?
Megapixels? Got me.
I am not trying to slam Phil's reviews. I think he does one of the
finest jobs on the net. And perhaps the 5700 deserves it's
recommendation, for it's class (certainly not it's price point).
But the reality check says that the only real review of any cam is
the one you do for yourself. This thread and preceding ones
regarding the 5700 bear this out succinctly.
Thankyou for your time and take care,
D.

There is absolutely no (sane) consistency in Phil's neat ratings or final recomendations. I have tried in vain to find any, some thread of consistancy. His ratings and final conclusions can only be compared to the mystery of the Holy Trinity, where else can you get 1 + 1 + 1 = 1? Only in Phyl's final conclusions ; )

If you go by Phil's own review results you can clearly see the E20N deserved a Highly Recomended! But he has always been very critical of the Exx, despite their above average test results. As far as value for money, I don't need Phil to decide that for me. After all who can really say what is a good value for the money? In any rate if I wanted such useless information I could get it from Consumer Reports, who at least follows some form of consistency. I am still scratching my head trying to figure out how the 7i with below average test results, lowest res of any 5MP camera, scores a Highly Recomended, and the E20n, which did above average test results, showed above average resolution, and to this day holds it's own, and even edges out the 5700 in resolution only scored a Recomended? The F707 I totally agree with Phil on, and is a rare example of actually matching all the test results to consistant ratings and a final rating, so I know he can do it!

Phil's a great guy, and great reviewer, but one thing I have noticed in my now almost 2 years reading his excellent pages, he has NEVER admited being wrong : )

But like I said, if you totally ignor his conclusions and ratings and final recoemndation and read his review, there he really shines, and you WILL see everything you need to know!

Kindest Regards!
Jim K

It looks like a decent cam otherwise, but no match for a real DSLR
(which I don't consider the 5700 to be so). Why, with all these
drawbacks including a slow AF, Phil would bother giving it a
"highly recommended" rating in this day and age of much better cams
with similar pricing I have no clue whatsoever except to theorize
that he has a serious Nikon bias.

I've NEVER heard Phil being accused of being Nikon Biased. The
first camera he ever reviewed was the Pro70 and ever since he has
from time to time been accused of being Canon Biased. Any way, if
you ignor all of Phil's ratings and final recomendations, and just
go by his actual reviews, there you will find all the information
you need. He gives excellent reviews, but confuses everything by
his conclusions and recomendations. I have been following Phil's
reviews very closely for the past year and a half. I was expecting
Phil to be a lot more critical of the 5700 then he was. I can only
assume he is trying to appear as nonbiased as possible. He was very
critical of the CP5000, and took a lot of heat over his D100
review. Perhaps he was trying to show he really does not have
anything against Nikon. Phil is way too serious in his work to let
such things slide by so easily, so there must be a reason.

The E20N should have been HIGHLY RECOMENDED, and IMHO the 5700, and
the D7i should have only been Recomended, not just because that's
what I think, but going by Phil's reviews that's what they deserve!
But I think we should cut Phil some slack, he's damned if he does
and damned if he doesn't. Just read the reviews and skip the
conclusions and you will get all the right information ; )

Kindest Regards!
Jim K
--
Every Camera Has Short Comings,
some camera's fall short of coming!

--
Every Camera Has Short Comings,
some camera's fall short of coming!

 

[Jim K53618]

after that I'm back to using my F707, UZI, and yes, even my trusty
old E20!

Jim - or everyone else - this one interests me. I have noticed on
photosig and other sites, that ´many excellent photos are being
made with the E-10/20, however the dpreview tests seem to show that
resolutionwise the F707 seems to be a more capable camera.
Can you say what you think about it´?
I intend to upgrade my Cann G1 after photokina, and I am thinking
about the Sony F707 (successor) or an Olympus.

Greetings Bernie

Hi Bernie!

Make no mistake about understanding the F707 is a seriously superior camera! In addition to it's excellent image quality, it is still the resolution Champ! As for it's so called over saturated colors, that is purely subjective and I personally have no problems with it's color. About the only weakness I see with the F707 is it desperately needs a histogram and thumnail reviews. It would be nice to have a saturation control just to silence the saturation critics. I am very interested in the 717 announcement to come shortly! I do not mind the Sony MS. At $55 for a 128MB MS, it's just as cheap as CF, and MS will of course be increasing its storage size soon any way. It's MS was never a issue for me, and neither is it's battery which gets 4+ freaking hours of heavy usage!

The E20N is a different animal all together and I have nothing but the highest respect and honors for it. IMHO it closely matches the film like continous tones and range as the D30/60!!! With resolution that is clearly above average, a fast lens, and all the trappings of a conventional 35mm and mediem format camera, it's no wonder that it's still a favorite for many professionals and serious amateurs! It's only weakness is the limited shutter speeds, forget about Interlace scans, which is next to useless, and despite of it's next to ZERO shutter lag, it's write sppeds are slow, and it desperately needs a larger buffer.

As much as I love this two cameras, I would suggest waiting until the next Photokina. By then we will know what the F717 features will be and if there is a Kodak/Oly, and what ever else there may be : )

Kindest Regards!
Jim K

--
Every Camera Has Short Comings,
some camera's fall short of coming!

 

[Bernie Ess]

As much as I love this two cameras, I would suggest waiting until
the next Photokina. By then we will know what the F717 features
will be and if there is a Kodak/Oly, and what ever else there may
be : )

Thanks to all three of you - everyone has his or her preferencies, and yes indeed I´m waiting for the photokina show here in Germany in 4 weeks, then there might be a different perspective of which choice to make.

One problem about the OLY E20 BTW is the price tag, its the most expensive, clearly more than even the 5700 here, but the photos I have seen are great.

regards, Bernie