i currently have been using a Sony p7 and have always used sony's. Now I have been into shooting aquaria which requires mainly macro shots. I just recently borrowed my friends 995 and was amazed by its macro ability. So now I am on the coolpix wagon. I love the size of my sony so thought maybe I could just get rid of teh sony and get a all around camera..so was thinking of the 5000, 5400, or 5700 series since its not an odd shape like the 995 and 4500. So I ask what would be my best bet. I can get a 995 for a super cheap price and then keep my sony, or get a 5000 + series and just have one camera. I see that the 5000 is getting better reviews then the 5400 but not sure about the 5700.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
5000,5400,5700,4500,995..Macro...All around camera?
- Thread starter evanb
- Start date
Jiri Cvrk
Leading Member
I like my 5000 (some macros are on my web), and I can advise this camera. Sometimes I use TC-E2 for macro (for greater insects) .
5700 imo has not so good frame coverage (dtto Oly 5050, and Sony 717, and Fuji S602z). But you can use longer focus and close up lens.
--
http://cvrk.com
5700 imo has not so good frame coverage (dtto Oly 5050, and Sony 717, and Fuji S602z). But you can use longer focus and close up lens.
Jiri Cvrk
--
http://cvrk.com
The best macro cameras are the swivel body Nikons, 990, 995, 4500. They do other things, too, but for macro can't be beat. I thought the swivel odd the first time I saw one, but after owning and using one for several years, I can't think of using any other design. That swivel gets the shots and I don't have to do my snake imitation (ie, lying prone on the ground) to get them.
http://www.pbase.com/baywing
--
http://www.pbase.com/baywing
So now Ijust need to decide..do I spend $500 and get a 4500, or spend $200 and gte a 995..I just don't like teh idea of buying a discontinued camera even though its a great deal...no rechargeable batteries for the 995 also..
TheeBadOne
Forum Enthusiast
--
Even the strongest oak must bend to the winds of fate.
Backdoctor
Forum Pro
The 5700 has a flip lcd screen and will prevent contortions too. This is like which flavor ice cream do you like. If it's Hagen Daz, who cares, they all have their good points.
Harris
Harris
Cp5700, N6006
Pbase Supporter
http://www.pbase.com/backdoctor
Harris
--
Harris
Cp5700, N6006
Pbase Supporter
http://www.pbase.com/backdoctor
Abbott Schindler
New member
- Messages
- 0
- Reaction score
- 0
I'd suggest that you look beyond macro to make a decision. As far as I know, the CP9xx, 4xxx, and 5xxx families all do excellent macros. A couple of considerations:
1. Do you really mean macro, or do you mean focus close to the subject? It seems to me that camera manufacturers are doing a bit of misleading here. Close focus (what many advertise as "macro") is the ability to get the camera right up to your subject. Macro photography refers to filling the frame with less of the subject, ie magnification ratio. These two concepts are not necessarily linked. A classic 35mm example: I had both the 60mm and 105 mm Micro Nikkors (Nikon also makes a 200mm). Both could product an image on film that was 1/2 the size of the subject (1:2 ratio), and you could add an extension ring to get to 1:1 ratio. The lens choice depended on the perspective and lighting you wanted to create and the available light (and the giddiness of the subject).
If you want the ability to get really really close to your subject, then go with one of the swivel bodies (I've got a 990). On the other hand, if you're interested in the magnification ratio, I've found the 5700 will give 1:1 images if you're careful, and the longer focal length possible seems to let me get a bit farther from the subject...ergo, more light is available for the image. With a 5 Megapixel image I can crop bunches and improve the final magnification ratio.
2. What are you going to do beside macro? If you're looking for nature or other images that require telephoto work, you'll want the 5700. The lens on it exceeds the focal length of the swivel bodies + 2X teleconverter, and it's much easier to use for tele shots.
3. On the other hand, if you plan to do a lot of close-in work, the 995 or 4500 is a better choice because there are wide angle accessories that give them very nice short focal lengths...and even fisheye (5000/5400 don't have as many wide angle choices).
4. For portrait work, either type will do as typical portrait focal lengths are within their built-in range.
5. 995 vs 4500/5xxx: How much are you going to crop/enlarge? If you're just going 8x10 from a full frame, any of these will be fine. If you plan to go larger, or you're going to crop the image, you'll want one of the 5xxx series to preserve reasonable detail in the print.
6. Are you doing much vertical composition? If so, I think the 5700 with the MB-E5700 is hard to beat...but that comes at a big price. I use this combination and it's amazing. Plus it lets you use regular AA batteries and lets you change batteries without removing the camera from a tripod (if you're using one).
7. Do you care about chromatic aberration (purple fringing, etc.)? The 9xx cameras have much more of this than the 4500 and 5xxx cameras...and it's readily noticeable. Same with white balance: the white balance and saturation seem much improved in the newer cameras.
There are other factors as well, but these are some of what I'd consider the most important decision starting points.
If it's any help, I've got a 990 and a 5700/MB-E5700. There seem to be a lot of readers on this forum who have 5000 and 5700. I've only shot several hundred pics with the 5700 so far, but it's definitely a winner once you figure out how to control it (this is NOT you're everyday point and shoot gadget, but it's pretty easy to use with a little experience). I carry the 990 for those extreme wide angles, and also for extremely distant subjects (I rigged a shoulder pod setup with the 990 and a 15X binocular...but that's another story)
There's no such thing as a single camera that does everything: it's all about tradeoffs. Maybe you could bring a Compact Flash card to a local dealer and shoot some pics with a 4500, 5400 and 5700. Get the feel of the camera and what its focal lengths will do, then go to a computer and have a look at the results.
Side story: I actually did this. I brought my 990 to a camera store and shot side by side pics with it and a 5700. The difference was like night and day. The 5700 focused on subjects the 990 couldn't. Color balance on the 5700 was almost perfect, but the 990 missed. Detail and sharpness (Photoshop at 100%) was noticeably better on the 5700. My wife and I couldn't believe the difference. But I had no idea about it till those pictures: reading this forum and reviews helped, but there's nothing like the real thing.
There's my long-winded advice. I hope it helps.
Abbott
1. Do you really mean macro, or do you mean focus close to the subject? It seems to me that camera manufacturers are doing a bit of misleading here. Close focus (what many advertise as "macro") is the ability to get the camera right up to your subject. Macro photography refers to filling the frame with less of the subject, ie magnification ratio. These two concepts are not necessarily linked. A classic 35mm example: I had both the 60mm and 105 mm Micro Nikkors (Nikon also makes a 200mm). Both could product an image on film that was 1/2 the size of the subject (1:2 ratio), and you could add an extension ring to get to 1:1 ratio. The lens choice depended on the perspective and lighting you wanted to create and the available light (and the giddiness of the subject).
If you want the ability to get really really close to your subject, then go with one of the swivel bodies (I've got a 990). On the other hand, if you're interested in the magnification ratio, I've found the 5700 will give 1:1 images if you're careful, and the longer focal length possible seems to let me get a bit farther from the subject...ergo, more light is available for the image. With a 5 Megapixel image I can crop bunches and improve the final magnification ratio.
2. What are you going to do beside macro? If you're looking for nature or other images that require telephoto work, you'll want the 5700. The lens on it exceeds the focal length of the swivel bodies + 2X teleconverter, and it's much easier to use for tele shots.
3. On the other hand, if you plan to do a lot of close-in work, the 995 or 4500 is a better choice because there are wide angle accessories that give them very nice short focal lengths...and even fisheye (5000/5400 don't have as many wide angle choices).
4. For portrait work, either type will do as typical portrait focal lengths are within their built-in range.
5. 995 vs 4500/5xxx: How much are you going to crop/enlarge? If you're just going 8x10 from a full frame, any of these will be fine. If you plan to go larger, or you're going to crop the image, you'll want one of the 5xxx series to preserve reasonable detail in the print.
6. Are you doing much vertical composition? If so, I think the 5700 with the MB-E5700 is hard to beat...but that comes at a big price. I use this combination and it's amazing. Plus it lets you use regular AA batteries and lets you change batteries without removing the camera from a tripod (if you're using one).
7. Do you care about chromatic aberration (purple fringing, etc.)? The 9xx cameras have much more of this than the 4500 and 5xxx cameras...and it's readily noticeable. Same with white balance: the white balance and saturation seem much improved in the newer cameras.
There are other factors as well, but these are some of what I'd consider the most important decision starting points.
If it's any help, I've got a 990 and a 5700/MB-E5700. There seem to be a lot of readers on this forum who have 5000 and 5700. I've only shot several hundred pics with the 5700 so far, but it's definitely a winner once you figure out how to control it (this is NOT you're everyday point and shoot gadget, but it's pretty easy to use with a little experience). I carry the 990 for those extreme wide angles, and also for extremely distant subjects (I rigged a shoulder pod setup with the 990 and a 15X binocular...but that's another story)
There's no such thing as a single camera that does everything: it's all about tradeoffs. Maybe you could bring a Compact Flash card to a local dealer and shoot some pics with a 4500, 5400 and 5700. Get the feel of the camera and what its focal lengths will do, then go to a computer and have a look at the results.
Side story: I actually did this. I brought my 990 to a camera store and shot side by side pics with it and a 5700. The difference was like night and day. The 5700 focused on subjects the 990 couldn't. Color balance on the 5700 was almost perfect, but the 990 missed. Detail and sharpness (Photoshop at 100%) was noticeably better on the 5700. My wife and I couldn't believe the difference. But I had no idea about it till those pictures: reading this forum and reviews helped, but there's nothing like the real thing.
There's my long-winded advice. I hope it helps.
Abbott
G
gene
Guest
In the hand, the 5x00 with the flip LCD is still prone to contortions.
You can rotate the LCD so your body/head doesn't contort, but your wrist still has too - If you still want a firm grip on the camera...
--
8008s/MF21/SB24 - Film setup
CP950 - Stolen
CP990 - Command Wheel iffy
CP5700 - Newest
P
Peter iNova
Guest
My preference is to work with those "odd shaped" cameras. And I have 995/4500/5000/5700 to draw that experience from. With the flip out screens, operating it is an extra, meaning time consuming, step. With the 4500, the access to screen viewing optimization is instant, fast, convenient and ready to go.
Your characterization of them as "odd" is funny. Clearly you don't know what you've been missing. Work with one for a while and you will wonder why Nikon isn't planning more split body cameras. I tend to think of the standard rangefinder layout not as "odd" but more like "antique."
-iNova
--
http://www.digitalsecrets.net
Abbott Schindler
New member
- Messages
- 0
- Reaction score
- 0
I agree with Peter, with just one exception (which is what drove me to the 5700).
I love shooting macros and closeups of flowers and other things near the ground. I also like vertically composed images. Lately I've been doing a lot of shooting in cactus fields, ant fields, and gravel areas. Not the nicest things to stretch out in!
Then I realized: If only I had a finder that would let me hold the camera vertically AND stand above it (safely out of the nasties). Sort of like my vertical viewfinders on my old Nikon SLRs. The swivel body CPs don't accommodate this. The pivoting LCD 5xxx series does. And the 5700/MB-E combination actually encourages this sort of composition. And the more I use the 5700, the less I find myself missing the 990's swivel. I never thought that would happen, but it has. Also, maybe I'm not bothered by the LCD on the 5700 because I usually use the EVF, which is pretty wonderful. I only use the LCD when I'm holding the camera over my head or for those nice flowers and bugs.
So, odd little swivel or twisty LCD or both: you might want to focus on how the camera would work for you rather than its odd features. Every camera has odd features, and they're usually there for a good reason. For a while it looked like Nikon was moving away from the swivel, but I get the impression that overwhelming demand encouraged them to come out with the 4500.
I love shooting macros and closeups of flowers and other things near the ground. I also like vertically composed images. Lately I've been doing a lot of shooting in cactus fields, ant fields, and gravel areas. Not the nicest things to stretch out in!
Then I realized: If only I had a finder that would let me hold the camera vertically AND stand above it (safely out of the nasties). Sort of like my vertical viewfinders on my old Nikon SLRs. The swivel body CPs don't accommodate this. The pivoting LCD 5xxx series does. And the 5700/MB-E combination actually encourages this sort of composition. And the more I use the 5700, the less I find myself missing the 990's swivel. I never thought that would happen, but it has. Also, maybe I'm not bothered by the LCD on the 5700 because I usually use the EVF, which is pretty wonderful. I only use the LCD when I'm holding the camera over my head or for those nice flowers and bugs.
So, odd little swivel or twisty LCD or both: you might want to focus on how the camera would work for you rather than its odd features. Every camera has odd features, and they're usually there for a good reason. For a while it looked like Nikon was moving away from the swivel, but I get the impression that overwhelming demand encouraged them to come out with the 4500.
Abbott Schindler
New member
- Messages
- 0
- Reaction score
- 0
Unless learn to release the shutter with your thumb and you have the MB-E5700. Don't laugh: releasing with your thumb is actually comfortable once you get used to the different position, and it lets you hold the camera steady. The MB-E provides the vertical grip and shutter release.
I spent an hour last night shooting cactus flowers after a rain with just this technique (I invented it last night). I was getting frustrated: There was no way to get my face anywhere near the camera, so I had to hold it low while crouching and figure out how to release the shutter without killing myself and while holding the camera steady. Fumbling around, my thumb landed on the shutter release and suddenly I had the answer. My hand was comfortable, the camera was stable, and the image was properly composed. And my eyes didn't get poked by the surrounding brush, my hands weren't pricked by cactus spines, and my knees weren't bunged up on the rocks.
You'll always find subjects that will make you contort: working through the contortions is half the fun.
Abbott
I spent an hour last night shooting cactus flowers after a rain with just this technique (I invented it last night). I was getting frustrated: There was no way to get my face anywhere near the camera, so I had to hold it low while crouching and figure out how to release the shutter without killing myself and while holding the camera steady. Fumbling around, my thumb landed on the shutter release and suddenly I had the answer. My hand was comfortable, the camera was stable, and the image was properly composed. And my eyes didn't get poked by the surrounding brush, my hands weren't pricked by cactus spines, and my knees weren't bunged up on the rocks.
You'll always find subjects that will make you contort: working through the contortions is half the fun.
Abbott
Donald W Horner
Active member
You can buy rechargeable batteries for the 995 at the following web site along with a battery charger.
http://www.sterlingtek.com/nikcool880en.html
I have often wondered why some people are so concerned about the length of time a barrery will last. I carry three of the batteries mentioned on the web site and have no problem recharging them at night. I use the monitor screen all the time and useally get about 75 photos per battery useage.
If I am missing something in feeling the way I do, I hope someone could give me some information about battery life that I am missing. I take from 75 to 150 photos when I go to a flower garden and throw away the photos that I do not like.
--
D W Horner
Jiri Cvrk
Leading Member
Hello,
my typical challenge from last time looks like
this picture is taken with Nikon E5000 TC-E2 attached from 25cm distance.
I like macro very much and sometimes I am doing nothing else
).
I think that it is impossible to photograph anaxes from 2cm). I often use this 2cm macro for flowers and smaller insects, and I think I need such macro too.
My question is, which of the here named cameras are the best for such shots?
Is E5000 good camera for such work or can I have better results with another (E5700) e_a_s_i_e_r ?
Thank you for reply.
Jiri Cvrk
--
http://cvrk.com
my typical challenge from last time looks like
this picture is taken with Nikon E5000 TC-E2 attached from 25cm distance.
I like macro very much and sometimes I am doing nothing else
).I think that it is impossible to photograph anaxes from 2cm
). I often use this 2cm macro for flowers and smaller insects, and I think I need such macro too.My question is, which of the here named cameras are the best for such shots?
Is E5000 good camera for such work or can I have better results with another (E5700) e_a_s_i_e_r ?
Thank you for reply.
Jiri Cvrk
--
http://cvrk.com
David Chin
Forum Pro
--
this picture is taken with Nikon E5000 TC-E2 attached from 25cm
distance.
I like macro very much and sometimes I am doing nothing else
I think that it is impossible to photograph anaxes from 2cm
often use this 2cm macro for flowers and smaller insects, and I
think I need such macro too.
My question is, which of the here named cameras are the best for
such shots?
Is E5000 good camera for such work or can I have better results
with another (E5700) e_a_s_i_e_r ?
Thank you for reply.
Jiri Cvrk
--
http://cvrk.com
Rgds,
David
C o o l p i x 4 5 0 0
~ Out-of-the camera series: http://www.pbase.com/dlcmh/outofthecamera
~ Fantastic Majeske's 4 5 0 0 gallery: http://www.pbase.com/ryenke/coolpix_4500
~ THE post that convinced me to buy the 4 5 0 0: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1007&message=3087176
My mine use will be for macro aquarium shots, these shots since being shot through glass will usually keep the objects anywhere from 2" to 6". Also lighting can be an issues, since the aquarium has bright lighting, and a flash can cause reflections...
5000 has the same wide angle choices as the 9xx, plus it has the 19mm.
--
http://www.pbase.com/ken_5
If you can get a Nikon 995 and its in good condition, I would jump at the chance. Despite some faults (what camera doesnt have them?) its still and excellent camera. Where would you buy the 995? Local dealer, local seller, or online vendor?
$200 is a good price.
Uncle Frank
Forum Pro
Very generous of you to write such a comprehensive post, Abbott. I agree with most of your conclusions, but need to nitpick one factual error:
My 5700 is due to arrive tomorrow, and I can barely wait. My 995 is wonderful, but it's strengths have influenced my photography towards macros and close ups. I think the 5700 will be a great general purpose camera, which will allow me to expand my perspectives. But I've decided not to part with my 995. It just fits my hand too well to let go of it
.
--
Warm regards,
Uncle Frank, FCAS Charter Member, Hummingbird Hunter
Coolpix fifty seven hundred due to arrive Friday - can't wait!
http://www.pbase.com/unclefrank/cp995&page=all
I think you were making that observation based on your 990, which is only a 3X zoom. The 995 + tc-e2 combo yields 304mm.
My 5700 is due to arrive tomorrow, and I can barely wait. My 995 is wonderful, but it's strengths have influenced my photography towards macros and close ups. I think the 5700 will be a great general purpose camera, which will allow me to expand my perspectives. But I've decided not to part with my 995. It just fits my hand too well to let go of it
. --
Warm regards,
Uncle Frank, FCAS Charter Member, Hummingbird Hunter
Coolpix fifty seven hundred due to arrive Friday - can't wait!
http://www.pbase.com/unclefrank/cp995&page=all
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum