«

Hi, All!

I'm in love with my 6 month-old Nikon Coolpix 5700 when
shooting my favorite subject - car pictures - in daylight.
I am completely dissasified with its flash performance not
only with the puny Speedlight but also with the excellent
Sunpak 433D Nikon-compatible external. I don't need to
belabor that here, suffice to say the 5700 is going on
eBay and I'm in the market for a new camera.

I really do not want a DSLR, of any make or model. There's
lots of reasons for this but size, weight, and the lack of
an Electronic View Finder are all show stoppers for me.

The 5700's 5 mega pixels is more than enough, but I'm
looking at the 8800 because it has a brand new flash
system (apparently)called iTTL. And, this time, I'm not
gonna be penny wise and dollar fooling - I'm gonna buy
Nikon's SB-600.

My requirements are the same as most peoples: clear,
sharp, noise-free, detailed, well exposed, great color,
great camera features. Who doesn't want that stuff? 8 MP
is just frosting on the cake. I don't like the 8800's
maximum ISO 400, but I do like its vibration control,
which may compensate for lack of ISO 800.

I'm confident that the 8800 will work superbly for me in
daylight. I don't know about flash. My local camera store
will let me put the camera and flash on my Visa and give
me 10 days to test drive it, so long as I don't open the
CD, which is OK since I have a USB reader.

I am not at all wed to Nikon. I've already started my
research on the web, but still have a ways to go. What I'm
asking of all the good people here is some opinions and
advice from people that actually own a Nikon 8800 or
competitive camera they recommend.

My main flash problems are in the dank light of car
museums where there're no walls or ceilings for the flash
to reflect off.

I am completely open-minded on make and model. I'd say my
budget is $1,000, which is where the 8800 is, less a $100
rebate. I understand that there's a major photo show in a
couple of weeks, so the 8800 and its competitors may come
down in price by the end of the month.

I would appreciate advice and opinions. If I have been
unclear as to my requirements, the problems I've had with
the 5700 or why I'm anti-DSLR, I'll be glad to
clarify/elaborate. I just wanted to keep my OP as short as
possible.

Thanks in advance for the help!

--
ATM, aka Jerry

I think you sort of answered your own question - you say you really
like the 5700 in daylight, so the camera is not likely to be the issue.
Then you say you are disappointed with the flash performance, but you
didn't really elaborate on what the problem was. Then you say you are
shooting in the dark light of car museums with little in the way of
reflective surfaces to use bounce techniques. (And those bounce
techniques are not going to give you good results on something as big
and as shiny as a car anyway - at least not with a single flash.) I
don't think a new camera and one flash, no matter how powerful, is
going to help that much.

I'm no expert on this type of photography, but having seen pro's shoot
vehicles at car shows - they either use a tripod and rely on the car
presenters lighting, or they go to a s#%#load of trouble with multiple
lights, some direct, some bounced, or even *huge* lightboxes. At the
very least, I think you will be wanting a couple of slaved flashes on
stands, or other more complex lighting arrangements.

So don't be too disappointed if the 8800 doesn't meet your expectations
either!

All Things Mopar wrote:
> Hi, All!
>
> I'm in love with my 6 month-old Nikon Coolpix 5700 when
> shooting my favorite subject - car pictures - in daylight.
> I am completely dissasified with its flash performance not
> only with the puny Speedlight but also with the excellent
> Sunpak 433D Nikon-compatible external. I don't need to
> belabor that here, suffice to say the 5700 is going on
> eBay and I'm in the market for a new camera.
>
> I really do not want a DSLR, of any make or model. There's
> lots of reasons for this but size, weight, and the lack of
> an Electronic View Finder are all show stoppers for me.
>
> The 5700's 5 mega pixels is more than enough, but I'm
> looking at the 8800 because it has a brand new flash
> system (apparently)called iTTL. And, this time, I'm not
> gonna be penny wise and dollar fooling - I'm gonna buy
> Nikon's SB-600.
>
> My requirements are the same as most peoples: clear,
> sharp, noise-free, detailed, well exposed, great color,
> great camera features. Who doesn't want that stuff? 8 MP
> is just frosting on the cake. I don't like the 8800's
> maximum ISO 400, but I do like its vibration control,
> which may compensate for lack of ISO 800.
>
> I'm confident that the 8800 will work superbly for me in
> daylight. I don't know about flash. My local camera store
> will let me put the camera and flash on my Visa and give
> me 10 days to test drive it, so long as I don't open the
> CD, which is OK since I have a USB reader.
>
> I am not at all wed to Nikon. I've already started my
> research on the web, but still have a ways to go. What I'm
> asking of all the good people here is some opinions and
> advice from people that actually own a Nikon 8800 or
> competitive camera they recommend.
>
> My main flash problems are in the dank light of car
> museums where there're no walls or ceilings for the flash
> to reflect off.
>
> I am completely open-minded on make and model. I'd say my
> budget is $1,000, which is where the 8800 is, less a $100
> rebate. I understand that there's a major photo show in a
> couple of weeks, so the 8800 and its competitors may come
> down in price by the end of the month.
>
> I would appreciate advice and opinions. If I have been
> unclear as to my requirements, the problems I've had with
> the 5700 or why I'm anti-DSLR, I'll be glad to
> clarify/elaborate. I just wanted to keep my OP as short as
> possible.
>
> Thanks in advance for the help!
>

I'm really curious to know why you insist on an electronic viewfinder. Most info
is availabe either in the optical viewfinder or mini LCD status screen on
top/back of a digital SLR. The Pentax *ist DS is much smaller than the rest, and
barely bigger than the prosumer P&Ss like the 8800. Go and have a play with one
if you haven't already.

--
--
Ben Thomas - Software Engineer - Melbourne, Australia

My Digital World:
Kodak DX6490, Canon i9950, Pioneer A05;
Hitachi 37" HD plasma display, DGTEC 2000A,
Denon 2800, H/K AVR4500, Whatmough Encore;
Sony Ericsson K700i, Palm Tungsten T.

Disclaimer:
Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
relate to the official business of my employer shall be understood as neither
given nor endorsed by it.

> I think you sort of answered your own question - you
> say you really like the 5700 in daylight, so the
> camera is not likely to be the issue.

Yes, it is, I'm afraid...

> Then you say you are disappointed with the flash
> performance, but you didn't really elaborate on
> what the problem was.

This post wasn't to diagnose my flash problems, I've been
there done that, including posting here, where Bob Rogers
worked with me some, not to mention a couple of weeks with
Nikon tech support on the phone and E-mail, and a trip to
Nikon Service.

I can describe what's going on for you, but that isn't
going to change how I feel about the 5700. It's history.

> Then you say you are shooting in the dark light
> of car museums with little in the way of reflective
> surfaces to use bounce techniques.

I didn't say I tilted the flash head up for bounce flash,
I just said there no close aboard walls or ceilings, as in
a smaller room, for the flash to simply reflect back on
the car. My 5700 works very well in small-to-moderate
rooms, and it works quite well if I can fill the entire
picture with the subject. The issue comes in when I want
to include, say 30% of the picture with the background of
the scene. Again, I'm not going to elaborate because
that's not the point of this post, but when I allow lots
of background into my photos, the 5700's flash sensor
which controls the auto exposure system gets confused in
an inconsistant manner. Enough of that...

> I don't think a new camera and one flash, no matter
> how powerful, is going to help that much.

Please keep in mind that I've used the Sunpak with mixed
results. It has a Guide Number of 120, which is plenty for
30-35'. That's beyond the distance I shoot at so my flash
is *not* the cause of the problem. And, I've proven to
myself that I get completely correct exposures if I put
the camera in manual and use the old GN / distance =
f/stop at 1/125. What I want, though, is to get reliable
auto flash exposures without having to diddle with manual
controls on every picture.

>
> I'm no expert on this type of photography, but having
> seen pro's shoot vehicles at car shows - they either
> use a tripod and rely on the car presenters lighting,
> or they go to a s#%#load of trouble with multiple
> lights, some direct, some bounced, or even *huge*
> lightboxes.

Again, I thank for your observations. I know all that
stuff you said, but don't want to do it. I'm not putting
you down, but I didn't post this request to get a lesson
in car show photography. I posted it because I want to
dump the 5700 and I'm asking for personal experience with
the Nikon 8800 in museum environments, or experience with
a competitor's camera.

I'm trying to make a judgement on what to buy. Posting
here will provide some data points, I'll get more by
reading dpreview.com, more data points from talking to
camera store sales people, etc.

I'm hoping to be as informed as I can before I buy. But,
since I have 3 stores locally that'll give me a 10-day no-
questions-asked charge refund, I'm protected. That's
plenty of time to get to the two big car museums near me -
The Henry Ford Museum and the Walter P. Museum. This is a
lot like asking people what car to buy. After all the
hoopla dies down, and the arguments about features,
reliablity, test results, etc. are over, you really have
to get in one, see if you're comfortable, and decide
first-hand if you *like* the car. That's what I'm trying
to do here.

I'll know one way or another if the 8800 is acceptable in
about a half-hour's shooting. And, I'll be using Nikon's
own SB-600 flash so there won't be any bullshit argument
out of Nikon that I'm screwed up because I have a non-
compatible flash (which isn't the case).

Besides chiding me for possible naievte and giving me
photography lessons I didn't ask for, can you offer me
some perspectives on how you believe an 8800 will perform
vs. a 5700 under similar shooting conditions with similar
lighting? If not, I thank again, and I'll move on to the
10 day test drive.

Cheers!

--
ATM, aka Jerry

Ben Thomas commented courteously ...

> I'm really curious to know why you insist on an
> electronic viewfinder. Most info is availabe either
> in the optical viewfinder or mini LCD status screen on
> top/back of a digital SLR. The Pentax *ist DS is much
> smaller than the rest, and barely bigger than the
> prosumer P&Ss like the 8800. Go and have a play
> with one if you haven't already.

You ask fair questions, Ben. Let me try to respond...

You cannot see what the as-taken image looks like in an
optical viewfinder, and the itty bitty LCD on the back is
way to small to make more than gross judgements.

For example, I can make an instant judgement with the EVF
of my Nikon 5700 that tells me 1) is the exposure
reasonable? 2) is the subject in focus? 3) do I have
enough depth of field? 4) did I pick up a bad flash glare?
5) did I accidently cut-off part of the subject by
carelessness? 6) are there any unwanted but unexpected
defects in the picture that could be alleviated by moving
slightly?

Besides those reasons, which are peculiar to my perhaps
warped thinking, I want to have a long zoom lens which is
relatively compact, and I don't want to have to buy
several expensive lenses and lug them around. The days of
trekking through Yellowstone Park with my Nikon FTN and 3
lenses is over for me.

That's my story, and I'm stickin' to it! So, As I
mentioned in my other reply post, I certainly respect you
for your knowledge, but what I'm looking for are
experienced opinions of how an 8800 might perform in the
peculiar flash situation I need to shoot in , vs. my 5700.

In car terms, I might dismiss the entire genre of truck-
based SUV, such as Chevy Tahoes, Ford Expeditions, or
Dodge Durangos, in favor of a traditional 4-door sedan
with good power, handling, and vehicle dynamics such as a
HEMI 300C. That doesn't make the SUVs bad, they're not. I
just don't want one. And, I don't want a DSLR.

Thanks again for your observations.

--
ATM, aka Jerry

Some of the DSLRs also have the same underexposure problems.
Go for the 8800, but its noise is higher than your 5700, that is a given.


"All Things Mopar" <> wrote in message
news:Xns95F8D30207290ReplyToken@216.196.97.131...
> Ben Thomas commented courteously ...
>
>> I'm really curious to know why you insist on an
>> electronic viewfinder. Most info is availabe either
>> in the optical viewfinder or mini LCD status screen on
>> top/back of a digital SLR. The Pentax *ist DS is much
>> smaller than the rest, and barely bigger than the
>> prosumer P&Ss like the 8800. Go and have a play
>> with one if you haven't already.
>
> You ask fair questions, Ben. Let me try to respond...
>
> You cannot see what the as-taken image looks like in an
> optical viewfinder, and the itty bitty LCD on the back is
> way to small to make more than gross judgements.
>
> For example, I can make an instant judgement with the EVF
> of my Nikon 5700 that tells me 1) is the exposure
> reasonable? 2) is the subject in focus? 3) do I have
> enough depth of field? 4) did I pick up a bad flash glare?
> 5) did I accidently cut-off part of the subject by
> carelessness? 6) are there any unwanted but unexpected
> defects in the picture that could be alleviated by moving
> slightly?
>
> Besides those reasons, which are peculiar to my perhaps
> warped thinking, I want to have a long zoom lens which is
> relatively compact, and I don't want to have to buy
> several expensive lenses and lug them around. The days of
> trekking through Yellowstone Park with my Nikon FTN and 3
> lenses is over for me.
>
> That's my story, and I'm stickin' to it! So, As I
> mentioned in my other reply post, I certainly respect you
> for your knowledge, but what I'm looking for are
> experienced opinions of how an 8800 might perform in the
> peculiar flash situation I need to shoot in , vs. my 5700.
>
> In car terms, I might dismiss the entire genre of truck-
> based SUV, such as Chevy Tahoes, Ford Expeditions, or
> Dodge Durangos, in favor of a traditional 4-door sedan
> with good power, handling, and vehicle dynamics such as a
> HEMI 300C. That doesn't make the SUVs bad, they're not. I
> just don't want one. And, I don't want a DSLR.
>
> Thanks again for your observations.
>
> --
> ATM, aka Jerry

SteveJ commented courteously ...

> Some of the DSLRs also have the same underexposure
> problems. Go for the 8800, but its noise is higher
> than your 5700, that is a given.

Thanks for the opine, Steve! Are you basing your belief
that the 8800 is noisier on the fact that it is an early-
generation Nikon 8 mega pixel, and new designs are often
noisier than follow-on designs from the same manufacturer?

And, do you consider the noise to be a show-stopper for
subjects requiring low noise, fine detail, and sharpness,
such as car pictures?

I noticed that the 8800 has ISO 50, where my 5700 was 100
min, so that should help. The 8800 doesn't go beyond ISO
400, which bugs me, but I'll be doing flash far more often
than available light either hand-held of with a tripod.

--
ATM, aka Jerry

"All Things Mopar" <> wrote in message
news:Xns95F8D85758808ReplyToken@216.196.97.131...
> SteveJ commented courteously ...
>
> > Some of the DSLRs also have the same underexposure
> > problems. Go for the 8800, but its noise is higher
> > than your 5700, that is a given.
>
> Thanks for the opine, Steve! Are you basing your belief
> that the 8800 is noisier on the fact that it is an early-
> generation Nikon 8 mega pixel, and new designs are often
> noisier than follow-on designs from the same manufacturer?
>
> And, do you consider the noise to be a show-stopper for
> subjects requiring low noise, fine detail, and sharpness,
> such as car pictures?
>
> I noticed that the 8800 has ISO 50, where my 5700 was 100
> min, so that should help. The 8800 doesn't go beyond ISO
> 400, which bugs me, but I'll be doing flash far more often
> than available light either hand-held of with a tripod.
>

Check out the Panasonic FZ20. It has a long flash range, and the lens does
not extend forward much. Anti shake too.

Thanks for the explanation. I can't read your mind, and if you re-read
your post, I think you'll agree that my advice *could* have been
correct, as you didn't mention the inconsistency issues - you just said
you got poor results in dark venues. I did not `chide`, nor intend to,
and I'm not sure how you read that into my post.

As for the 'inconsistent confusion' that the 5700 encounters, I haven't
seen or heard of this fault on that camera, so I won't try to comment
on whether the 8800 and/or a different flash will help. I haven't
noticed any similar issues with mine (Oly 8080), but I've only used it
with a very ancient hammerhead flash in manual.

(I might add that although I agree that the Panasonic DMC-FZ20
recommended below is a very fine camera, it *does* get reported as
occasionally having exposure issues, so maybe that might not be `the
one` either!).

> Thanks for the explanation. I can't read your mind,
> and if you re-read your post, I think you'll
> agree that my advice *could* have been correct,
> as you didn't mention the inconsistency issues - you
> just said you got poor results in dark venues.

I don't think you and I are at odds, maybe just on
adjacent lanes of the same highway.

> I did not `chide`, nor intend to, and I'm not sure how
> you read that into my post.

No, you didn't chide. And, if I left you with my thinking
of you that way, it was unintentional. Again, there're
limits to how much is prudent to put into an OP or even a
follow-up. Past some reasonably small amount of text,
everyone will tune out. So, I didn't want to confuse the
issue with people trying to figure out why I couldn't get
good flash pictures. I just put a short paragraph in to
say "I've fed up - need a new toy!".

> As for the 'inconsistent confusion' that the 5700
> encounters, I haven't seen or heard of this fault
> on that camera, so I won't try to comment on whether
> the 8800 and/or a different flash will help.

Well, as best I've been able to determine after trying for
over 5 months, damn few people are even alleging a defect.
I think I've read maybe three posts alluding to flash
problems where I thought the shooting situation was even
similar to mine. Mainly, when I've enquired before - as I
did on this NG a couple of times - the responses I got
were very well thought out and indicative of people
knowing more about this stuff than I did. Unfortunately,
in the final analysis I didn't glean anything that I could
hang my hat on, except that my technique is universally
considered to be sub-optimal.

You would know that, because you and I haven't talked
about it, but I wasn't in the past and I'm not now asking
for help in photographic technique to get better car
pictures, I was asking earlier for help in trying to
figure out why *specific* circumstances - smart or not -
were causing trouble.

But, I'm past that now. I'm still interested in personal
testimonials but I'm pessimistic of getting them. Its just
that some situations aren't all that common.

So, again, I'm spreading a wide net past this NG to gain
as much info I can, but in the final analysis, I'll find
out through the school of hard knocks - the 8800 (or
whatever I buy) will either do the job or not. If it does,
I'm golden and I sell the 5700. If it doesn't, back to the
store for a refund it goes.

Since I'm knee deep in some pretty tall weeds, here, I'll
dig myself in a deeper hole: My previous camera was a 2001
FujiFilm 4900 4 mega pixel. It has an itty bitty built-in
flash, also. Naturally, it never took anything approaching
great pictures, but at the Detroit Auto Show, at three
museums, at outdoor car shows where I was using flash as
fill, and in new car dealers, the pictures might not have
been good, but they were drop-dead consistant: light fell
off as the square of increased distance if I tried to
exeed that 10-12' max range of the flash.

But, with the Fuji, I *never* got inconsistent exposures.
And, to rule out an attack of early-onset Alzheimer's, I
took my wife's $150 Kodak 6330 P & S to the WPC museum
along with my 5700 and took a couple dozen identical
situation pictures. The Nikon pics were sharper and more
detailed, as you'd expect, but the cheapie Kodak beat the
Nikon's brains out with highly consistent flash.

So, I respectfully ask you (and the others), what am I
missing here? I'm not the sharpest tool in the box, and I
admit it, but I don't visualize myself as a drooling
imbecile either (and, *NO*, I am *not* saying that you
implied that!).

I'm a retired DaimlerChrysler employee with company lease
car priveledges, such as it is. Last fall, they gave us a
special lease rate on base model Chrysler Crossfire
coupes. I'm not making a political statement here, but I
think it's a pretty good looking car. So, I went for a
test drive.

Turned out that it is quiet, handled well, performed
adequately (if not spectacularly), but I *hated* it! There
is no earthly way I could have discovered that by reading
Motor Trend or watching Motor Trend TV or watching other
Speed Channel shows that gushed on the car. It's a great
car, I just didn't like if for my brand of driving.

So, by analogy, the Nikon 5700 is a fine camera with
excellent reviews and many happy owners, but not me. So,
I'm gonna fix it by buying some I do like to drive.

Thanks again for your many suggestions. As Mr. Spock used
to say to Captain Kirk, "Sir, I shall consider it!"

--
ATM, aka Jerry