Graham Holden wrote:
> On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 05:48:40 GMT, <> wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> Could anyone please help me with a difficult decision I can't seem
>> to make?
>>
>> I'm stuck between the Nikon CP8800 and the Nikon D70.
>>
<snippage has occurred>
Graham wrote:
>
> My experience below. Not necessarily the "right" way of doing
> things, nor the right answer for everyone, but just "for information":
>
<snip Graham's cogent summary>
I suggest you take his analysis to heart: he hasn't missed anything of
importance that I can think of.
I will say this: With all the research and generously shared experience
and advice, you may select the wrong camera. The template may fulfill
your intellectual requirements perfectly, but once it is in your hands
you may discover it just plain doesn't fit.
Unless you can find an accommodating local seller, or convince a
well-supplied friend to let you work through his arsenal, it may be a
long, expensive process to arrive at the best compromise.
For my part, I have had to pay the price, but with great joy: the
process has been fun and rewarding and I don't view mistakes or
alternate choices as reflective of character flaws, in contrast to some
folks you might encounter hereabouts.
First significant choice: Nikon CP5700. I liked the idea of a
long-lens/small-package made by a trusted company. It worked fine, and I
even learned to compensate to a degree for the dreaded shutter lag.
Several of the necessary skills and a bunch of luck (and attempts) let
me bring home some good shots among 600 or so from the 2003 Monterey
Historic Automobile Races.
http://www.fototime.com/inv/9CEF2E0211DCF4E
Next try: Added the Nikon CP5000 on recommendation of a professional who
at that time did all his digital work with one. I became addicted to its
19mm equivalent wide angle (with .68x convertor). a good choice, for
sure.
And then: More Pixels Mania. Nikon CP8700, just in time for the 2004
Historics. Once again persistence and luck paid off with a few good
frames.
http://www.fototime.com/inv/83B7FF2C6CE1B1A
Finally, to the dSLR: First and most important, I no longer feel as if I
am fighting the equipment to get the results I know it can return. With
the utility comes responsibility: the photographer can't blame poor
product on the camera. Second, I _know_ the camera-lens combination is
capable of doing the best possible work in its class; once again, no
excuses, what comes out can be top-of-the line. Luck is still a factor,
but definitely a less influential one.
http://www.fototime.com/inv/058FA28C479E2F1
Take into account the images you see are made by a photographer whose
pleasures come as much from the process as from the products. I don't
mind showing rejects and also-rans although I understand and appreciate
the attitude of those who advocate never letting anyone see anything but
your best. I think I am a photographer, just not a totally professional
one.
I still own and enjoy using the non-interchangeable-lens cameras, and
after lugging the 20D and lenses around, especially appreciate their
compact and maneuverable nature. They will put out quality photos, good
enough for almost anyone's needs, and beyond most folks' desires. They
are easy to operate for most folks' purposes, and are capable of
excellence.
The 20D and all dSLRs I know about Increase the likelihood of excellent
output. They do so at the cost of Bulk, Price, Ease-of-use/Convenience,
and Subtlety. You are going to pay, one way or another, for advanced
features and topnotch output.
The reality of lens-changes in the field is probably less onerous in
fact than in psychological terms, excluding the obvious but rare
circumstances (sandstorms, hurricanes, freefall excursions, _etc._). The
one thing I hate about dSLRs is the inevitable moment when the perfect
shot is imminent and the wrong lens is on the body. A quarter-century
ago my gesture at solving this problem was carrying more than one
body-lens-film combination, primed and ready. It was easier then,
comparable Canon items being smaller than current (85-300 excepted) and
less expensive. It didn't always work. I missed the shot of a lifetime
when fully-equipped and in the right place:
" ... one of the best-ever photos that got away, pictures that I didn't
get because of one deficit or another in my repertoire of photographer
behavior: at an early- or mid-80s IMSA event (maybe) I was walking past
the open Goodyear garage toward the 76 station. I had cruised the
paddock/garage area once and was expecting to go to my car and out to
the edge of the course. I was not ready to take a picture, although I
had two loaded cameras hanging on my body.
"Around the corner of the station office came a side-by-side pair of
instantly recognizable and fully suited drivers: eighteen, nineteen, or
twenty years old, they were Michael Andretti on the left, and Al Unser,
Junior, on the right. They were very intent, leaning in toward one
another as they walked. Michael was telling Al Jr. about an on-track
adventure, saying something like, ' ... so I had to give it one of these
.... ' He reared back and demonstrated by extending his arms, gripping an
imaginary steering wheel, and whipping his hands back and forth in small
arcs. Al Jr. nodded understanding. I gaped.
"By the time I got a camera up, they were just two guys walking away.
Kids. Pretending to be race drivers. Only, they were race drivers. Ow."
Any road, be prepared to enjoy the search and decision-making, don't
regard your choice as a wedding vow, and beware the influence of Dreaded
Cognitive Dissonance: it makes grown people throw hissy fits, ordinary
folks rabid, and leaves a bad taste in everyone's experience.
--
Frank ess
"There are some aspects of existence that simply do not yield to
thinking, plain or fancy."
Similar Threads
