Nikon Coolpix 5700

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Burnell Stover, Jul 10, 2003.

  1. Anyone NOT recommend this camera? It sounds exceptional, and some reviews I
    have read give it high marks. Purchased the 885 some time ago that has a
    disgusting flaw, so am a bit leery.

    Burnell
     
    Burnell Stover, Jul 10, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. A1 Camera, i brought my one to replace my EOS kit and i'm amazed by the
    quality.


    "Burnell Stover" <> wrote in message
    news:1xhPa.325$...
    > Anyone NOT recommend this camera? It sounds exceptional, and some reviews

    I
    > have read give it high marks. Purchased the 885 some time ago that has a
    > disgusting flaw, so am a bit leery.
    >
    > Burnell
    >
    >
     
    antony stevens, Jul 10, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Burnell Stover

    SwashBuckle Guest

    I have no doubt a full blown report will be posted with lots of technical
    jargon that you will have to fight your way through or try to
    understand.............but as per previous poster, superb quality picture
    taker, with most of the adjustable features required to experiment.

    I have owned a 5700 for 6 months now and since then my 950 is a little
    redundant.......my 35mm's (F90, Nikkormats, F2A's) have not moved for 4
    years (since I started with the 950)

    mini

    "antony stevens" <> wrote in message
    news:fmjPa.613$...
    > A1 Camera, i brought my one to replace my EOS kit and i'm amazed by the
    > quality.
    >
    >
    > "Burnell Stover" <> wrote in message
    > news:1xhPa.325$...
    > > Anyone NOT recommend this camera? It sounds exceptional, and some

    reviews
    > I
    > > have read give it high marks. Purchased the 885 some time ago that has a
    > > disgusting flaw, so am a bit leery.
    > >
    > > Burnell
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
     
    SwashBuckle, Jul 10, 2003
    #3
  4. Burnell Stover

    Frank ess Guest

    "Burnell Stover" <> wrote in message
    news:1xhPa.325$...
    | Anyone NOT recommend this camera? It sounds exceptional, and some
    reviews I
    | have read give it high marks. Purchased the 885 some time ago that
    has a
    | disgusting flaw, so am a bit leery.
    |
    | Burnell
    |

    I've had one for a total of about ten days by now. It does good work,
    color and definition are excellent in my view. I haven't become
    proficient in avoiding the (notorious?) tele focus problems, although
    techniques are mentioned in other threads. Mine doesn't vibrate like
    the one owned by another poster. It did clunk one time, but I haven't
    been able to replicate that. I'm also having difficulty getting used to
    the length of time it takes to write a Fine Full frame to CF memory,
    having come from a 3MP SD-card camera. I guess it makes sense to get
    the fastest CF cards available. I am not very far up on the learning
    curve that comes along with all those controllable variables. I'm
    confident it will become second nature in a short time. Eventually. I
    hope.

    Frank ess
     
    Frank ess, Jul 10, 2003
    #4
  5. In article <1xhPa.325$>, Burnell Stover
    <> wrote:

    > Anyone NOT recommend this camera? It sounds exceptional, and some reviews I
    > have read give it high marks. Purchased the 885 some time ago that has a
    > disgusting flaw, so am a bit leery.


    Try looking through one in person. I liked the specs, but didn't like
    the electronic viewfinder. Of course it may be that I'm used to using
    the optical finder on my 995, or my eyes - but to me it was grainy and
    updated far too slowly.
     
    Scott Schuckert, Jul 10, 2003
    #5
  6. Burnell Stover

    bizzutch7 Guest

    there's still the issue of auto-focusing problems in subdued light. At least
    I can't seem to conquer the problem.
    --bizz


    "Burnell Stover" <> wrote in message
    news:1xhPa.325$...
    > Anyone NOT recommend this camera? It sounds exceptional, and some reviews

    I
    > have read give it high marks. Purchased the 885 some time ago that has a
    > disgusting flaw, so am a bit leery.
    >
    > Burnell
    >
    >
    >
     
    bizzutch7, Jul 11, 2003
    #6
  7. Burnell Stover

    Ed Ruf Guest

    On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 10:39:02 -0700, in rec.photo.digital "Burnell Stover"
    <> wrote:

    >Anyone NOT recommend this camera? It sounds exceptional, and some reviews I
    >have read give it high marks. Purchased the 885 some time ago that has a
    >disgusting flaw, so am a bit leery.


    What's the "disgusting flaw"? I'm happy with my 5700/TC-15/WC-80/MB-E5700
    which is an upgrade from my 990/TC-3/WC-63/FC-8.
    ________________________________________________________
    Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ()
    http://members.cox.net/egruf
    See images taken with my CP-990 and 5700 at
    http://members.cox.net/egruf-digicam
     
    Ed Ruf, Jul 11, 2003
    #7
  8. Burnell Stover

    Dr. Gizmo Guest

    Haven't had a chance to view through either the 5700 or the 5400 but am of
    the opinion that an optical viewfinder has more benefits.
     
    Dr. Gizmo, Jul 11, 2003
    #8
  9. Burnell Stover

    Warren Sarle Guest

    "Burnell Stover" <> wrote in message
    news:1xhPa.325$...
    > Anyone NOT recommend this camera? It sounds exceptional, and some reviews

    I
    > have read give it high marks. Purchased the 885 some time ago that has a
    > disgusting flaw, so am a bit leery.


    It's hard to provide a useful answer unless you say something about what you
    plan to use the camera for. If you will be using it solely outdoors in good
    light,
    you really need an 8x zoom, and you absolutely cannot settle for 4MP, the
    Nikon Coolpix 5700 might be acceptable. The Sony DSC-F717 has much better
    focusing, exceptional low-light capabilities including a night-vision
    feature,
    and better image quality. The Olympus Camedia C750 has better autofocusing
    and an absolutely incredible 10x zoom. When I was shopping for a digital
    camera,
    I could see no reason to pay the exorbitant price for the Nikon Coolpix
    5700.

    And then there's the question of whether you want an EVF in the first place.
    Manual focusing is difficult, depth of field is impossible to judge, and
    action
    shooting is out of the question. But an EVF is very nice for judging
    exposure,
    and it can be used in sunlight much more effectively than an unshielded LCD
    screen.
     
    Warren Sarle, Jul 11, 2003
    #9
  10. "Dr. Gizmo" <> wrote in message
    news:y2tPa.41343$...
    > Haven't had a chance to view through either the 5700 or the 5400 but am

    of
    > the opinion that an optical viewfinder has more benefits.


    I thought that until I owned the camera - the electronic finder has many
    advantages in bright light and (for me) encouraged more editing of
    pictures on the fly. Difficult to go back now!

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jul 11, 2003
    #10
  11. "bizzutch7" <> wrote in message
    news:utmPa.4408$...
    > there's still the issue of auto-focusing problems in subdued light. At

    least
    > I can't seem to conquer the problem.
    > --bizz


    Try spot metering in low light, it definately helps. I have seen a way to
    actually fit a penlight type small torch to the camera flash ( You would
    have to see it before critisising). When on a tripod, use the light to
    obtain focus in complete darkness, press manual focus once auto focus has
    locked. You can then click the torch off and press the shutter button for a
    great shot ( becomes really easy once youve had a couple of goes. Theres a
    way around every problem with the 5700. It's just acrap camera if you
    cant/wont put any effort into your photography. If you want a picture and
    explanation of how tofit the torch, let me know. I will send it personally
    as I dont want to post images on the NG

    Rich
     
    Richard Alexander, Jul 11, 2003
    #11
  12. Burnell Stover

    Steve James Guest

    dajaxon <> wrote:

    > I'd look at its current price because it is not cheap and maybe get a Canon
    > 10D for a few 100 dollars more though.


    The Canon 10D is more like double the price of the Coolpix 5700 once you
    add a decent zoom lens.
    --
    To email me use: sjusenet AT comcast DOT net
     
    Steve James, Jul 12, 2003
    #12
  13. Burnell Stover

    ralford Guest

    not to mention size and weight.

    rma

    "Steve James" <> wrote in message
    news:1fxxe2t.1wmhaft4h0d34N%...
    > dajaxon <> wrote:
    >
    > > I'd look at its current price because it is not cheap and maybe get a

    Canon
    > > 10D for a few 100 dollars more though.

    >
    > The Canon 10D is more like double the price of the Coolpix 5700 once you
    > add a decent zoom lens.
    > --
    > To email me use: sjusenet AT comcast DOT net
     
    ralford, Jul 12, 2003
    #13
  14. "ralford" <> wrote in message
    news:quSPa.14718$...
    > not to mention size and weight.
    >
    > rma
    >
    > "Steve James" <> wrote in message
    > news:1fxxe2t.1wmhaft4h0d34N%...
    > > dajaxon <> wrote:
    > >
    > > > I'd look at its current price because it is not cheap and maybe get a

    > Canon
    > > > 10D for a few 100 dollars more though.

    > >
    > > The Canon 10D is more like double the price of the Coolpix 5700 once you
    > > add a decent zoom lens.
    > > --
    > > To email me use: sjusenet AT comcast DOT net

    >

    Maybe a D30 would be a good alternative. I have now got the D30 and a 5700
    and they both complement each other. However, if size was not an issue, the
    D30 would have to be my first choice. The D30's are selling at £450 on the
    net now and you'll get two decent lenses for around the £300 mark. Not much
    price difference.....
     
    Richard Alexander, Jul 14, 2003
    #14
  15. Burnell Stover

    Dr. Gizmo Guest

    Haven't had the chance to see a 5400 yet. It has a display on the back
    doesn't it? Seems like that would be the best of both worlds. Optical
    plus digital.

    Gonna have to check out the 5700, though.
     
    Dr. Gizmo, Jul 14, 2003
    #15
  16. Burnell Stover

    rbdmg Guest

    The minuses of the Nikon 5700 are

    A weak internal battery.
    A low-capacity internal battery.
    An internal battery that takes too long to recharge.
    The camera must be taken off the tripod to replace the battery.
    Extra EN-EL1 batteries costly for mAH rating.

    (Did I mention that I am unhappy with the
    internal EN-EL1 battery?)

    Complex menu system - after two months I am still not comfortable with
    it.

    Four small buttons on the left side that are easy to accidentally push.

    A weak built-in flash.

    Poorly implemented manual focus system.

    Limited F-stops.

    Nikon View 6 - can't figure out what this software is good for,
    unless you consider over 46MB of disk space it is reserving for
    future better use.



    The pluses are:

    Excellent pictures - if I can learn how to take advantage of the
    5700 qualities.

    The optional MB-E5700 battery holder.

    The optional MC-EU1 remote control.

    Shoe for optional external flash.

    Prompt sending of $100 rebate.


    A number of the minuses apply to most digital cameras.

    But, considering the price of the 5700 I am disappointed that some of pluses
    (stronger battery, stronger flash, and remote control) are high-priced extra
    items.

    Would I buy a 5700 knowing what I know now? Probably - there isn't anything
    that I consider to be much better for the money. I'll use the 5700 as my
    primary digital camera for a couple of years until digital SLRs with
    interchangeable lenses mature and come down in price
     
    rbdmg, Jul 14, 2003
    #16
  17. Burnell Stover

    Ed Ruf Guest

    On Mon, 14 Jul 2003 19:59:51 GMT, in rec.photo.digital "rbdmg"
    <> wrote:

    > Nikon View 6 - can't figure out what this software is good for,
    > unless you consider over 46MB of disk space it is reserving for
    > future better use.


    The only use I make of it is for processing of raw NEF files.
    ________________________________________________________
    Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ()
    http://members.cox.net/egruf
    See images taken with my CP-990 and 5700 at
    http://members.cox.net/egruf-digicam
     
    Ed Ruf, Jul 14, 2003
    #17
  18. Burnell Stover

    Yves Guest

    On Mon, 14 Jul 2003 19:59:51 +0000, rbdmg wrote:

    > The minuses of the Nikon 5700 are
    >
    > A weak internal battery.
    > A low-capacity internal battery.
    > An internal battery that takes too long to recharge. The camera must
    > be taken off the tripod to replace the battery. Extra EN-EL1 batteries
    > costly for mAH rating.


    I used my CP5700 during 4 months with only 2 batteries. Taking care of
    consumption (use of lcd, ...) I always find a way to have power. Now I use
    an external 4000 mAh LiOn and the MB Grip with 2 sets of accus
    >
    > Complex menu system - after two months I am still not comfortable with
    > it.


    Correct, but it's the only way to provide such so many settings features.
    Some bugs in the Users settings
    >
    > Four small buttons on the left side that are easy to accidentally
    > push.


    I agree
    >
    > A weak built-in flash.
    >


    I agree, and use a SB-80dx (I'm not rich, only foul)
    > Poorly implemented manual focus system.
    >


    I agree, but never need the manual focus
    > Limited F-stops.
    >


    I agreee, in summer weather the f8 is poor ...
    > Nikon View 6 - can't figure out what this software is good for,
    > unless you consider over 46MB of disk space it is reserving for
    > future better use.
    >


    I'm using Lnx and The Gimp :)
    >
    >
    > The pluses are:
    >
    > Excellent pictures - if I can learn how to take advantage of the
    > 5700 qualities.
    >


    Yeah
    > The optional MB-E5700 battery holder.
    >


    Yeah, during 6 months I claimed opposite opinion on the grip. I remain on
    a bad impression (so many heavy batteries, charging 6 cels is quite
    difficult -- found yesterday the ansman Powerline 6, intelligent charge,
    individual cels processor controled). For me, the best and the cheapest
    solution remains the external packs (with one disadvantage : no "sleep
    mode")


    > The optional MC-EU1 remote control.

    Never seen
    >
    > Shoe for optional external flash.

    Using the SB-80dx with diffusor dome -- really excellent !


    Take a look at the website to obtain some samples (with exif data)

    --
    Yves VDM --------------------------
    -------- http://gallery.mipsology.com
     
    Yves, Jul 14, 2003
    #18
  19. Burnell Stover

    ralford Guest

    I agree the battery can be drained fairly quickly if one doesn't watch out.
    On the other hand, at $30 a pop, what's the big deal about a spare. And
    with a quick release tripod head you can change the batter w/o removing the
    QR plate.

    It is a full featured eSLR that takes a while to use all its features - not
    there yet. But there isn't much to compete - the Minolta and Sony folk will
    argue that, I am sure, however, it suits my needs better than the others.

    Cheers,

    rma

    "rbdmg" <> wrote in message
    news:XYDQa.1712$...
    > The minuses of the Nikon 5700 are
    >
    > A weak internal battery.
    > A low-capacity internal battery.
    > An internal battery that takes too long to recharge.
    > The camera must be taken off the tripod to replace the battery.
    > Extra EN-EL1 batteries costly for mAH rating.
    >
    > (Did I mention that I am unhappy with the
    > internal EN-EL1 battery?)
    >
    > Complex menu system - after two months I am still not comfortable with
    > it.
    >
    > Four small buttons on the left side that are easy to accidentally

    push.
    >
    > A weak built-in flash.
    >
    > Poorly implemented manual focus system.
    >
    > Limited F-stops.
    >
    > Nikon View 6 - can't figure out what this software is good for,
    > unless you consider over 46MB of disk space it is reserving for
    > future better use.
    >
    >
    >
    > The pluses are:
    >
    > Excellent pictures - if I can learn how to take advantage of the
    > 5700 qualities.
    >
    > The optional MB-E5700 battery holder.
    >
    > The optional MC-EU1 remote control.
    >
    > Shoe for optional external flash.
    >
    > Prompt sending of $100 rebate.
    >
    >
    > A number of the minuses apply to most digital cameras.
    >
    > But, considering the price of the 5700 I am disappointed that some of

    pluses
    > (stronger battery, stronger flash, and remote control) are high-priced

    extra
    > items.
    >
    > Would I buy a 5700 knowing what I know now? Probably - there isn't

    anything
    > that I consider to be much better for the money. I'll use the 5700 as my
    > primary digital camera for a couple of years until digital SLRs with
    > interchangeable lenses mature and come down in price
    >
    >
     
    ralford, Jul 14, 2003
    #19
  20. Burnell Stover

    Frank ess Guest

    "ralford" <> wrote in message
    news:yzFQa.45342$...
    | I agree the battery can be drained fairly quickly if one doesn't
    watch out.
    | On the other hand, at $30 a pop, what's the big deal about a spare.
    And
    | with a quick release tripod head you can change the batter w/o
    removing the
    | QR plate.
    |
    | It is a full featured eSLR that takes a while to use all its
    features - not
    | there yet. But there isn't much to compete - the Minolta and Sony
    folk will
    | argue that, I am sure, however, it suits my needs better than the
    others.

    I got the Digisnap 5700 "cable release"from
    http://www.harbortronics.com/digimain.htm
    It works with the Canon RS- 60E3 remote cable, and it moves the tripod
    screw socket so it is centered under the lens axis. Doesn't require
    removal from the tripod to change batteries. Delivered within
    California in two days.

    I wonder about designers who can't make it possible to store the 1.5x
    lens and its adapter screwed together in their useful configuration,
    with a cap on each end. They will fit in the bag together (barely), but
    the rear cap for the lens doesn't fit the rear of the adapter. So, it's
    · screw (adapter), unscrew (lens back cap), screw, rather than
    · unscrew (a cap that would fit the back of the adapter) and screw.
    One extra, gratuitous screw.

    I had a Sony camcorder a while back. It had myriad little buttons all
    over the place that changed things without notice. I told them there
    should be one prominent button or switch that would disable everything
    but the on-off switch, without turning off the set functions. That
    would make sense on the CP5700, I think.

    Frank ess
     
    Frank ess, Jul 15, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Ed Ruf

    Re: Which Format to save JPG (NIKON CoolPix 5700)

    Ed Ruf, Jul 15, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    537
    Ed Ruf
    Jul 15, 2003
  2. Larry R Harrison Jr

    Nikon Coolpix 775 or Nikon Coolpix 2500

    Larry R Harrison Jr, Aug 2, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    561
    Larry R Harrison Jr
    Aug 2, 2003
  3. Ola Theander

    Prblm: Nikon Coolpix 5700 puts focus on wrong object.

    Ola Theander, Aug 17, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    525
    Ed Ruf
    Aug 17, 2003
  4. Lawrence L'Hote

    Nikon Coolpix 5700 Off to Nikon for Repair

    Lawrence L'Hote, Oct 13, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    617
    Lawrence L'Hote
    Oct 13, 2003
  5. Larry R Harrison Jr

    Nikon Coolpix 5700 or Nikon D100

    Larry R Harrison Jr, May 12, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    842
    misifus
    May 17, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page