Anyone gone from Coolpix 995 to Coolpix 4500?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by dirtycow, Feb 2, 2004.

  1. dirtycow

    dirtycow Guest

    Has anyone upgraded from a CP995 to CP4500? I want to upgrade my 995, and
    want something Nikon and with a split body design. The 4500 fits the bill
    and its a cheap too. The only thing is, its only another megapixel better
    than what I have already, and the zoom's the same. I would upgrade if it had
    less shutter lag though. Has anyone followed this upgrade path? Was it worth

    dirtycow, Feb 2, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. dirtycow

    Ed Ruf Guest

    Why are you thinking of upgrading and how important are those features to
    you? These are the "improvements" I'm aware of from:

    4 vs 3 MP
    5vs. 1 min max bulb
    scene modes
    pano assist
    perspective correction
    movies with audio
    audio clips
    also possible firmware hack to save raw data

    Is anything wrong with the 995? Do you have any accessories for it? How do
    you use the camera?
    Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ()
    See images taken with my CP-990 and 5700 at
    Ed Ruf, Feb 2, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. dirtycow

    Paul Bartram Guest

    I have owned a 995 for around a year now, and recently had a chance to
    handle a 4500. I felt an instant dislike for it! It is too small by
    comparison, and the lack of a top info panel means far too much 'gunk'
    obscuring the LCD view screen.

    Visit and see how many photos have been
    submitted from 995 owners (45460) compared to 4500 (24052), then compare the
    actual pictures. That should tell you everything you need to know. Nikon
    discontinued the 4500 fairly quickly, as it was not a good seller. I'm just
    disappointed they didn't continue the series and produce something even
    better than the 995, which I think is brilliant. If yours is in good working
    order, I'd say keep it...

    Paul Bartram, Feb 2, 2004
  4. dirtycow

    dirtycow Guest

    I have owned a 995 for around a year now, and recently had a chance to
    Sound advice. I just fancy something newer to be honest. My 995 just cant
    handle taking pictures of things that move - the shutter lag is aweful. I'm
    still fairly happy with the quality of images I do get from it, and find the
    split body superb. I was considering an upgrade to a 5700, but hear that the
    shutter lag is no better. Maybe ill wait and see if the 8700 gets better

    I think perhaps also I should learn to use my 995 better for what it is. I
    have recently started steering away from the Auto mode, but really dont yet
    understand most of the features in full. Perhaps I should invest in a tripod
    and a new battery - I think that would pick my 'spirits' up, and open up
    some new avenues.

    Have you guys got any of your photos online? Ive had a look at your site
    Ed - some of the sunsets over the lakes are *stunning*.

    dirtycow, Feb 2, 2004
  5. dirtycow

    Paul Bartram Guest

    perhaps also I should learn to use my 995 better for what it is. I have
    recently started steering away from the Auto mode, but really dont yet
    understand most of the features in full.

    I have *never* used auto mode on mine, for several reasons. First, the
    continual focus 'hunting' chews the battery. Secondly, it takes control of
    shutter speed away from you, so in lower light situations you might find it
    has dropped to 1/15th second without your realising it, and the picture is

    I use 'P' mode exclusively, and since most of my subjects are moving I spin
    the command wheel to the right, to select the fastest shutter speed the
    exposure level will allow, especially when using the zoom at maximum. is a useful addition to
    the paper manual, which itself is pretty comprehensive. Even after a year of
    use, I still refer to it from time to time!
    lag is awful.

    I thought so at first, compared to the F60 I swapped for it. However, as any
    digital user will tell you, the 'pre-focus and hold' method makes things a
    lot easier. Just a matter of practice really...

    Paul Bartram, Feb 2, 2004
  6. dirtycow

    Ed Ruf Guest

    Wouldn't hold my breath on the 8700. Looks like much of the 5700 body/lens.
    If using the same AF system with more pixels/siites to querry it will be
    worse. If the same sites as the 5700, can be no better.
    There are definite things you can do to improve the situation. Look at what
    the camera does when you half press: sets white balance, aperture, shutter
    speed and focus. How can you preset any of these to your advantage? White
    balance is easy to preset. Next, if you are trying to photograph moving
    subjects I'd choose shutter priority where you set the shutter speed. Given
    that the Nikon's don't have the fastest of lenses, unless you are in bright
    light setting an decently fast shutter speed will probably force the
    aperture wide open. Depending upon the available light, this still may not
    provide enough light for a decent shot. This is where you may look at
    upping the ISO. For added noise you can use various filtering techniques
    in many editors, or choose a specific software solution such as Neat Image
    I use this) or Noise Ninja. IF possible you can also use infinity focus. It
    may not be the optimum, but easier than trying to focus on a moving target,
    if you can't prefocus on something of near the same range.
    If you mean my sunsets over the Yorktown battlefields, those are all taken
    with the 990, not 5700. Not because it won't take similar photos, but I
    haven't been in the same situation to take such shots. Rule # 1 you have
    to be there to take the shot. Rule #1 you have to have the camera with you.
    I still carry the camera on walks around the battlefields, but since the
    loss of my wGSD this summer to cancer, I'm not there at sunset/twilight
    after work as I was during our daily walks.
    Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ()
    See images taken with my CP-990 and 5700 at
    Ed Ruf, Feb 2, 2004
  7. dirtycow

    jean Guest

    My 995 was stolen and the insurance company replaced it with a 4500, the
    only thing it had over the 995 was that extra megapixel. The screen is
    smaller and since there is no LCD panel, it is very busy. The manual focus
    is almost impossible to do since the distance is shown with a bar graph
    instead of a numeric display in metric or imperial measure, this means macro
    shots where you measure the distance can't be made properly with a 4500.
    Speed is the same or nearly so on both. The thing that bugged me the most
    though is that to wake up the camera, I had to use the power switch, on the
    995 a press of the shutter would wake it up and it would be ready faster.

    jean, Feb 3, 2004
  8. dirtycow

    Debra Co Guest

    I have owned a 995 for around a year now, and recently had a chance to
    I agree with this. I have a 990 and didn't even feel the need to upgrade to a
    995 or a 4500. If I was upgrading today, I think I'd go for a Canon A80. The
    swivel screen would fulfill all my swivel desires, and it can be folded down
    and protected. The camera is way smaller than my 990 and feels great in the
    Debra Co, Feb 3, 2004
  9. dirtycow

    dirtycow Guest

    My 995 was stolen and the insurance company replaced it with a 4500, the
    Thanks to all who replied. I will make it my mission to improve my technique
    before even considering an upgrade - the comments in this thread have shown
    that is necessary. I guess I got into the 'better camera = better shots'

    I am still chuffed with my 995 - just wish I had more time to use it!

    dirtycow, Feb 3, 2004
  10. dirtycow

    jean Guest

    Only a DSLR would be better IMOHO.

    jean, Feb 3, 2004
  11. dirtycow

    dirtycow Guest

    Only a DSLR would be better IMOHO.

    Indeed. And I dont want to spend that sort of money on something that would
    essentially be wasted on me, as I would not have the technical knowledge or
    thought patterns to get the best from it. I will make an effort from now on
    to try and be more creative with my 995, and im sure I should get some
    pleasing results.

    dirtycow, Feb 3, 2004
  12. dirtycow

    Neon John Guest

    I have a 995 and my brother has a 4500. I've spent significant time with
    both. Frankly, you could not give me a 4500. About all it has in common with
    the 995 is the NIKON name and the split body. It's too small, the LCD is too
    small, the top LCD is gone, the controls are too overloaded, the macro isn't
    anywhere near as good as the 995, the flash is even weaker than the 995.
    Where to stop....

    You have the best camera in the split body series. The extra MP isn't worth

    Neon John, Feb 4, 2004
  13. dirtycow

    Eager Guest

    My brothers owned 995's and I bought a 4500. Here's the review I wrote
    to them, when they asked if they should upgrade:


    Don't rush into the 4500. It seems to be a definite bump up from the
    900-series from what I've read, but it's also lost some things you
    might miss.

    Most important, the LCD screen is much smaller, so small that I find it
    has lost a lot of the functionality of the screen on my dear departed
    CP 800 (though it's much better in sunlight -- the 800s was useless in
    bright sun). I can't use this 4500 screen to check focus in tough
    situations, for example. It's simply no good as a quick and dirty slide
    show for friends on the go. It's still important of course for framing
    shots and checking exposure and stuff, but I think they made a mistake.

    I also understand that there was a little LCD on the top of the 900s
    for a readout of data. That's gone. All the data is on the main LCD. I
    think that's a mistake, too. In bright sunlight, the LCD is hard to
    read, but I need to check data -- shutter speed, f-stop, etc., quickly.
    I may have to invest in one of those little hoods for the screen.

    Other disappointments (that the 4500 may share with the 900s): long lag
    for shutter release. Too long! I'm getting around that by prefocusing,
    but it's a shame.

    Fairly slow lens. 2.6 is way better than my 800, but still pretty slow.
    I wish there was a good 1.8 lens like my old manual Nikon!

    I understand the earlier 900s offered a distance readout in manual
    focus mode. The 4500 gives no numbers, just a "focus bar," which isn't
    helpful (and the screen is too tiny to help).

    This may be true of the 900s, but I wish the camera would stand square
    on a table when twisted 90 degrees, that is with the LCD facing up and
    the lens forward. I'll have to fudge a rubber foot or something.

    There's no "play" mode, which is a good thing, but... instead the
    "review" button rotates through a mini-review quarter-screen picture
    that I find useless, then the full screen play mode, and then back to
    record mode. To review pix, I have to press the review button twice and
    there's no way to turn off the little mini-review screen. I don't
    understand who'd use the little one! Nice: when in Play, pressing the
    shutter release moves back to record mode.

    On the other hand, 4 megapixels is fabulous. Of course.

    The built-in flash is apparently a much different design from the 900s.
    It seems to work great. The power is much, much better than my 800,
    which could barely illuminate 10 feet away. (But I rarely want to use
    the built-in since all built-ins look way too harsh for me).

    I *love* putting a real flash on the thing -- I can finally reach kids
    in the gym from all the way in the bleachers. I bounce flash all the
    time at home and the pix come out looking great. My flash is a
    Nikon-compatible Sunpak with a guide number rating of 120, so it's a
    great flash. If I'd gotten a different brand camera, I'd have had to
    spend probably $150 to replace this quality flash. I'm using a flash
    bracket called the KISS, by the folks who make the Rollbar.

    Picture quality, like the 900s, is terrific.

    I *really* like having a 4X zoom for a change -- it seems like just
    enough for real zoom shots, unlike my old 3X zoom. And of course I love
    the macro capability. It's just astounding. The auto white balance
    seems to work pretty well, though I've gotten even better results with
    a manual setting of the white balance when I have time.

    The 4500 also feels really well made, with a metal body, though I don't
    remember the feel of the 900s. This thing uses a new joystick-like
    button that I really like, for moving through menus. Press the center
    of the joystick for "OK." I'm guessing that the firmware is pretty much
    the same as the 900s.

    Surprisingly, the EN-EL1 battery (same as the 995 and lots of the new
    Coolpix's) is fine. It lasts for quite a lot of shooting (I turn off
    that constant auto-focus) and I've found third-party spares with a
    higher mAh rating for as little as $20 each (!)
    <>. I still wish I could use AAs,
    since I'd have an alternative emergency supply at every local corner

    The Nikon software simply sucks in OS X, but I don't care -- I use
    iView MediaPro.

    Eager, Feb 9, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.