Nikon Launches Two New Wireless Cameras: Coolpix S50 and S50c

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by rishil, Feb 21, 2007.

  1. rishil

    rishil Guest

    rishil, Feb 21, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  2. rishil

    ASAAR Guest

    And if anyone wants some more information than the bit of press
    release that rishil provided on his/her blog, Nikon has brochures of
    its new cameras than can be downloaded. More interesting than the
    two little wifi-cams (S50 and S50c) is Nikon's Coolpix P5000 which
    has a 10mp sensor, optical VF, optical VR, P S A and M shooting
    modes, flash hotshoe for the SB-400, SB-600, SB-800, high res. LCD
    display and up to ISO 3200 (hah!). YMMV





    ASAAR, Feb 21, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  3. You bet. I hope Nikon continues to expand and refine the Pxxxx line. Just
    the fact that they've put a hot shoe on that one shows they may be getting
    serious about compacts again. They haven't had a hot shoe on a Coolpix since
    the 8800.

    And that SB-400 is a neat looking little bugger. Just ordered one this
    morning. It should be perfect for my 5400 especially, which gets awfully
    top-heavy with an SB-600 on it.

    Neil Harrington, Feb 21, 2007
  4. If only it had a 5MP sensor instead of the 10 (with corresponding
    decrease in noise levels or increase in ISO), it would start to get
    interesting. Though I think it'd look *really* strange with my SB-800
    on top of it. Isn't the SB-800 about three times the size of the camera?
    David Dyer-Bennet, Feb 21, 2007
  5. Canon, not Nikon, but same basic idea:

    Daniel Silevitch, Feb 21, 2007
  6. rishil

    ASAAR Guest

    You reverse it so the flash acts as a big handle for the camera
    which sits above the SB-800. :) You're right. It would be
    extremely awkward, but when I've had to attach my old SB-26 to a
    small digicam I used an old Stroboframe bracket with a cord
    connecting the camera's hot-shoe to the flash. It not only improved
    the balance, it made it easier to hold and the additional height
    practically guaranteed that there'd be no redeye! Even though the
    P5000 doesn't have the 5mp sensor you'd like, the brochure notes
    that "ISO 3200 is available only for image sizes of 5M (2592 x 1944)
    or smaller" so perhaps it's meeting your request half-way. I hope
    the sensor is at least 1/1.8". Any smaller and I'd think that it
    would be straining mighty hard to get a usable ISO 800.
    ASAAR, Feb 21, 2007
  7. I agree, but judging by the ISO numbers offered I wouldn't expect noise to
    be a problem at more usual settings. Still, the pixel-cramming race is
    getting pretty silly.

    Just about, I'd guess. I wouldn't even put my SB-800 on my 5400, which is
    surely a larger camera than the P5000. The 5400 looks ridiculous enough with
    the SB-600 on it.

    The new SB-400 is the answer to that problem. Granted, it's awfully
    feature-deprived compared to the larger Speedlights but there's only so much
    you can fit in a unit that size. At least it tilts, is much farther away
    from the lens axis and more powerful than the built-in, and doesn't use up
    camera power.

    Neil Harrington, Feb 21, 2007
  8. rishil

    C J Campbell Guest

    It would be even nicer with a RAW mode. I agree, though, that 10 megapixels
    is too much for a point and shoot.
    C J Campbell, Feb 21, 2007
  9. David Dyer-Bennet, Feb 21, 2007
  10. I suppose; works for big lenses!
    I would use the SB-8000 in bounce mode mostly, for better lighting and
    no redeye.
    Yes, one can always downsample to reduce ridiculous resolutions to
    useful ones. But there's overhead circuitry on the sensor that's
    per-pixel, so you'd get even better results if the sensor was a sane
    resolution to begin with.

    (10MP isn't *inherently* insane, it's not completely ridiculous in my
    D200 for example; just that in a snapshot camera I'd find 5MP and much
    lower noise more useful than 10MP.)
    David Dyer-Bennet, Feb 21, 2007
  11. For a snapshot camera, I'll take 3/4 of my pictures at ISO 800 and
    higher, so I'm pretty concerned with how it performs there. (Current
    snapshot camera is a Fuji F11, which performs decently there.)
    Buying and carrying another flash isn't high on my list either.
    Although -- can the SB-400 play CLS? And if it's that small it's
    probably not powerful enough for bounce (given how marginal the SB-800
    is for that).
    David Dyer-Bennet, Feb 21, 2007
  12. Only in the sense of i-TTL exposure, as far as I know. What's on the Nikon
    site makes several references to its compatibility with CLS-capable cameras,
    but I don't think it will work as a wireless remote unit which is what I
    assume you're thinking of.

    Depends on the situation, I should think. An ordinary sized room with
    off-white walls and ceiling ought to be OK. Mine should arrive in a day or
    so and I'll try to remember to post something about it here.

    You find the SB-800 only marginal for bounce? That surprises me.

    Neil Harrington, Feb 22, 2007
  13. The SB800 has plenty of power for bounce.

    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=, Feb 22, 2007
  14. I have the SB-400 but haven't had much time to play with it yet. Just a few
    early comments:

    It's cute as a bug's ear, weighs only 4.5 oz. empty. Has the usual Nikon
    locking pin. Has no diffuser of any kind. The tiny flash head (not the whole
    body) tilts from straight ahead to 60, 75 or 90 degrees. Comes with a nice
    fitted zippered case, not the usual Nikon baggy thing.

    The instruction manual is on a single very large sheet of paper in three

    The ready light is the unit's only way of communicating anything to the
    user, and it does this by different blink rates and patterns. For example,
    if it detects that it's not on a CLS-compatible camera it blinks very fast
    for a half second and keeps repeating this. Other blink rates serve to warn
    of possible underexposure, low battery, and overheating.

    It is only usable on CLS-compatible cameras. Disappointing to me is that it
    just gives the "not CLS compatible" blinking on my Coolpix 5400, for which
    the size of this flash unit would have been perfect. Same thing on my 8700.
    The only Coolpix mentioned as suitable for it in the instructions is the
    8800, but it also works on my 8400. Evidently Nikon's new Coolpix P5000, out
    soon, will work with it too.

    On suitable Nikons it operates in i-TTL mode. On the D40 only it will also
    work in manual mode. Viewfinder flash-ready signals work on DSLRs, and
    additionally on the D40 the flash-ready signal blinks to warn of focal
    length shorter than 18mm (maximum flash coverage) or flash head not

    So this is basically a flash unit designed for the D40 with which it was
    introduced, which also has functionality with some, but not all, other
    digital Nikons with hot shoes.

    Neil Harrington, Feb 24, 2007
  15. I have certainly found it so, and the SB-600 too for that matter.

    Neil Harrington, Feb 24, 2007
  16. rishil

    Paul Rubin Guest

    You mean it supports the wireless stuff?
    Paul Rubin, Feb 24, 2007
  17. Not as far as I can see. Nothing about wireless is mentioned in the

    Under "Specifications" it says:
    Flash mode | i-TTL, M (manual, only with the D40)

    Under "Available flash modes" it lists:
    Slow-sync flash
    Red-eye reduction
    Red-eye reduction with slow-sync flash mode
    Rear-curtain sync
    FV (Flash Value) Lock
    Exposure compensation and flash output level compensation
    Manual mode (only with D40 camera)
    Neil Harrington, Feb 24, 2007
  18. My standard of comparison is a Braun RL-515.

    Or, to put it another way, I want to bounce off a 20-foot white ceiling
    and shoot Plus-X (ASA 125) at f/5.6.
    David Dyer-Bennet, Feb 25, 2007
  19. <chuckle>

    What, not Panatomic-X?

    Well, I guess we have different needs.

    Neil Harrington, Feb 25, 2007
  20. Because it was never conceivable; no hope of a flash that powerful then,
    not a portable one. But the grain difference in an 8x10 between Plus-X
    and Tri-X was big, and my client much preferred the Plus-X results.

    I don't think I shot more than 5 rolls of Panatomic-X in 30 years of
    serious film photography; seems like I was shooting either Plus-X or
    pushed Tri-X (anywhere from 1000 to 4000).
    Shocking, innit?
    David Dyer-Bennet, Feb 25, 2007
    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.