Nikon Coolpix 5700

[Burnell Stover]

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]

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


"Burnell Stover" <bstover@inreach.com> wrote in message
news:1xhPa.325$VS4.304@news.inreach.com...

> 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]

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" <antstevens@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:fmjPa.613$Qr4.65900@newsfep2-gui.server.ntli.net...

> A1 Camera, i brought my one to replace my EOS kit and i'm amazed by the
> quality.
>
>
> "Burnell Stover" <bstover@inreach.com> wrote in message
> news:1xhPa.325$VS4.304@news.inreach.com...

> > 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
> >
> >

>
>

[Frank ess]

"Burnell Stover" <bstover@inreach.com> wrote in message
news:1xhPa.325$VS4.304@news.inreach.com...
| 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

[Scott Schuckert]

In article <1xhPa.325$VS4.304@news.inreach.com>, Burnell Stover
<bstover@inreach.com> 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.

[bizzutch7]

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" <bstover@inreach.com> wrote in message
news:1xhPa.325$VS4.304@news.inreach.com...

> 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
>
>
>

[Dr. Gizmo]

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.

[Warren Sarle]

"Burnell Stover" <bstover@inreach.com> wrote in message
news:1xhPa.325$VS4.304@news.inreach.com...

> 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.

[David J Taylor]

"Dr. Gizmo" <kentcompton@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:y2tPa.41343$C83.3251745@newsread1.prod.itd.ea rthlink.net...

> 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

[Richard Alexander]

"bizzutch7" <bizzutch7@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:utmPa.4408$k85.337188@twister.tampabay.rr.com ...

> 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

[Steve James]

dajaxon <dajaxon@yahoo.com> 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]

not to mention size and weight.

rma

"Steve James" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:1fxxe2t.1wmhaft4h0d34N%me@privacy.net...

> dajaxon <dajaxon@yahoo.com> 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

[Richard Alexander]

"ralford" <ralford@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:quSPa.14718$o86.1204@news1.central.cox.net...

> not to mention size and weight.
>
> rma
>
> "Steve James" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:1fxxe2t.1wmhaft4h0d34N%me@privacy.net...

> > dajaxon <dajaxon@yahoo.com> 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.....

[Dr. Gizmo]

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.

[rbdmg]

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

[Yves]

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 --------------------------
-------- [url]http://gallery.mipsology.com[/url]

[ralford]

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" <rbdmg@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:XYDQa.1712$Mc.156260@newsread1.prod.itd.earth link.net...

> 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
>
>

[Frank ess]

"ralford" <ralford@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:yzFQa.45342$o86.13697@news1.central.cox.net.. .
| 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
[url]http://www.harbortronics.com/digimain.htm[/url]
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

[ralford]

wrt the tc-15 adapter - agree, and a solution is offered by
[url]http://members.rogers.com/nextphoto/order5700.htm[/url] in the form of an end cap
for the e8 - $25 cap!

and then there is the filter issue... also addressed by nextphoto.

rma

"Frank ess" <fsheffi1@sandotrr.com> wrote in message
news:YbHQa.5$CD3.172@twister.socal.rr.com...

> 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.
>

[Frank ess]

"ralford" <ralford@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:DVHQa.45553$o86.11231@news1.central.cox.net.. .
| wrt the tc-15 adapter - agree, and a solution is offered by
| [url]http://members.rogers.com/nextphoto/order5700.htm[/url] in the form of an
end cap
| for the e8 - $25 cap!
|
| and then there is the filter issue... also addressed by nextphoto.
|
| rma
|
| "Frank ess" <fsheffi1@sandotrr.com> wrote in message
| news:YbHQa.5$CD3.172@twister.socal.rr.com...
| > 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.
| >


Thank you. Too bad there is of necessity a cure for that disease.

Frank ess