Cedric, let us know what you get and how well it works.

I also use a 990 and the ONLY thing it doesn't do well, for me, is action or sports photography. The shutter lag is just too great. I was never a genius in the darkroom but I love the digital (Photoshop) darkroom. I could wish for more dynamic range during image acquisition but that can be worked out for still life or landscapes using multiple images at different exposures. I could wish for less noise at 400 ISO setting but I guess my next 'prosumer' camera will do better.

 

Yes... image 'noise' is a problem in low light. There are clever ways to remove it in Photoshop etc. but I can never remember how to do it and success varies.

Whilst I wouldn't want to be excluded from any form of photography, I suppose I'm most interested in landscape, portrait, candid and macro shots. I don't do much action stuff.

I'm beginning to think I should perhaps bite the bullet and get rid of all the Nikon gear which would leave me free to choose any make and model. I wouldn't need more than a couple of zoom lenses to perhaps cover wide to medium tele lengths.

Decisions decisions I'll keep you posted but I wont be doing anything in a rush.

 

I personally would still shoot print film until the technology for digital SLR's gets up to 8 megapixels or more. I still find that a film scanner produces better pictures IME than a digital SLR.

 

rstark:
The other point of view of course. Mmm not sure about that I suppose I ought to do some direct comparisons.

This board is fantastic... thanks.

 

The mulitplier on my camera is 1.6X. It can be an issue on the ultra wide end.
Here are a couple of S1 photos from the TWS event. Keep in mind they are formatted for the web at 72 ppi. The raw images are much better. Click on the image and select full size.

 

Cedric,

Is the 990 you refer to the "Coolpix" camera?
If so, I'm looking for a digital camera and the Nikon's seem like a good choice.
I'm only a novice photographer (I'm required by the wife to take pics of the kids every few days)

Anyway, would you recommend the Nikon Coolpix cameras?
I like the idea of a small camera with good zoom ability!

Thanks,

Mike

 

Cedric,

From the gear that you have, you are a serious photographer. I have a Nikon N70. I've also wanted to get a digital SLR camera and not one of those point and shoot kind. A few years ago, I went to Universal Studios and they have workers that take pictures there. One of them had an N70 just like mine, except he had some kind of attachment at the bottom that allowed it to take digital pictures. Not sure what it was. I'll see if I can find anything about it. That way, you should still be able to use all your old gear.

 

Wirejock:

Thanks! By 'multiplier' I take it you mean 1.6X the original lens focal length?

MajorHavoc:

I'd definitely recommend the Coolpix 990 or the new model the 995.
The only proviso is that I would say it is aimed at the more serious photographer. A lot of the cost is in override functions you may never use, though if you are keen to progress you wont outgrow it. I paid about

 

As for the Nikon Coolpix, I have a 950. It is a very competent camera, but I find the control of it non-intuitive. Nikon is not alone in this; I find almost all consumer digital cameras to be clumsy to use in anything other than point and shoot mode. I can pick up virtually any SLR and figure out how to manually focus, exposure compensate, manually expose, check depth of field, turn on/off flash, etc in a matter of seconds.

Non-SLR consumer digital cameras typically involve all kinds of menus and selections to do these simple tasks. The other downside of the Nikon 950 (again a common problem), is that it eats AA's like they were spicy wings at a super bowl party.

I'd love to get a digital SLR, but the prices are still to high for me to justify it as an occasional amateur.

 

Anyone try out the new Coolpix 5000?? 5 megapix! Hotshoe. 256-segment matrix metering, etc.



http://www.nikonusa.com/usa_product/produc...productNr=25501


I like my 990, but there are times that I find it far to slow in those "catch the moment" situations. Nothing is more unnerving than pressing the shutter and waiting 1 sec. for the camera to actually take the picture. Usually by then the moment has passed and the shot is lost. If I had to choose between them, I still stick with my trusty N80.


As for the D1, I had always assumed that Nikon used a CCD that covered the 35mm SLR frame (hence, the $$$ pricetag). But you're right, the Nikon website states that the EFL is approximately 1.5x standard 35mm SLR format. I'm surprised that nobody makes a -1.5x relay to retain the original format. This has been done with 35mm cine format (academy), which is approximately -1.4x 35mm SLR format and 1" and 2/3" vidicon, which is even smaller. Sure to keep the package light and compact you'd have to dispense with image orientation optics, i.e., the final image would be upside down and reversed, but that's easily corrected in Photoshop.