If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon - Coolpix 8400 Digital Camera
I have a friend that has a Nikon - Coolpix 8400 camera. I have a DSLR (20D).
I was looking at all that his Coolpix offers, and it is pretty close to what I have. From what I can see, the difference, other than being able to swap the lens: 20d vs 8400 Shutter speed of 8000 vs 3000 ISO up to 3200 vs 400 5fps vs 2.3 8.2MP vs 8.0MP 9 point focus system on both 35 metering zone vs 4 metering zone 4 focus modes vs 3 dof preview versus none color adjustments versus none no movie vs quicktime movies I was surprised that the coolpix has Automatic, Aperture Priority, Shutter Priority and Full Manual Settings. It touts a lot of bang for the buck. In my comparison, am I missing other points? I am trying to make a fair comparison, and I am a newbie in the DSLR scene, so I hope I am not missing the obvious. Anyway, all feedback is appreciated. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Robbie wrote: I have a friend that has a Nikon - Coolpix 8400 camera. I have a DSLR (20D). I was looking at all that his Coolpix offers, and it is pretty close to what I have. From what I can see, the difference, other than being able to swap the lens: 20d vs 8400 Shutter speed of 8000 vs 3000 Big difference, 266% faster. ISO up to 3200 vs 400 Another big difference, 8x faster 5fps vs 2.3 Yet another big difference, over twice as fast 8.2MP vs 8.0MP But, sensor size very different, 22mm x 15mm vs. 8.8mm x 6.6mm. This is the reason for Nikon's ISO 400 max. Noise at 400 is probably worse than Canon's at 3200. 9 point focus system on both 35 metering zone vs 4 metering zone 35 zones are far better. 4 focus modes vs 3 dof preview versus none Dof with small sensors is a non-issue - it is always too much. color adjustments versus none Plus RAW for Canon no movie vs quicktime movies Insignificant. Other points: Canon has interchangeable lens capability, optical reflex viewfinder, low-noise CMOS sensor. While the Nikon is well specified, I cannot see how you can consider the two cameras to be 'close', unless you don't think these major differences have any effect on your photography. If that is the case, then, with respect, I think the 20D is way more camera than you need. Colin D. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Robbie wrote:
I have a friend that has a Nikon - Coolpix 8400 camera. I have a DSLR (20D). I was looking at all that his Coolpix offers, and it is pretty close to what I have. From what I can see, the difference, other than being able to swap the lens: 20d vs 8400 Shutter speed of 8000 vs 3000 ISO up to 3200 vs 400 5fps vs 2.3 8.2MP vs 8.0MP 9 point focus system on both 35 metering zone vs 4 metering zone 4 focus modes vs 3 dof preview versus none color adjustments versus none no movie vs quicktime movies I was surprised that the coolpix has Automatic, Aperture Priority, Shutter Priority and Full Manual Settings. It touts a lot of bang for the buck. In my comparison, am I missing other points? I am trying to make a fair comparison, and I am a newbie in the DSLR scene, so I hope I am not missing the obvious. Anyway, all feedback is appreciated. I have a Nikon 8400 and find it to be an excellent camera producing good quality images. Of course, compared to the DSLR you can't change lenses, so I bought a Panasonic FZ5 with an image stabilised 432mm f/3.3 lens for telephoto shots. Compared to the DSLR, it has a limited ISO range, and I need to apply software noise reduction on images taken at ISO 400. It is also slightly slower in use than a DSLR, although it is fast for a point and shoot. It really depends on what you want to do, and what your aims are. The slow lens and limited sensitivity of the Nikon 8400 would limit its use in lower light conditions - will that matter to you? Movies add a lot to a subject - is the lack of movies important? Do you think you will want to invest a lot in the inevitable lens collection which you will gather with a DSLR? Do you know that some lenses you buy today won't work on the next generation of full-frame DSLRs? Questions, always questions! David |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks for the comparison!
Yes, I am aware that I really do not want to buy the "S" or Digital only lenses. Good points on the low light conditions, as I really like to photograph using existing light and rely on the ability to crank up the ISO with low noise. The lack of movies does not bother me. Thanks! "David J Taylor" wrote in message o.uk... Robbie wrote: I have a friend that has a Nikon - Coolpix 8400 camera. I have a DSLR (20D). I was looking at all that his Coolpix offers, and it is pretty close to what I have. From what I can see, the difference, other than being able to swap the lens: 20d vs 8400 Shutter speed of 8000 vs 3000 ISO up to 3200 vs 400 5fps vs 2.3 8.2MP vs 8.0MP 9 point focus system on both 35 metering zone vs 4 metering zone 4 focus modes vs 3 dof preview versus none color adjustments versus none no movie vs quicktime movies I was surprised that the coolpix has Automatic, Aperture Priority, Shutter Priority and Full Manual Settings. It touts a lot of bang for the buck. In my comparison, am I missing other points? I am trying to make a fair comparison, and I am a newbie in the DSLR scene, so I hope I am not missing the obvious. Anyway, all feedback is appreciated. I have a Nikon 8400 and find it to be an excellent camera producing good quality images. Of course, compared to the DSLR you can't change lenses, so I bought a Panasonic FZ5 with an image stabilised 432mm f/3.3 lens for telephoto shots. Compared to the DSLR, it has a limited ISO range, and I need to apply software noise reduction on images taken at ISO 400. It is also slightly slower in use than a DSLR, although it is fast for a point and shoot. It really depends on what you want to do, and what your aims are. The slow lens and limited sensitivity of the Nikon 8400 would limit its use in lower light conditions - will that matter to you? Movies add a lot to a subject - is the lack of movies important? Do you think you will want to invest a lot in the inevitable lens collection which you will gather with a DSLR? Do you know that some lenses you buy today won't work on the next generation of full-frame DSLRs? Questions, always questions! David |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks for the comments! I realize those points make a big difference. I was
not sure if I had left something out. The Coolpix does seem to be worth the price. I will stick with my DSLR though "Colin D" wrote in message ... Robbie wrote: I have a friend that has a Nikon - Coolpix 8400 camera. I have a DSLR (20D). I was looking at all that his Coolpix offers, and it is pretty close to what I have. From what I can see, the difference, other than being able to swap the lens: 20d vs 8400 Shutter speed of 8000 vs 3000 Big difference, 266% faster. ISO up to 3200 vs 400 Another big difference, 8x faster 5fps vs 2.3 Yet another big difference, over twice as fast 8.2MP vs 8.0MP But, sensor size very different, 22mm x 15mm vs. 8.8mm x 6.6mm. This is the reason for Nikon's ISO 400 max. Noise at 400 is probably worse than Canon's at 3200. 9 point focus system on both 35 metering zone vs 4 metering zone 35 zones are far better. 4 focus modes vs 3 dof preview versus none Dof with small sensors is a non-issue - it is always too much. color adjustments versus none Plus RAW for Canon no movie vs quicktime movies Insignificant. Other points: Canon has interchangeable lens capability, optical reflex viewfinder, low-noise CMOS sensor. While the Nikon is well specified, I cannot see how you can consider the two cameras to be 'close', unless you don't think these major differences have any effect on your photography. If that is the case, then, with respect, I think the 20D is way more camera than you need. Colin D. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
According to Robbie :
Thanks for the comparison! Yes, I am aware that I really do not want to buy the "S" or Digital only lenses. Good points on the low light conditions, as I really like to photograph using existing light and rely on the ability to crank up the ISO with low noise. You should be informed that you can either have the D70 locked to a fixed ISO (which you can change by pressing the "ISO" button with the left thumb and rotating the thumbwheel with the other (or by going into the menu)), or you can set it in the menus to automatically switch up in ISO if necessary to maintain the shutter speed above a user-selectable (another menu) floor value. I generally keep it in the auto mode, except when using unusual lenses or dealing with unusual lighting conditions -- usually in manual mode where the auto-ISO doesn't trigger anyway. The lack of movies does not bother me. Nor is it a problem for me -- though the D70 doesn't really do movies at all -- just a relatively few frames per second in burst mode. Enjoy, DoN. -- Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564 (too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero --- |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Nikon Coolpix 5700 Digital Camera 5.0MP - Question | Matalog | Digital Photography | 0 | December 30th 04 09:42 PM |
FS: Nikon D100 digital camera w/ Capture 4 software | DKFletcher | 35mm Equipment for Sale | 0 | August 25th 04 02:32 AM |
FS: Nikon D100 digital camera w/ Capture 4 software | DKFletcher | General Equipment For Sale | 0 | August 25th 04 02:32 AM |
Which is better? digital cameras or older crappy cameras thatuse film? | Michael Weinstein, M.D. | In The Darkroom | 13 | January 24th 04 09:51 PM |
FS: Nikon Coolpix 5700 digital camera , extra batteries & memory cards, LIKE NEW!! | bd | 35mm Equipment for Sale | 0 | December 11th 03 07:18 PM |