Ping: Cooter

Hi Cooter.
An update to the saga of the underexposed pics.
Today I returned my CP8800 for a full refund. It was a hard decision to
make, it does so many things in a VERY impressive manner but at high shutter
speeds which I need sometimes, as you know it just wouldn't perform to it's
specifications. Nikon NZ had it for four weeks and couldn't solve the
problem. They would not admit it is a universal problem but obviously could
not say it was peculiar to my camera as they couldn't just replace it. They
checked it out and said it was within the manufacturers performance
parameters. In the end they stopped talking to me saying they were waiting
for a response from Nikon Asia.
Enough is enough so I took the money and ran. When I bought the 8800 I had
been looking hard at the Nikon D70 but decided I couldn't afford it so
bought the 8800, which according to it's specs would do all I wanted. Don't
get me wrong, the 8800 is a fabulous camera and produces some amazing
photos, just not at high speed. For almost everythig less it is great.

This afternoon I ordered the D70 with the bundled kit lens and the Nikor ED
70-300 lens. Should arrive in three days.

Thanks for your help in all of this Cooter.
Kind regards.
Leo

Hi Leo,

Thanks for the update. It will save me from (probably) endless
back-and-forth with Nikon Tech in the US. It's doubtful I'll have any real
need for high shutter speeds, so it is not a problem for me. I like the 8800
well enough to keep it even with its few "problems". Glad you were able to
get a refund and hope you enjoy the D70.

Regards,
Cooter

(If two of these show up please disregard one of them)

Hi Leo,

Thanks for the update, it will save me endless back-and-forths with Nikon
Tech in the US. I don't forsee too many times when I will need these two
shutter speeds, so no use for me to get in a big hassle with Nikon. Glad you
were able to get a refund, and hope you enjoy the D70.

Enjoyed the chats.

Regards,
Cooter

Ed,

In all the reading I've done on the 8800 I've never seen so much as a
mention of the question you pose. But if the camera is properly constructed
I can't see why it might make a difference in the 1/1500 and 1/3000 second
exposure problems. When I shot the tests in response to Leo's post the
single supposedly correct 1/3000 and three 1/1500 sec. exposures were
selected by the camera with no indication that they were, or would be,
underexposed. In addition, these exposures would be correct based on the
"Sunny 16" rule. I'm inclined to think Nikon goofed somewhere in the
firmware.