Nikon Coolpix 5000

Hi there Phillip. It's cool to know you are into African Cichlids too.I have been keeping/breeding African Cichlids from the Lakes Tanganyika and Malawi for more than 10 years and keeping marine Reef Aquariums for almost 15 years,and saltwater for almost 20 years(since I was 12).I already wrote and published some articles on the subject.I bet this 300g of yours will looks awesome after is set up and runing.Please include pictures in the future.I really would like to see them.That's another passion I have besides photography.

About the review,I agree with you pratically on everything.I played with the coolpix 5000 for 2 weeks but sent it back and purchase a Canon G2 to use as a travel/bring everywhere camera.Even if the Canon G2 have less pixels,the image quality is about the same and the Canon,in my opinion, it's easier to use.Besides,I could use my EOS acessories on it,like flashes/batteries.But the coolpix 5000 stills a very decent/capable camera that will atract for sure the Nikon crowd.Best Regards,

Just wanted to add my personal experiences with the CoolPix 5000. I would NEVER suggest anyone buy this camera. It's awful. It's hard for me to say this, being a devoted Nikon user.

A few of the problems I've had:

1) It's nearly impossible to get the thing to focus. Even on simple subjects in bright lighting situations, the camera can't seem to get a focus. You can choose to tell the camera what area of the image to focus on, it just seems that the one you want is the one it can't get a bead on. The "manual focus" is worthless, since it's operation requires that you choose from a number of pre-defined camera to subject distances to use it.

2) I purchased mine in December of 2001. It had to be shipped back fro repair two months later because the LCD connection from the motherboard broke, rendering the thing useless. In addition, it has to go back again, since the camera has a problem figuring out what orientation the LCD is in. It keeps reversing the horizontal orientation. The LCD can be flipped around and locked back in place with the LCD facing back towards you. When you do this, it takes numerous attempts to get it to see left and right appropriately.

3) The fact that the flash sensor is in placed right where your fingers go is disturbing. And extremely inconvenient.

4) Running non-Nikon dedicated flash units with the hot-shoe is ridiculous. The internal flash always goes off (you can, of course, turn off th internal flash, but then it doesn't trigger the hot-shoe either). So, if you use studio strobes, you have to put a piece of black tape over the built in flash. Not what you'd expect from a $1,000 piece of gear.

This camera is, in my opinion, not even worth $300. The 5 mega-pixel CCD isn't worth the cost...since most of the photos I've taken with it have turned out bad, and getting a good photo requires A LOT of effort. The specs make the thing seem like a dream, but it's not.

I'd suggest skipping this and getting the E-10/20, or a Fuji S1/S2. Granted, these are more expensive, with lower res CCD's, but my experiences have been SO bad with this camera that buying one would be throwing your money away (unless, of course, you're looking for an expensive camera that is an absolute nightmare to use).

I'm surprised to hear the vehemence with which one reviewer has decried the Nikon Coolpix 5000 - after much research, I eventually bought mine a week ago on the way to a long weekend away at the coast, and have to say I love the camera already! I have been a film camera user for about 10 years, usually Nikon (my last purchase before the coolpix was a Nikon F80 with 20mm, 24mm, 28-70mm, and 180mm lenses).

I have had no trouble getting to grips with the huge array of functions on the camera, and find I get *incredibly* sharp images most of the time. Even in low light I found that the camera has produced excellent quality images (composition not withstanding). If I had an opportunity I'd post them here to demonstrate!

In all I have found the camera, in this short time, very useful, with the potential for excellent images :)

.. just my 2c's worth

This probably has more to do with higher-end digital cameras in general than the Coolpix 5000 in particular, but here go's:

I stopped off at my local computer store last night with my trusty Nikon FE w/50 mm Nikkor in hand. While waiting for my salesman to finish with a customer I browsed the digital camera department. I came upon the Coolpix 5000 I had just been reading about on photo.net. I put the FE down and picked up the 5000. I rolled it around. I moved it from hand to hand. I held it as if I was going to take a picture. I put the 5000 down and picked up my FE.

Now, I am into computers. I own a Fuji FinePix 2400Zoom. I like my FE. I even like the Fuji. But, this 5000 seemed more like a camera you would get for your child. It was very light. It was very small. It had no substance. It seemed like it was made of 'cheap plastic'. It just didn't 'feel' like a $1000+ camera. It didn't do a thing for me. I didn't even care to look through the lens.

Personally, I think part of the joy of taking photographs (not snapshots mind you) is the look and feel of my equipment. Holding a precision machined (metal) tool in your hands. Metal buttons and dials. Lenses that 'snick' into place. When you have the proper tools in hand, you just know the job is going to turn out well.

To be honest, I have not looked at, let alone handled a modern 35mm camera. I think I probably will be disappointed when I do.

It's official: I'm an old fogey! I bought my FE and lenses upon graduation from college in 1978 and have been happy with my equipment ever since. I think I put a new battery in the camera every 6 or 7 years. I just replaced the fitted Nikon case a couple months ago as the original was dry rotting. But every time I pull the camera out of the bag it just 'fits' right into my hands and I'm ready to go. The 5000 felt like a toy compared to my FE.

Just my 2 cents worth, Mark L. Cooper

Anyone who really owns the cp5000 would not look at anything else even at half the price. The picture quality is the sort that would bring a smile to most 35mm users. The higher bit depth of other cameras RAW mode do not compete with the better photographic quality of this camera. If you want the best at this price, this is it,obviously. You can even shoot great quality ultra wide angles, so there is no contest. Oh did I mention the BSS mode for shooting in soft lighting? How about 1 seconds worth. It a lovely jewel of a camera and I don't even have to recommend it, it seems to energise anyone who views the pics. Cheers

Ahgh, the Canonistas are out in full force once again, decrying the equipment from Nikon. One wonders at their objectivity, as this Coolpix, as with the others, is a fine camera that has much to offer the user. While one may prefer the Canon interface, others (such as myself) prefer the Nikon's. To me, it is much ado about nothing -- just because you prefer a Windows PC, for example, that does not negate a Macintosh or Gnome-based machine as being a good one.

It is an incredibly sharp camera. You will be able to get very decent 11*14 inch printouts from it, and without much effort in Photoshop or other image manipulation tool of your choice...(Again, the reviewer's preferences shine through -- there are those of us who vastly prefer Macromedia Fireworks or Paintshop Pro over P-Shop.) Nonetheless, where the ink meets the page, the CoolPix 5000 shines forth.

It is a durable camera, one has to be to be in my bag, as I tend to treat camera bodies as consumables. My CPix 995 was good for over 10,000 images, and I have no doubt that the 5000 will last just as long.

It is light, and small, which is a big plus -- that makes the camera portable, and thus emenantly more usable. One can easily include it along in nearly any outing, and without the weight and bulk that some "more substantative" would bring. The controls are large enough to be easily located and manipulated, despite the small size of the camera.

Take a long look at the Coolpix 5000. It is a good camera.

After the long frustration of dealing with the constant problems and bugs in the Coolpix 990, I took a look at the 5000 and found it to be wanting. It really shared a lot of the shortcomings of the 990 and added an even slower lens. I checked out the Sony FDC707 and found it superior in every way-- so much so, I bought one. The fast Zeiss lens, 58mm filter size (easy to use my Cokin filters)and the best manual focus system I've ever used on a digital camera, really add up to make s superior product. I shot a parade last year with the 990 and had to use the optical finder for most of the shots and got home with most shots so out of focus they were unusable. (Hard to see the focus confirmation light in bright sunlight and the LCD is completely unusable in those conditions.) The 707, however, has a LCD viewfinder and adds some truly unique features like Nightshot and laser autofocus aid. At the same parade this year, with the 707 instead of the Nikon, the yield was 100% in-focus and well-exposed shots, including video!!! I can't think of much praise for the Nikon digital cameras, other than to say they make the competition look even better after you've used one for any length of time.

The Nikon CoolPix 5000 is my first foray into digital photography, (only purchased after consultation with some knowledgable pros), after 4 decades of film photography, the last professionally (and using Nikons, among others). After using it I am apalled by some of the attributes of the camera: the unbelieveable shutter lag; the teenie, tiny size and unintuitive location of controls; the fact my (moderate size) hand wants to hide the flash sensor; the lens hood (necessary for outdoor work) that partially blocks the viewfinder and built-in flash; the limited f/stops (2.8/4.0 to 8.0 - I really want an f/16, or at least an f/11 for depth of field; the nearly unusable viewfinder; and the unconscionable delays finding focus and exposure. None-the-less, I am very pleased with the quality of the prints I am able to produce from the CoolPix 5000 digital files!

the limited f/stops (2.8/4.0 to 8.0 - I really want an f/16, or at least an f/11 for depth of field

The DOF of most digital cameras is (at the same aperture) significantly bigger than for, say, 35mm format since the CCD used to capture the image is a lot smaller than the size of a negative. Trust me, getting big DOF on a (consumer-level) digital camera is no big deal - getting a small DOF is a much bigger problem, even at f/2.0...

The DOF of most digital cameras is (at the same aperture) significantly bigger than for, say, 35mm format since the CCD used to capture the image is a lot smaller than the size of a negative.

I think that is not correct: a smaller sensor (film format, CCD chip) causes less DoF and a shorter focal length causes more DoF. The effect of a shorter focal length, however, is greater than that of the smaller sensor and the end result is more DoF.

Without going head to head with anyone, I shall simply note that the Nikon Coolpix 5000 was rushed out to make the past Christmas market season, as best I know. The "firmware" was a mess and I was told a number of cameras jammed because lens caps weren't removed before turning camera on. I had that experience and was able to overcome it without the upgrade; however it put me out of business on a rare offroad snowfall day in southern New Mexico and curtailed a day's work.

The latest major to me problem, just a few months after Christmas season purchase, is the receptacle for the USB cable literally coming loose inside camera. Nikon gave me info on shipping it via telephone and I have since received a bill from Torrance California for over $200. How totally unlike a company I had almost reverred since FNs and early Nikonos. I would add that the lens does not seem as sharp as many of theirs I have used and do use. And the manual focus is a joke. I have found there is a definite reddish tint on occasion. On high ISO-equivalents, the skies and other parts of images are full of holes.

I suggest that the Nikon Coolpic 5000 is not up to Nikon standards and I am one of those trapped without recourse by a less than worthy product. Caveat Emptor. But what do I know? I've only been shooting since the 1940s.

john s. flannery

Comments about the plastic feel of digital cameras seem odd to me. I suppose if someone talked about the plastic feel of an iBook compared to a full business manual typewriter like a Pre WWII Imperial where the thing is made of lots of heavy metal and the keys need to be pounded down a good two inches to make the key strike the paper it would be a little bit comparable. Also just having held a Leica M7 I was surprised by the weight and I know it is a precision instrument, not like the typewriter, but they are all tools. Having used digital cameras since 1997, I think this model from Nikon is quite good. I have just purchased the improved Coolpix 5700 and will be commenting on it after a week or three of use. Initial impressions, lens seems good, no focus problems yet. Interface good. Shutter delay is much improved, still not SLR speed or RF, but much better faster than a Canon G2. regards Bill Gibson

I've owned a Coolpix 5000 for a total of 10 hours. Nikon really goofed on this one. My finger is right in front of the photo cell causing my flash (SB50DX) to blast out like a rocket. Then, you can'tturn the flash off if you are going to use studio stobes. Yes, this camera is not a grand anymore. But for the $699 I paid for it, it should be better designed. I'm bringing it back to B&H tomorrow andwill save my cash till I can afford an SLR. One other thing, how can this camera be TTL with the SB50DX if the photocell controls the flash?

The "firmware" was a mess and I was told a number of cameras jammed because lens caps weren't removed before turning camera on.

This would be a problem, except for that a firmware upgrade was released a couple months ago. I purchased this camera as my first digital camera after months of playing around wtih cameras and photo's, not "expert" opinions. I have been talking pictures on SLR camera for years and ventured into the unknown. I am hardly disappointed with this camera. The shots I've taken (as displayed on this site) are of the lowest quality the camera has to offer. The camera does have a little "shutter lag", but this is standard on most digital cameras. Sony does a wonderful job masking this lag by making an "initating" sound followed by a shutter clicking sound when the picture is taken. All in all, it's about pictures, and these pictures are just amazing. At times the button placement is very odd, but the camera does a wonderful job automatically detecting things that it's a mystery people would complain about them; being they rarly need to be touched.

Hi all

I purchased a coolpix 5000 in July 2002 and am very happy with it. There was an initial steep learning curve but some of this is probabily because it's my first digital camera. The only shortcoming I have found is that the optical zoom is limited, but for wideangle shots it's very good especially with the wide angle lens that gives a FL of 19mm. I purchased the X2 teleconvertor which has given me a FL of 170mm.

Now with the latest software upgrade to 1.7 I can also opt to use the Nikon NEF raw data format.

When looking for a camera I tried both Cannon & Fuji models but much prefered the Nikon.

Roy

This camera, contrary to the review, is an excellent device. In my experience, however, this camera cannot be adequately reviewed by only snapping pictures in full-auto. I took about three pictures with my CP5000 in P mode before switching over to manual.

This is very much a camera only for enthusiasts. If you want a simple point and shoot camera, look elsewhere. If you want to be able to control just about everything, this is a great camera.

The lens is unusual for digital cameras - its low end is wider than most cameras, and focusing at incredibly close distances is a breeze using the manual matrix selection. It's quite possible to shoot images at greater than 1:1 and still produce acceptable images.

My only real complaint about the camera is the aperture; it really is too slow.

Overall, this camera is great for enthusiasts who like to control the way their pictures come out.

removed

A few tips on the CP 5000, which I've found to be an excellent camera overall:

1 Shoot at the low contrast setting

2 Shoot with no sharpening

3 Get the latest firmware update (free) that allows RAW storage

4 Use the external battery pack (increases the heft and size of the camera and lasts for a more than acceptable number of shots)

5 Pre-focus, which decreases the shutter lag, although not to SLR or RF standards

6 Check your resolution settings frequently, as it is possible to inadvertently change settings

Finally, I agree with Jason above. This is not a camera for snap shooters-- it's not nearly convenient enough. It is, however, a versatile tool for those willing to learn how to use it and take the time to do so.

The Nikon Coolpix 5000 is a good camera with more settings you will ever need. I am also using a Coolpix 950 (especially for Macro photography). What i like is the size of the camera in combination with the MB5000 (hand/battery grip with a release button for vertical images and zooming). With the MB5000 you will get a better balanced grip on this camera with a speedlight (like the SB24).

The biggest problem is shoot indoor pictures with the built in flash. It's tricky to focus and often very difficult to get well exposed pictures (too light in close distance, too dark when trying to exposure large indoor environments). For all photography outside in daylight, the quality is very good, well detailed (i am using this camera for architectural photography, natural colours en sharpness are excellent). For fast snapshot photography or photography where you want to use the build in flash i would definately recommend another digital camera (by example Canon).