Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

I really want to like the Nikon 8800, but... help please. ..

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
January 20, 2005 3:03:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

My first digital camera was a Nikon CP950, and it was excellent,
providing me with 1000's of nicely exposed, perfectly focused pictures.
I next bought a Canon S400 for more pixels and extreme portability and
now have the S500, having given my wife the S400. The S500 takes superb
images (the camera performance still amazes me!), and 14x17 inch prints
are very sharp. However, my goal has always been something like 8 mpx
in part to allow for small crops, a much longer zoom, and vibration
reduction (VR). Also, I thought it would be nice to have some extras,
like a movie mode, time-lapse, long night-time exposures, and so on. For
me the definition of a good camera is a camera that you have with you.
I looked at the Canon 20D loved its sophistication and quality. But
it's big. My last and best film camera was a Canon EOS 10s, a great
camera that I didn't even take on vacations after a while; I dreaded
lugging it around. So... I thought the Nikon 8800 could be the answer
to my dreams. It has everything I wanted, and it wasn't too big.
However, I tried one out for a while in a camera store, and I was
annoyed by the shutter lag and the hunting around for focus at full
telephoto. These things of course have been major complaints about the
camera, but the CP950 is no speed demon, and speed never bothered me
with it. Neither did lack of higher ISOs. But I comapered the 8800 to
the Panasonic FZ20, and the latter just seemed to be snappier and more
responsive in my hands. The 8800 seemed sluggish in comparison. maybe
I expect much more than when I bought my CP950.

So, on to my questions. For those of you that own Nikon 8800s and have
used them for a while, how annoying have you found this sluggishness?
Has it interferred with getting pictures you want? Have you just
developed techniques that more or less unconsciously allow you to
compensate for shutter lag so that you hardly notice it (that's what
happened to me on my 950).

Any comments would be appreciated. The ideal thing would be to rent one
for a day and do a lot of shooting, but there doesn't seem to be
anyplace around here that does that. Also, I just may try to be patient
and wait to see what Canon's next move will be. I think they will have
to offer something competitive to the 8800.

Thanks in advance.

More about : nikon 8800

Anonymous
January 21, 2005 12:28:24 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>" Also, I just may try to be patient
> and wait to see what Canon's next move will be. I think they will have
> to offer something competitive to the 8800.
>
> Thanks in advance.

have a look at the Canon S1-pro.
Anonymous
January 21, 2005 12:40:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Joseph Miller wrote:

> So, on to my questions. For those of you that own Nikon 8800s and have
> used them for a while, how annoying have you found this sluggishness?
> Has it interferred with getting pictures you want? Have you just
> developed techniques that more or less unconsciously allow you to
> compensate for shutter lag so that you hardly notice it (that's what
> happened to me on my 950).

I've got a Kodak DX6490. It's bloody slow compared to a DSLR, and its slowness
often results in out of focus or completely missed shots. I will buy a Pentax
DSLR before May to replace it. I will continue to use the Kodak for landscape
photography, but it's no where near up to the task of trying to take photos of
my 15 month old daughter running around the room.

--
--
Ben Thomas - Software Engineer - Melbourne, Australia

My Digital World:
Kodak DX6490, Canon i9950, Pioneer A05;
Hitachi 37" HD plasma display, DGTEC 2000A,
Denon 2800, H/K AVR4500, Whatmough Encore;
Sony Ericsson K700i, Palm Tungsten T.

Disclaimer:
Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
relate to the official business of my employer shall be understood as neither
given nor endorsed by it.
Related resources
Anonymous
January 21, 2005 12:49:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Canongirly wrote:
>
> "Joseph Miller" <miller@ucolick.org> wrote in message
> news:41f00fb3$1@darkstar...
>
>> Sorry got the camera name wrong i meant this one
>
>
> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/canon_pro1....

I took a hard look at that camera and had two major reservations:

With the long telephoto, I would really like vibration reduction. It is
great on the 8800. If it had VR, I'd probably buy it immediately.

Noise is visible starting at ISO 100. That's not too good.


The eternal problem. Nothing is perfect! I don't feel an urgency to buy
right now, so I'll give it a while.

Thanks for reminding mne about the Canon.

Joe
Anonymous
January 21, 2005 1:39:47 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Joseph Miller wrote:
> But I comapered the 8800 to the Panasonic FZ20,
> and the latter just seemed to be snappier and more responsive in my
> hands. The 8800 seemed sluggish in comparison. maybe I expect much
> more than when I bought my CP950.

I went for the Panasonic FZ20 instead - at maximum zoom its lens is f/2.8
rather than the f/2.9 of the Nikon. 5MP was enough, and it costs much
less, of course. If you want an image-stabilised camera that's even
smaller taking AA batteries and CF cards, the Canon S1 IS is another
possibility. It is only 3.2MP, though.

By the way: there is a new newsgroup where these type of cameras (ZLR) can
be discussed:
rec.photo.digital.zlr
You'd be welcome!

Cheers,
David
Anonymous
January 21, 2005 2:08:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

David J Taylor wrote:
[]
> I went for the Panasonic FZ20 instead - at maximum zoom its lens is
> f/2.8 rather than the f/2.9 of the Nikon.

Should read:
I went for the Panasonic FZ20 instead - at maximum zoom its lens is f/2.8
rather than the f/4.9 of the Nikon.
Anonymous
January 21, 2005 3:45:00 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

D
>
> By the way: there is a new newsgroup where these type of cameras (ZLR) can
> be discussed:
> rec.photo.digital.zlr
> You'd be welcome!

The last time I went there, a week or two ago, it was so dead that I
didn't find much of interest.
Anonymous
January 21, 2005 7:34:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Greetings Ben,

I can understand your frustration, Ben, I have two Daughters as well.
Catching those special moments is really key.

As to the camera being slow, the camera actions are as fast as they are set
to be. What is taking time is the prep for the next picture, i.e. CCD has
to be flushed and ready for another shot. Also, the buffer memory may be
full if you have taken several shots and so will not allow another picture
until the pictures you have already taken are processed. Is that a possible
scenario? Also, keep in mind that the setting you choose from the many on
the list of possible options will make a difference as well. Certain scene
modes or other set the camera to particular settings. So, it is possible
that these settings are not what you want.

One of the great options that your camera has is the external flash feature.
Like you, I took a great many pictures of my girls when they were young and
when I had the chance as they grew up. I was fortunate to have a good flash,
so I learned to use it pretty well. You may want to consider getting a good
flash that has a few options that you can set as well. Makes a great deal
of difference in the resulting pictures (i.e. stopping action etc.). Flash
does not use any features of the camera only receives a pulse sent to it
trigger the flash. So, all your settings if you want them, will be on the
flash.

When I use my DX6490 I attach it and my flash to a flash handle. Lets me
keep the flash over the camera to reduce shadow and stop the actions that
kids can get into. It will be worth the investment in the years to come.
Of course, your flash range will be greatly extended.

Talk to you soon,

Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company



"Ben Thomas" <nosp@m.thanks.mate> wrote in message
news:ve8psc.5q9.ln@192.168.11.2...
> Joseph Miller wrote:
>
> > So, on to my questions. For those of you that own Nikon 8800s and have
> > used them for a while, how annoying have you found this sluggishness?
> > Has it interferred with getting pictures you want? Have you just
> > developed techniques that more or less unconsciously allow you to
> > compensate for shutter lag so that you hardly notice it (that's what
> > happened to me on my 950).
>
> I've got a Kodak DX6490. It's bloody slow compared to a DSLR, and its
slowness
> often results in out of focus or completely missed shots. I will buy a
Pentax
> DSLR before May to replace it. I will continue to use the Kodak for
landscape
> photography, but it's no where near up to the task of trying to take
photos of
> my 15 month old daughter running around the room.
>
> --
> --
> Ben Thomas - Software Engineer - Melbourne, Australia
>
> My Digital World:
> Kodak DX6490, Canon i9950, Pioneer A05;
> Hitachi 37" HD plasma display, DGTEC 2000A,
> Denon 2800, H/K AVR4500, Whatmough Encore;
> Sony Ericsson K700i, Palm Tungsten T.
>
> Disclaimer:
> Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
> relate to the official business of my employer shall be understood as
neither
> given nor endorsed by it.
Anonymous
January 22, 2005 2:47:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Joseph Miller wrote:
> D
>>
>> By the way: there is a new newsgroup where these type of cameras
>> (ZLR) can be discussed:
>> rec.photo.digital.zlr
>> You'd be welcome!
>
> The last time I went there, a week or two ago, it was so dead that I
> didn't find much of interest.

It was created to help focus discussions, and reduce the overwhelming
volume of posts here. Hope to see your next ZLR question there.

Cheers,
David
!