COOLPIX 5000 5.0 MegaPixel Digital Camera - $689

[Fauji]

I can't believe the people who think 3 Mpixel is enough because most people can't tell the difference between normal prints and prints taken from a digital camera. To get "National Geographic" quality, which would keep me happy, you need about 250 dpi, and with a size of 10x8 we need 5 Mpixels.

Oh, by the way, New Mexico has a speed limit of 75 mph.

 

[amheck]

To get National Geographic quality, you probably also need a $2000+ (if not more) digital or SLR camera setup.

Aaron

 

[MegaNerd]

DPReview has a detailed review of this camera here.

 

[Fritzo]

<<
huh? i think your definition of true photo quality is a tad low. 3 mpix is good for 4x6, and only marginal for anything higher. >>



Double huh????? You can get a photo quality 4x6 from a 1 MP camera. If you shrink a 3 MP picture down to 4x6 size, you'll start to get blockiness from pixel compression. Here's a chart for a rough estimates of MP/print size:

640x480: wallet size, or web shots
1MP: 3x5, marginal 4x6
1.3MP: 4x6, marginal 5x7
2.0MP: 5x7, marginal 8x10
3.0MP: 8x10, marginal 10x13
4.0MO: 10x13.........and so on.

Obviously, the higher the fractional MP rating, the better the marginal size quality is going to be (ie- 2.2MP is going to make better 8x10's than a 2.0MP camera).

I've been into digital photgraphy for about three years ( first camera was a Photorun 320x240, cool camera, CRAPPY pictures), and I've been an Olympus fan for quite a while. I've got a C-2100uz with a B-300 teleconverter (17x zoom there baby!) @ 2.1 MP, a C-3000z that I use for a general purpose shooting, and a Fuji 1300 that we use as a glove compartment camera (for those "Oooo....look at that!" moments ). I almost always use the 2.1 MP setting on both of my Oly's because that gives the best quality/storage ratio. At 2.1MP, I print out almost everything at 5x7 on my Lexmark Z53 and they look perfect. I like to use the 2100 for outdoor shooting and the 3000z inside for my portaits. So, long story short, not sure where you got 3MP will only do 4x6's.

 

[AirMail1]

Hi,
I did a little bit of research on AMPhotoworld. (I was trying to PM their 669 price of the Sony DSC707 (5mg) to Sears). Anyway long and short of it: It is NOT a USA warranty. (thus Sears will NOT PM) If you have a warranty problem, I am told that the unit has to be shipped directly to the mfr (which means a trip to Japan) to correct it.

I bumped into another site, (which I believe deserves its own thread and will mention separately also)
DigitalDealz.com that has the Nikon (and a bunch of other cameras) for about the same price as AMPhot0 and it claims to have a USA warranty.

 

[ragazzo]

bwayphoto.com $669. bizrated at bizrate.com

 

[Fritzo]

<< Hi,
I did a little bit of research on AMPhotoworld. (I was trying to PM their 669 price of the Sony DSC707 (5mg) to Sears). Anyway long and short of it: It is NOT a USA warranty. (thus Sears will NOT PM) If you have a warranty problem, I am told that the unit has to be shipped directly to the mfr (which means a trip to Japan) to correct it.

I bumped into another site, (which I believe deserves its own thread and will mention separately also)
DigitalDealz.com that has the Nikon (and a bunch of other cameras) for about the same price as AMPhot0 and it claims to have a USA warranty. >>


WARNING!!! If this is true, then this is what's known as a gray market camera. Most manufacturers only provide a warranty for the country the camera was intended for. If it's bought in another country, the warranty my be either void, or severely reduced. Watch out!

 

[TBC]

<<

Not sure why anyone would need a 5 megapixel camera. Even 4 is getting to be too much useful resolution. What are you going to do with a 5 MP photo...print out a 20x24 poster? People are being fooled into thinking that the megapixel rating on a camera equates to the mhz rating on PC's...meaning people are thinking that a 5 MP camera is more powerful than a 3 or 4 MP camera. At 4 MP, you can make a photo quality 10x13, and a 3 MP, you can make photoquality 8x10's (the largest size most of us are going to print anyway, unless you have some sooper dooper printer capabile of going larger). Unless you're some kind of professional magazine photographer, I can't think of any reason to fork out the extra money for a 5 MP camera. I hope this isn't going to be a trend where camera manufacturers try to press the point that "More megapixels is better". Even if you did get this camera, who would actually use the 5MP setting? That would take a up a 128MB card in no time flat! I think that camera manufacturers should drop the MP "p*ssing" contest and start adding useful features like higher optical zooms, better flashes, longer battery life, larger screens, etc.



huh? i think your definition of true photo quality is a tad low. 3 mpix is good for 4x6, and only marginal for anything higher. >>


And I say your reply is nonsense. 3mega pixels is even perfect for 8x10 prints. I also agree with the person you replied to, as its all marketing hype to get you to buy the latest.

 

[MoshiMoro]

Again, use the magazine ads to pricematch! Not the website! Worked for me at Sears.

The price of $609 was found at A&MPhoto, two days ago. They flutuate all the time. Just wait for it to go down again.

 

[patrickzhao]

Does sears do 110% PM. and, is it possible to get another 10% off promotion listed on sears website.

 

[randomlinh]

btw, a 3-4mp cam w/ a 10x zoom is great and all.. but you forgot one thing.. at 10x you will want IS, IS is expensive.

 

[greg]

On the 5MP being overkill:

You aren't JUST buying the camera for the 5MP and if you were, then it would be overkill. You are buying it for the quality of the picture. I have owned nearly all popular digicams up to 5MP ( I sold them for living last year). There is a clear, discernable difference between a 5MP and a 1,2, or 3 MP camera all other things being equal. You get the latest optics and the latest CCDs. If you buy for snapshots, then small and light is the way to go. If you are concerned with getting beautiful portraits and more creativity, you get a real camera.

If you think that a 5MP camera simply adds pixels to make the picture better you are missing the point and likely won't ever need a 5MP camera.

Similarly, medium and large format cameras offers a simply stunning improvement over 90% of 35mm cameras dollar for dollar. Likewise, the depth and clarity of the best 4 and 5MP cameras is simply not achievable in lower res cameras, period. If I showed you the best pics taken with a 3MP vs a 2MP of comparable quality you'd see the light. I currently own a FUJI 2800, and a Canon G1. The canon's pictures are so far superior to the fuji's that the difference in $ is worth it. To illustrate my point, I took several pics with the canon at the 2mp setting and the fuji at 2mp. The canon takes 3D like portraits while the FUJI takes snapshots. I like them both, but for different purposes.

Cameras I have used for more than 2 months (roughly 2,000 shots)

Nikon 800, 880, 885, 775, 995, 5000
Canon G1, G2, S20, A20
Olympus 2040, 3030, 4040, 3000
Kodak 4800
Fuji 2800
Minolta Diamge 5 and 7

 

[scsiguru]

Nice find...but I'm going to wait for the Nikon D100

 

[AirMail1]

A couple FYIs

Greg,
That Canon G2 is supposed to be a smoking camera.
As for the other ones. Any comments about the image quality between the Nikon 5000 vs the 995?
I still went with the Sony. Battery and lens were the biggest pros. Only neg was the memory stick. I would have preferred compact flash.

As for others about Sears pricematching.
NO. They wont Pricematch AND add the 10% sale into the deal. Well at least NOT for me and I was polite and had a very polite CSR who tried to get it to go thru, pleading my case with a manager. Though as everything else YMMV.

 

[Tiggerbaby]

Canon G2 is cool!
Nikon Coolpix 5000 is so-so

www.dpreview.com Rules!

 

[PsychoAndy]

<<

<< Hi,
I did a little bit of research on AMPhotoworld. (I was trying to PM their 669 price of the Sony DSC707 (5mg) to Sears). Anyway long and short of it: It is NOT a USA warranty. (thus Sears will NOT PM) If you have a warranty problem, I am told that the unit has to be shipped directly to the mfr (which means a trip to Japan) to correct it.

I bumped into another site, (which I believe deserves its own thread and will mention separately also)
DigitalDealz.com that has the Nikon (and a bunch of other cameras) for about the same price as AMPhot0 and it claims to have a USA warranty. >>


WARNING!!! If this is true, then this is what's known as a gray market camera. Most manufacturers only provide a warranty for the country the camera was intended for. If it's bought in another country, the warranty my be either void, or severely reduced. Watch out! >>



uh, isnt that what i said about 15 posts up?

 

[kindest]

if your willing to pay this much for a camera, take a look at the Canon G2.
In a comparsion between the G2 and the 5000, the G2 pretty much blows it away.
Something to think about.
Check out a very lengthy and detailed comparsion between the two here.

 

[iamme]

Out of curiosity, would a picture that was taken with a 5MP camera, and then shrunk to print in an 8x10 canvas look better....or a picture taken with the same camera, taken at the 8x10 size (2 or 3 MP)?

 

[Fritzo]

<< On the 5MP being overkill:

You aren't JUST buying the camera for the 5MP and if you were, then it would be overkill. You are buying it for the quality of the picture. I have owned nearly all popular digicams up to 5MP ( I sold them for living last year). There is a clear, discernable difference between a 5MP and a 1,2, or 3 MP camera all other things being equal. You get the latest optics and the latest CCDs. If you buy for snapshots, then small and light is the way to go. If you are concerned with getting beautiful portraits and more creativity, you get a real camera.

If you think that a 5MP camera simply adds pixels to make the picture better you are missing the point and likely won't ever need a 5MP camera.

Similarly, medium and large format cameras offers a simply stunning improvement over 90% of 35mm cameras dollar for dollar. Likewise, the depth and clarity of the best 4 and 5MP cameras is simply not achievable in lower res cameras, period. If I showed you the best pics taken with a 3MP vs a 2MP of comparable quality you'd see the light. I currently own a FUJI 2800, and a Canon G1. The canon's pictures are so far superior to the fuji's that the difference in $ is worth it. To illustrate my point, I took several pics with the canon at the 2mp setting and the fuji at 2mp. The canon takes 3D like portraits while the FUJI takes snapshots. I like them both, but for different purposes.

>>



Your point is not an issue of megapixel rating, it's an issue of optics and CCD technology. Canon makes damn fine optics, and probably makes some of the best digicams around. The Fuji, while a good camera, won't be able to compare. This camera, while 5MP, has a slower lens than my Olympus. MP ratings are cheap ways for manufacturers to upgrade their camera lines...my point is that camera manufactuers should focus on optics (no pun intended) and other features....we have plenty of resolution already.

 

[Fritzo]

<<

<< People are being fooled into thinking that the megapixel rating on a camera equates to the mhz rating on PC's...meaning people are thinking that a 5 MP camera is more powerful than a 3 or 4 MP camera. >>




Sounds like you got fooled too. Mhz is not a good indicator of processing power for PCs just like megapixels isn't good enough to describe camera quality. >>



Boy...my point just parted your hair right down the middle, didn't it.

WHat I'm saying is that camera companies are using the same technique that PC manufacturers are using to increase sales...adding higher numbers to the "rating" of the device rather than improving the rest of the components.

 

[Fritzo]

<< [

uh, isnt that what i said about 15 posts up? >>



Sorry...missed it

 

[AirMail1]

I believe the optics on the Sony are as good as it gets. A Carl Zeiss lens that was specifically made for digital. (has something to do with how digital captures pixels and refraction which is a little bit different than film). Also its no fluke when you notice the diameter of that lens and see how well it works in low level light and I am not referring to the night vision thing either. (this thing works better indoors than any other camera I demoed. (every prosumer camera on the market)

BTW cameras are getting better. I dont believe its a scam. MegaPixel might be a little overhyped but the latest Foveon chip IS going to revolutionize the digital market. A lot more depth and truer color.

I just wish I could have held out till they became more prevalent.

Sigma just came out with the first one available for retail (soon to be released though its supposed to go for 3000) the S9D I believe.

Anyway just thought I would add my two cents. I forgot this wasnt dpreview or stevesdigicams but a hot deals board.

Bottom line: I dont think you can go wrong with any of the higher end cams posted in this thread after applying the deals via PMing.

 

[mintyfresh]

I have been looking for months. It will be easy (or at least east to attempt) to price match any camera using the magazine method.

Conclusions:
1) CP5000 sucks, compared to certain good 4MP cameras.

So which is better, the Canon G2 or the Sony DSC-S85 is very good? Let's remove the memorystick and CF issue from the debate.

Which is better?

 

[robsdeals]

More is Better, Go with 5MP!
Just ask that guy in the 4-cyl car merging on the thruway,
He wishes got the 6-cyl.

 

[Freejack2]

Actually a 4 cylinder coupled to a manual transmission can very much hold it's own.
As for cameras, here is a question. Is photo quality set at some arbitrary point, or is photo quality based on a point where the naked human eye is incapable of determining any loss of quality, over physically viewing the scene in person?

Apparently Kodak has a back that attaches to certain professional cameras and captures at a 16 megapixel (4080x4080) resolution.
I get the the impression that this means there is a reason for it. I suppose it could be so posters can be made of the photos from it, but would printing on some ultra-hires professional printer show any difference?