To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.publish.photographyOpen lugnet.publish.photography in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Publishing / Photography / 197
196  |  198
Subject: 
Re: Nikon CoolPix 2100 Rating?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.castle, lugnet.publish.photography, lugnet.space
Date: 
Thu, 24 Apr 2003 12:29:57 GMT
Viewed: 
18 times
  
In lugnet.castle, Jon Palmer writes:
"Aaron Muhl" <Aaron_Muhl@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:HDu527.oEJ@lugnet.com...
Since I'm not really getting anywhere in publish.photography, I was
wondering if the two largest groups could comment.  Anybody used this • camera
listed below?

Don't use it but I know Bram uses a Coolpix camera.  He's been a bit
un-Lugnet lately due to school (so he most likely won't see this) but you
might try him.


Bram, as well as Troy Cefaratti, both have the Coolpix 995, and I have the
Coolpix 4500 (which is basically the 995's followup).  They're the split-body
design, and I love my camera dearly.  They are more mid-to top of the line than
the camera that you're eying, Aaron, so the featureset clearly isn't the same.
But when you're spending 3 times as much on the thing, you'd expect a little
more.

One thing to watch out for, if you're interested in photographing extreme
closeups of small creations, you'll want a camera with a good macro zoom.  The
4500 can go as close as 3/4 of an inch when in macro mode.  I don't know what
the 2100 can do, as the page you posted didn't specify whether it has a macro
mode or not.

Assuming that the 2100 interfaces with a PC the same as the 4500 does, you
won't need any additional cardreaders or anything crazy like that.  When it's
plugged in and properly configured, it'll see the camera as removeable hard
drive, basically.  You'll be able to copy images off the camera with ease.

One thing you might think about getting is 1) an AC power cord and 2) an extra
battery.  My 4500 sucks the battery charge like crazy, so I'm always running
out of juice (especially when I forget to turn the camera off when I'm done
transferring images, which is something I frequently do).  Again, the 2100 is
less feature rich, so it may not chew through the power as quickly, but they're
still good things to have.

All in all, Nikon makes some damn fine digital cameras, but unfortunately I
don't know that much about your particular model.

Jeez, that's a lot of babbling.  I hope you got something out of it.

Adrian
--
http://www.brickfrenzy.com



Message has 1 Reply:
  RE: Nikon CoolPix 2100 Rating?
 
(...) Actually, I have the 990, which is one model earlier than the 995. Troy is using a Canon EOS D10 these days. I'm quite happy with all the features on my camera...manual/automatic focus, f-stop, shutter speed, white balance, flash, etc. The (...) (22 years ago, 24-Apr-03, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.publish.photography, lugnet.space)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Nikon CoolPix 2100 Rating?
 
"Aaron Muhl" <Aaron_Muhl@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:HDu527.oEJ@lugnet.com... (...) camera (...) Don't use it but I know Bram uses a Coolpix camera. He's been a bit un-Lugnet lately due to school (so he most likely won't see this) but you might (...) (22 years ago, 24-Apr-03, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.publish.photography, lugnet.space)

7 Messages in This Thread:



Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR