| |
Adrian Drake writes:
> 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.
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 swivel body also comes in handy often.
However, the 990 is pretty bulky and heavy.
> 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.
I think the 2100 is the one used by the lab I work in. It does have a
macro mode, and it takes great pictures of our small robot parts. Not
sure what other features it has though...I haven't used it a whole lot.
> 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.
Yup.
> 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.
I'm pretty sure the 2100 eats batteries just like every other Nikon.
Thankfully, the 990 uses AA's, so i have several sets of rechargeable
NiMH AAs that I can pop in when I forget to turn the camera off when
it's plugged in to my computer.
There are a couple things I wish my camera did better:
A bigger zoom would be great for non-Lego pictures
The autofocus is kind of slow, making it hard to take pictures of moving
subjects
The red-eye reduction doesn't really work. Part of that problem was
fixed in the 995 by moving the flash, but I don't know how well it works
on the 2100.
You'll probably also want to invest in a bigger compact flash card so
you can take more pictures. 16 MB doesn't hold much.
--Bram
Bram Lambrecht
bram@cwru.edu
www.bldesign.org
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
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
|
|
|
|
