Nikon’s Latest Lives Up to its Name
I’ll confess my bias up front. For nearly two years I’ve been using an Epson PhotoPC 850Z ($619 street price) in my design business and I’ve been very pleased — not to mention familiar — with it. As result, I can’t but help compare my experience with the Epson camera to the new Nikon CoolPix 990. But the 3.3-megapixel CoolPix takes resolution to the next level (2,048 x 1,536 pixels), while the PhotoPC 850Z tops out at 2.1 megapixels (1,600 x 1,200 pixels).
First impressions are important. When I unwrapped the CoolPix 990 I was disappointed to see that the package contained four unrechargeable AA alkaline batteries. The LCD (liquid crystal display) that allows you to preview images on the camera unit is notorious for gobbling up battery life. After a 4-hour sightseeing drive with the CoolPix I had 12 discarded batteries to show for it. In the long run disposable batteries are expensive, wasteful (not to mention ecologically irresponsible), and inconvenient. Naturally, I could buy NiMH rechargeables (recommended in the manual) and a charger, but for $999 I’d expect them to be included with the CoolPix, as they are with the less-expensive Epson and Olympus cameras I’ve used. The CoolPix also lacks an AC-power adapter (available separately for $49.95). Why should I drain the batteries when I’m at my desk downloading images?
Nikon Provides a USB cable with which to download images to the PC, but I probably won’t use it. I’m hooked on Lexar’s JumpShot CompactFlash Reader (included with the CoolPix) — a USB cable with a built-in Compact Flash (CF) slot. I can store images on the included 16MB CF card, then pop the card out of the camera and insert it into the JumpShot slot, where my PC recognizes it as drive G. This eliminates a download delay as well as the battery drain, and lets me retrieve images just as I would from any drive. Nikon also sells a 64MB CF card for $249 and a 96MB card for $349.
Physical Fitness
Ergonomically, the CoolPix is lightweight and easy to hold (at least for a right-hander), with a large extruded rubber grip area for one-handed operation. The shutter button falls naturally under the forefinger, while the zoom buttons are within easy reach of the thumb. By contrast, in my previous experience with Kodak’s digital cameras my fingers were either covering the lens (with the DC215) or the LCD (with the DC240 and DC280) because these features were too close to the camera’s edge.
The CoolPix’s most distinctive feature still baffles me. The camera is split nearly down the middle into two pieces joined by a swivel hinge. One half contains the electronics — the LCDs, buttons, and dials — while the other comprises the lens, viewfinder, and flash apparatus. In its default state, the lens points upward, while the viewfinder sits on the camera’s underside. To operate the camera normally — that is, to photograph something in front of you — you must swivel the lens 90 degrees. Why should you have to bother with this? Sure, this lets you view the LCD straight-on regardless of where the lens is pointed, but come on, how often do you need to shoot at odd angles? Of course, you can also swivel the lens 90 degrees in the opposite direction for a self-portrait, but unless you’re an exhibitionist, I doubt it’s worth the inconvenience this design imposes.
Another serious problem for me is the CoolPix’s removable lens cap. This is primarily a field camera. The last thing I want to fiddle with outdoors is a quarter-size plastic disc, which is sure to get lost in no time. This also adds another tedious step to taking a simple picture. Yet to go without the lens cap is to risk damaging a pricey camera.
Which begs another question: Why don’t digital cameras come with any protection for the exposed and very vulnerable LCD screen? The CoolPix’s LCD, as with most other cameras I’ve seen, easily can be scratched on buttons, snaps, and zippers just bouncing on its strap around my neck; not to mention the dangers posed by protruding objects while I scramble to get a good shot. A simple zippered pouch for the camera would be nice (another option for $19.95).
Not only did I find the lens fumbling to be a nuisance, I frankly don’t use an LCD to frame my shots very often, for two reasons. The first is the obvious battery drain. The second is that I’ve found in most outdoor situations the lighting is just too bright to see the LCD clearly. What’s more, it’s just more natural to hold the camera to my eye than at arm’s length. Unfortunately, the CoolPix’s LCD comes on automatically every time the camera is switched on for picture taking. It can be turned off with two presses of the Monitor button — which the manual recommends — but there’s another annoying waste of time. Why isn’t the monitor off by default?
This article was last modified on January 6, 2023
This article was first published on November 10, 2000
Commenting is easier and faster when you're logged in!
Leave a Reply
I’m on my 3d CoolPix (900, 950 & 990) and must say that the 990 is a vast improvement over the 950. The majority of problems others mentioned with the 950 are gone or improved: CF card slot location, USB, battery life, startup and shooting speed. The interface and controls are much easier to access than before.
There are numerous settings that can be changed as default such as monitor on/off at startup. There are 3 user configurable presets, two of which are available by assigning them to external buttons, without diving into the menu system.
The swivel body simply allows for amazing shooting flexibility. In crowds, shooting OVER objects, etc. just cannot be done without the swivel body. Macro shots are incredible!
I agree with the lens cap annoyance. The included tether is a lame “solution”.
A few things NOT mentioned in the article…
The 990 has an optional wired remote available. This is excellent for low-light tripod shooting. It allows you to use the zoom and frame shots remotely with the LCD. Image quality and the array of available add-on lenses put the CoolPix heads above other digital cameras in its price range.
As for toughness, I’ve used all my CoolPix for business (construction site progress documentation), when hiking and mountain biking (crashes, too) and have never had problems. It’s at least as tough as my Nikon FM2 SLR.
I don’t yet own a digital camera so I read all I can about features, price and resolution. After reading the creativepro.com lead story (Friday 11/24) on the Epson digital camera, I could see it wasn’t for me. This article on the Coolpix was much more informative, every aspect of the camera–pro or con–was covered in detail and generated a lot of response from other readers. I learned a lot and I thank you.
i can’t understand how anyone could possibly complain about the extraordinary swivel-body design (and continue to cling to it). not only does it allow overhead shots, it opens the door for new compositional exploration. you can capture people acting naturally because you don’t have an imposing camera squared up to your face. you can get the social shots of your friends without anybody missing to take the shot, you just pull it out and shoot…no messing around with timer/tripod and missing the moment (this also affords dramatic compositional possibilities). you can get angles that you would otherwise be contorting your body or laying on the ground.
as for the lcd display…
i find the viewfinder gives inadequate control over framing. i would be completely annoyed if it didn’t turn on by default.
i think it’s strange that the flash card limitations of this camera weren’t discussed in the review. it will not accept cf type 2 cards. this means that the new microdrives will not fit. the camera is capable of producing excellent photos. if you choose to take advantage of the full resolution, you can take 1 photo on the supplied flash card. why didn’t nikon make the 990 compatible with these bigger and cheaper memory solutions?
I’ve owned a couple of “prosumer” digital cameras–NONE came with the AC adapter
or rechargeable batteries–ALL were options. The first time I used the 990 for a paying job,
I used the swivel head feature. A major downside–the flash causes red eye. The cure? Attach the Nikon SB28 flash. The results rival natural light!
This is a great camera. Not perfect, but close.
–Steve Bohne
I can’t understand how any photog would discount the usefulness of a swivel body. I’ve been a film and video shooter for 37 years and last year I purchased a Nikon 950. One week with the swivel body (yes, I thought it kinda weird at first) made me ask why every camera isn’t made this way. I get better and more interesting angles which would have never been possible without lying on the ground or standing on a ladder. I also get much better candid shots since no one even knows I’m shooting. I highly recommend this design be continued by Nikon.
Try it….if you can’t figure out how to make this one of the 990’s most useful features then good luck getting truly great shots.
I have had my 990 for two days and have been trying it for the kinds of situations I and the people in my group will use it. I rarely have the swivel in the same position for more than a few shots. It especially valuable for those pictures where the straight on doesn’t work, and maybe I’m odd, but that is a majority of them. Even when I was shooting a lot of landscapes, I was always looking for the new perspective I did a lot of work with old medium format equipment, and really missed the large, long relief focusing screens when I worked with 35mm equipmment. I love the fact that work like that again with even more flexibility. An advantage of the design for those of us who are right eyed is when using the viewfinder, it fits nicely to the eye because it is on the narrow end of the case.
Attaching the USB cable to the camera works splendidly, on the Mac it mounts on the desktop, and you can drag the pictures off, and it is fast. The lexar reader did not come with the camera, I will have to pay $10 dollars to get lexar to mail it to me.
I agree with points on the extras (case, etc). Nikon included the little nylon string for the lens cap, but there is not a great place to attach it. One thing about CF cards. The 990 need USB enabled CF. Regular CF will not work. The camera displayed a screen saying that the card will not work. I called Nikon and found it had to be this special CF. I had to send back the CF I bought to go with the camera (I specifically asked the vendor for CF to go with the 990). The USB enabled cost about $40 more for a 32MB card.
As with most advances in technology (and it is huge going from a 1024X768 to 2048X1536), those who need it usually pay a price for being early adopters. It is worth it to get full page prints from the dye-sub that make my colleagues gasp. I haven’t had that response from a digital camera’s output until now. It’s not film quality, but it is closest thing for the price.
I will concede that if you do a lot of shooting from the midst of a crowd, the swivel could be just the ticket for you. But I still maintain that its inconvenience in more common shooting situations outweighs such exceptions for the majority of users. As for macro shooting, I guess it’s a matter of personal taste. I too use the LCD, but I’d rather get real close and hold the camera *squarely* in both hands.
I feel compelled to jump in on the side of the Coolpix 990. Marty Beaudet’s not wrong about a number of small nuisance items, but I believe he misrepresents the camera when he takes most of the article to get around to its outstanding points. These are brilliant image quality, excellent “point and shoot” capability – especially default metering and focusing, excellent rapid-fire capabilities, wonderful weight and balance characteristics, and very fast booting after power up. The overall excellence of this camera in my opinion handily outweighs the detractions. I own a Coolpix 950, but I believe the cameras are similar enough that the following comments should be valid.
I strongly disagree with Marty’s opinion about the split body design , “The CoolPix’s most distinctive feature still baffles me.” This feature is INVALUABLE for being able to hold the camera above your head and get beautifully framed shots when the extra height is critical, as in crowd shots. I’ve gotten many great shots this way and I wouldn’t trade this feature for anything. Because the LCD screen is pointed down in this circumstance, it is almost always possible to easily see the image even in bright daylight.
Where I soundly agree with Marty is the lenscap issue. I believe it definitely should have a built-in lenscap that retracts with one automatic step when the camera is turned on..
And there are two other quirks of my Coolpix 950 that I find really aggravating:
1) The lens moves to a nearly fully zoomed-in setting whenever the camera is powered on. This robs a few precious seconds when trying to grab a quick shot. You have to wait for the camera to fully power up, then zoom back with the rather pokey zoom controls. It also means that you can’t leave the lens at a preferred default zoom setting.
2) The most aggravating feature is that even though the camera is capable of taking pictures very rapidly, you have to wait for the camera to store all of the current buffered pictures before you can move the zoom. This is INFURIATING. If Nikon hasn’t already corrected this in the 990, they really need to.
My bottom line is still that this is easily the best digital camera I’ve owned, and this is my fifth.
Bob Bradford
Los Angeles
I disagree with many of the complaints you have about the CoolPix features. I agree with their approach to what I would call basic accessories (case, power supply, and rechargeable batteries). Having used a CoolPix 950 for over a year, I wouldn’t have any other. The one feature that I like the most is the ability to rotate the viewfinder. In most situations I cannot just look though a view directly at the subject. I take many pictures of events where there are crowds and various objects in the way, the abilty to moved the viewfinder around is a tremendous boon. Also the ability to be able to color balance is another advantage as in the college we have several types of lights and combination of lights. So those things that you find inconvenient are of great of advantage to those of us that do more than basic snapshot photography.
I agree — the Nikon Coolpix series has definite user drawbacks. In particular, the monitor and the flash should be defaulted off for convenience and to save on battery power. I’ve found it a great nuisance to click several times to get to the no-flash option from auto-flash. In addition, the memory card “door” seems quite flimsy and the “abuse factor” on the camera is extremely low. Non-digital cameras are able to withstand abuse much better than this digital one, which has no serious outside protection. As for the camera lens, I connected a small nylon cord to the lens and attached it to the side of the Coolpix. It works quite well. At least, it doesn’t get lost.
Jamaio is right on, I am using a friends 950 for macro the swivel is great as is adjustable settings. What is surprising on the 950 is how cheezy the battery hatch and ram disc cover are. For this kind of money you would expect much better fit and finish, at least on par with a $100 point and shoot.
Is the 990 the same? I will be buying a 990 as I need it for macro with a light box , but if I were buying for home use I would look hard at it, maybe the next model will get it right.
I have to take many digipix standing in crowds. Swivel feature an absolute must, to be able to hold camera high above my 6ft 2in. head and clearly see what I’m taking. Any digital camera worth its value needs this feature (Agfa Ephoto 1680 has it)
Most non-pro photographers fail to think about images from other than the hold-the-camera-to-your-eye-and-snap perspective. I use my Coolpix 950 for macrophotography. The viewfinder is next to useless in this situation because of parallax. The best way to do macrophotos is to frame the image in the LCD screen. Better that the camera swivels than straining your neck to get close (real close) to your subject!
Another overlooked feature of the Nikon 9xx series is the broad range of custom settings available in the “manual setting”. Controlling depth of field by using aperture priority is but one example.
I’m surprised that you didn’t like the swiveling body of the Coolpix. I’ve owned both the Nikon 800 and more recently the Nikon 950, and must say that I purchased the Coolpix 800 because I thought the swiveling body was a gimmick. Just a few hours with a friend’s 950 made me a believer — and also a Coolpix 950 owner.
The swiveling body is very useful if you take pictures of children, as you can get the camera down on their level. They also don’t ham it up for the camera quite so much since they can’t really tell when you are taking the picture.
Ever try to take a picture over your head in a crowd? Without the Nikon swiveling body, you take your camera, stick it over your head and take your chances that you’re going to frame the picture. The Coolpix lets you see what you are shooting.
Now if they could only combine the Coolpix 3 megapixel res with a built in MiniDV camcorder…