Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: anyone replaced their internal battery yet?

Expand Messages
  • ferroelectra
    ... different ... I have come so far as to take it out and found it was still ok but I broke off a solder pin in the process. I have not been able to locate a
    Message 1 of 25 , Jan 1, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In coolpix990@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Russell" <mike@r...> wrote:
      > Has anyone replaced the ML1220 internal battery yet? I have two
      different
      > friends with problems - any info appreciated.
      >
      > Mike Russell
      > www.curvemeister.com
      > www.geigy.2y.net

      I have come so far as to take it out and found it was still ok but I
      broke off a solder pin in the process.

      I have not been able to locate a replacement (rechargeable) cell
      anywhere.

      If I cannot find one I will probably try using a small supercap.

      I believe that the masive number of 990 getting "mad coolpix disease"
      are not the consequence of bad internal batteries as I thought first
      but
      something else - probably something (electrolytic caps?) going bad and
      drawing lots of current. One symptom is drained batteries after a
      short time.

      This problem must be the result of a design flaw in the 990 or bad
      choice of components. Nikon should at least come up with an
      explanation and offer repair for a reasonable price.

      Until then I'll stay away from Nikon digital cameras.

      If anyone knows where to find rechargeable 1220 Li-Cells please post
      it here.

      fe
    • Jon Glass
      ... Could somebody please explain this mad coolpix disease to a list newbie? I m curious if it s worth trying to fix my 990, or just count my losses and move
      Message 2 of 25 , Jan 1, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        On Jan 1, 2005, at 1:36 PM, ferroelectra wrote:

        > I believe that the masive number of 990 getting "mad coolpix disease"
        > are not the consequence of bad internal batteries as I thought first
        > but
        > something else - probably something (electrolytic caps?) going bad and
        > drawing lots of current. One symptom is drained batteries after a
        > short time.
        >

        Could somebody please explain this "mad coolpix disease" to a list
        newbie? I'm curious if it's worth trying to fix my 990, or just count
        my losses and move on? Thanks.
        --
        -Jon Glass
        Krakow, Poland
        <jonglass@...>
      • Clark Ellison
        Design flaw? Nikon take responsibility? Actually admit they messed up? I do not think any of us will live long enough for Nikon to repair their mistakes in
        Message 3 of 25 , Jan 1, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Design flaw? Nikon take responsibility? Actually admit
          they messed up? I do not think any of us will live long enough for Nikon to
          repair their mistakes in this unit. Too bad, as it could be a great camera.
          Of all the cameras I have ever owned it is by far the most unreliable.
          Anyone can say anything they want about the number of pictures taken in
          digital VS the number of picture taken with an SLR, the 990 never held a
          candle to my old SLR and I took thousands of pictures with it and never took
          as good of care of it as I have the Nikon. I have contacted Nikon several
          times and they do not feel they even need to reply. This will be the last
          Nikon I own. I understand it is out dated now but if they offered some sort
          of discount on a new camera with the return of this one it would be
          different.








          --
          No virus found in this incoming message.
          Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
          Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.7 - Release Date: 12/30/2004



          --
          No virus found in this outgoing message.
          Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
          Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.7 - Release Date: 12/30/2004



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Mike Russell
          ... Sorry for your bad experience - this behavior is typical of any large company that has tens of thousands of units out there. The older models get left
          Message 4 of 25 , Jan 1, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Clark Ellison wrote:
            > Design flaw? Nikon take responsibility? Actually
            > admit they messed up? I do not think any of us will live long enough
            > for Nikon to repair their mistakes in this unit.

            Sorry for your bad experience - this behavior is typical of any large
            company that has tens of thousands of units out there. The older models get
            left behind, and when support is no longer profitable, the support of these
            cameras simply ceases. Hence the value of this group, where we use our
            experiences to help keep each other's cameras going. This has nothing to do
            with Nikon, IMHO, but our own ability to learn about and fix our own
            cameras.

            > Too bad, as it could
            > be a great camera. Of all the cameras I have ever owned it is by far
            > the most unreliable. Anyone can say anything they want about the
            > number of pictures taken in digital VS the number of picture taken
            > with an SLR, the 990 never held a candle to my old SLR and I took
            > thousands of pictures with it and never took as good of care of it as
            > I have the Nikon.

            So what are the problems you're facing? It may be possible to repair your
            camera, although at this point you appear to be so bitter about it that it
            may no longer be worth trying.

            > I have contacted Nikon several times and they do
            > not feel they even need to reply. This will be the last Nikon I own.
            > I understand it is out dated now but if they offered some sort of
            > discount on a new camera with the return of this one it would be
            > different.

            Have you ever heard of a camera company doing this? Car retailers do this,
            but that is because their markup is so high that they use the illusion of
            buying back your old car to entice you to buy the new model every few years.

            I for one intend to keep using my 990 until it turns to powder or I
            otherwise can't fix it anymore, and I'm looking toward this group as a place
            to both get and receive information on how to accomplish this.

            Mike Russell
            www.curvemeister.com
            www.geigy.2y.net
          • Larry N. Bolch
            ... I think you will find the same situation for most consumer-level digital cameras approaching five years old. These are not cameras built for the long haul,
            Message 5 of 25 , Jan 3, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Clark Ellison wrote:
              > Design flaw? Nikon take responsibility? Actually
              > admit they messed up? I do not think any of us will live long enough
              > for Nikon to repair their mistakes in this unit. Too bad, as it could
              > be a great camera. Of all the cameras I have ever owned it is by far
              > the most unreliable. Anyone can say anything they want about the
              > number of pictures taken in digital VS the number of picture taken
              > with an SLR, the 990 never held a candle to my old SLR and I took
              > thousands of pictures with it and never took as good of care of it as
              > I have the Nikon. I have contacted Nikon several times and they do
              > not feel they even need to reply. This will be the last Nikon I own.
              > I understand it is out dated now but if they offered some sort of
              > discount on a new camera with the return of this one it would be
              > different.

              I think you will find the same situation for most consumer-level digital
              cameras approaching five years old. These are not cameras built for the
              long haul, and are priced accordingly. Some observations based upon
              decades of camera buying and using...

              Entry level film cameras have a substantially longer life expectency in
              years, mostly because there are so many films processed with a Christmas
              tree on both ends. Without the cost of film and processing, digital
              photographers simply shoot more, and thus put a lot more wear on their
              cameras. While many film cameras may shoot 24 frames or less in a year,
              digital photographers probably fill their cards more than 24 times per
              year.

              Bring a consumer-level film camera into a commercial shooting situation,
              and death comes quickly. I wore out two Pentaxes and a Nikon FE in about
              a year for each. My Nikon F3 put bread on my humble table for a couple
              of decades without failure or even maintenance. It has been reported
              that the entry level Canon (Rebel 300) and Nikon (D70) have a
              shutter-life expectency of 20,000 exposures or less. For many digital
              shooters, this is well under a year.

              Going back to film cameras, what is the difference between a Nikon N75
              at $180US and an F6 at $2300US (B&H prices as of today)? A few whiz-bang
              features for nearly 13x the money, but mostly reliability. With the same
              lens mounted and the same film loaded, there are very few situations
              where one could accurately guess which camera actually made a given
              picture.

              Pros don't buy the top end Nikons for features. The prime reason is that
              when you trip the shutter for the 100,000th time, you will be pretty
              sure that you will not have to stand before the client with hat in hand
              and head bowed explaining why the mission-critical shots were missed.

              Could the camera companies build a CP990-class camera as robust as a
              Nikon F5 or F6? Certainly, but would you be willing to pay 12x as much
              for it?

              Consider that a full generation in any of the digital technologies is 18
              months to two years at the most. Now, for less than what the CP990 cost,
              you get low noise, no chromatic abberation, 8MP, a camera that turns on
              quicker, saves vastly quicker and has lag so short that it is almost
              imperceptable. These are cameras certainly, but they are digital devices
              first and foremost. Gordon Moore's law holds with digital cameras as
              much as it does with embedded controllers in a military satellite.

              I sold my CP990 and bought a CP5000 - much better camera in every way -
              and now am about to retire the CP5000 in favor of the CP8400. The
              difference will be quite dramatic, though the satisfaction level with
              the CP5k was extremely high. Interestingly, each camera has cost
              slightly less in real terms.

              I do not want to pay $12,000US for a compact camera that will be
              exceeded in every way in 18 months. I had not planned on keeping the
              CP5k for three years, and the only reason I did so was that it took this
              long for Nikon to come out with the CP8400. The two cameras share
              specific features unique in the marketplace - features that specifically
              match my needs and way of shooting.

              One buys film cameras, but subscribes to digital technology. This is not
              frivolous. Camera makers are not fostering a program of "planned
              obsolescence". Three years of advance in digital technology not only
              provides far more usable cameras, but also shows up in the pictures,
              unlike the N75 vs the F6.

              Furthermore, the payback on a digital is extremely fast over that of a
              film camera outside of professional photography. Based just on the cost
              of film and processing, at the rate I shoot for myself, a $1,000 camera
              is paid for in three to six months. If I do a magazine shoot or two, it
              is paid for in weeks. From that point, photography is truly free. With
              film, there is the constant cost of materials and services, but even
              more the time spent going to and from the processing lab. Time spent in
              Photoshop, is time spent in pleasure.

              A busy working pro can justify the cost of a D2X or a Canon 1Ds, based
              upon time saved alone, but an enthusiast can not. With an enthusiast, it
              must be a hobby purchase with no thought of return or based upon the
              savings in film costs.

              Thus I expect to spend $1,000 every 18 months to three years on advanced
              digital technology, knowing that it will be paid back quickly. I never
              expect to wear a camera out before it is replaced.

              larry!
              http://www.larry-bolch.com/
              ICQ 76620504
            • Paul Berndt
              Larry, Well put. I have been monitoring this thread and was thinking the same thing. I m still using my 5 year old 990 and marvel at how well it has
              Message 6 of 25 , Jan 4, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                Larry,

                Well put. I have been monitoring this thread and was thinking the same
                thing. I'm still using my 5 year old 990 and marvel at how well it has
                performed and the flexibility that it provides. I'm thinking about
                getting the 8800 for the lens and keeping the 990 for the wide
                angle/macro use.

                How many of you are still using a 5 year old computer and software? If
                you are, I'd wager that you are looking to upgrade, digital cameras are
                the same.

                Larry N. Bolch wrote:

                SNIP

                >Consider that a full generation in any of the digital technologies is 18
                >months to two years at the most. Now, for less than what the CP990 cost,
                >you get low noise, no chromatic abberation, 8MP, a camera that turns on
                >quicker, saves vastly quicker and has lag so short that it is almost
                >imperceptable. These are cameras certainly, but they are digital devices
                >first and foremost. Gordon Moore's law holds with digital cameras as
                >much as it does with embedded controllers in a military satellite.
                >
                >I sold my CP990 and bought a CP5000 - much better camera in every way -
                >and now am about to retire the CP5000 in favor of the CP8400. The
                >difference will be quite dramatic, though the satisfaction level with
                >the CP5k was extremely high. Interestingly, each camera has cost
                >slightly less in real terms.
                >
                >
                SNIP

                >
                >Thus I expect to spend $1,000 every 18 months to three years on advanced
                >digital technology, knowing that it will be paid back quickly. I never
                >expect to wear a camera out before it is replaced.
                >
                >larry!
                >http://www.larry-bolch.com/
                >ICQ 76620504
                >
                >
                >
                >To unsubscribe send an email to:
                >coolpix990-unsubscribe@egroups.com
                >
                >
                >Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
              • Renato Aranghelovici
                ... My TV is 14 years old... it s an electronic thing, though... Also my film camera sold after 990 served me for 11 years, and after me, still in service for
                Message 7 of 25 , Jan 4, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  > How many of you are still using a 5 year old computer and software? If
                  > you are, I'd wager that you are looking to upgrade, digital cameras are
                  > the same.

                  My TV is 14 years old... it's an electronic thing, though...
                  Also my film camera sold after 990 served me for 11 years, and after me, still in service for 2 years at a friend.

                  I have under 4000 shots with 990, why don't expect for it for a longer life?

                  Renato
                • Keith Sutherland
                  I don t believe that it is the age of the equipment but rather the use to which it is put and the functionality it offers. Computers that are many years old
                  Message 8 of 25 , Jan 4, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I don't believe that it is the age of the equipment but rather the use to
                    which it is put and the functionality it offers. Computers that are many
                    years old perform very well for word processing but try to edit a large
                    picture - painful! Tv's are going digital and in a few years analogue
                    transmissions will cease - forced upgrade.

                    My 990 does what I need it to do and is still performing well. I do not
                    have a need to upgrade it.

                    I expect a long life from equipment and pay that bit more for equipment that
                    gives me that life. If I were to buy a cheap digital camera I would be
                    accepting the functionality and life that goes with it.

                    Just because something is old does not mean it should be replaced. Some
                    might try to apply the replacement principle to me! :-)

                    Regards

                    Keith


                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: Renato Aranghelovici [mailto:renato.aranghelovici@...]
                    Sent: 04 January 2005 13:31
                    To: coolpix990@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: Re: [coolpix990] Re: anyone replaced their internal battery yet?


                    > How many of you are still using a 5 year old computer and software? If
                    > you are, I'd wager that you are looking to upgrade, digital cameras are
                    > the same.

                    My TV is 14 years old... it's an electronic thing, though...
                    Also my film camera sold after 990 served me for 11 years, and after me,
                    still in service for 2 years at a friend.

                    I have under 4000 shots with 990, why don't expect for it for a longer life?

                    Renato





                    --
                    No virus found in this outgoing message.
                    Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                    Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.8 - Release Date: 03/01/2005
                  • Clark Ellison
                    My point exactly, when a computer is five years old it will not handle the software of today but it will still function as it was designed to do when it was
                    Message 9 of 25 , Jan 4, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      My point exactly, when a computer is five years old it will not handle the
                      software of today but it will still function as it was designed to do when
                      it was built. A camera should still be able to take a picture when it is
                      five years old. It should not be in such sad shape that it will not even
                      turn on and if it does none of the feature that it came with operates. I
                      understand the point of view that systems that are five years old are not as
                      capable as the new ones but these cameras are not failing at five years they
                      are starting to fail with in a year and the manufacture is silent. If you
                      are a commercial photographer then you purchase your camera with the
                      knowledge that you will need to replace it with in a few years in order to
                      keep up with the improvements. It is a tool for work and has a small write
                      off as such but for the person just wanting to take quality pictures, a five
                      year life span to total failure is not satisfactory. If your forty five
                      thousand dollar Lexus was in complete failure in only five years you would
                      be outraged, even though the new Lexus would have features that were unheard
                      of when you bought the �old� one.

                      If you take twenty thousand pictures a year then you are right you should
                      not expect the camera to last as long as someone that takes two thousand a
                      year.

                      I would not gripe about mine if anything on it still worked. I am not a PRO
                      and do not take that many pictures with mine. When I was shooting film I
                      took thousands of photos a year with my camera and then passed the cameras
                      on to my children and they still work with out a problem. I am not
                      complaining about the camera by comparing it to what is available now. For a
                      camera that has an asking price of a grand to live five years is ridiculous
                      especially when after the first year features stop working. If it worked
                      five years and then died, I might understand. What I do not understand is
                      why Nikon would want us running around with add on switches sticking out of
                      a camera that was allegedly top of the line. The quality of the pictures is
                      great but the quality of the camera is not.



                      Clark



                      -----Original Message-----
                      From: Keith Sutherland [mailto:akeith.sutherland@...]
                      Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 8:06 AM
                      To: coolpix990@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: RE: [coolpix990] Re: anyone replaced their internal battery yet?



                      I don't believe that it is the age of the equipment but rather the use to
                      which it is put and the functionality it offers. Computers that are many
                      years old perform very well for word processing but try to edit a large
                      picture - painful! Tv's are going digital and in a few years analogue
                      transmissions will cease - forced upgrade.

                      My 990 does what I need it to do and is still performing well. I do not
                      have a need to upgrade it.

                      I expect a long life from equipment and pay that bit more for equipment that
                      gives me that life. If I were to buy a cheap digital camera I would be
                      accepting the functionality and life that goes with it.

                      Just because something is old does not mean it should be replaced. Some
                      might try to apply the replacement principle to me! :-)

                      Regards

                      Keith


                      -----Original Message-----
                      From: Renato Aranghelovici [mailto:renato.aranghelovici@...]
                      Sent: 04 January 2005 13:31
                      To: coolpix990@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: Re: [coolpix990] Re: anyone replaced their internal battery yet?


                      > How many of you are still using a 5 year old computer and software? If
                      > you are, I'd wager that you are looking to upgrade, digital cameras are
                      > the same.

                      My TV is 14 years old... it's an electronic thing, though...
                      Also my film camera sold after 990 served me for 11 years, and after me,
                      still in service for 2 years at a friend.

                      I have under 4000 shots with 990, why don't expect for it for a longer life?

                      Renato





                      --
                      No virus found in this outgoing message.
                      Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                      Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.8 - Release Date: 03/01/2005



                      To unsubscribe send an email to:
                      coolpix990-unsubscribe@egroups.com






                      _____

                      Yahoo! Groups Links

                      * To visit your group on the web, go to:
                      HYPERLINK
                      "http://groups.yahoo.com/group/coolpix990/"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/coo
                      lpix990/


                      * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                      HYPERLINK
                      "mailto:coolpix990-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe"coolpix99
                      0-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com


                      * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the HYPERLINK
                      "http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/"Yahoo! Terms of Service.


                      --
                      No virus found in this incoming message.
                      Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                      Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.7 - Release Date: 12/30/2004



                      --
                      No virus found in this outgoing message.
                      Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                      Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.7 - Release Date: 12/30/2004



                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Glauco
                      Guy, sorry but i don t understand well the problem the 990 is a good 3Mp camera, obviously now after 5 years there are some bettere camera.... but anyway for
                      Message 10 of 25 , Jan 4, 2005
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Guy, sorry but i don't understand well the problem

                        the 990 is a good 3Mp camera, obviously now after 5 years there are some
                        bettere camera.... but anyway for example the macro of the 990 is one
                        of the best macro i never saw.

                        Actually my camera has over 28.000 shot , the battery door was broken it
                        has a lot of scratch .... but it work well very well...... and very
                        important i take shoot in manual mode faster i know perfecly how the
                        camera work....

                        i think everyone can find always better technology for himself .....
                        but some times is not necessary


                        Glauco

                        --
                        ------------------------------
                        "La barba non fa il filosofo."
                        (Plutarco)
                        ------------------------------

                        * glauco@...
                        * www.uriland.it
                        * ICQ: 115323690
                      • Larry N. Bolch
                        ... It is also an analogue device with few moving parts to wear out. In that 14 years, there has been some advances in TV technology, but an analogue set now
                        Message 11 of 25 , Jan 4, 2005
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Renato Aranghelovici wrote:
                          >> How many of you are still using a 5 year old computer and software?
                          >> If you are, I'd wager that you are looking to upgrade, digital
                          >> cameras are the same.
                          >
                          > My TV is 14 years old... it's an electronic thing, though...

                          It is also an analogue device with few moving parts to wear out. In that
                          14 years, there has been some advances in TV technology, but an analogue
                          set now is not a whole lot different than yours. This is about to change
                          drastically as TV too becomes digital over the next couple of years - at
                          least here in North America. Digital TV sets have dropped dramatically
                          in price over the past three years and in about two more will be very
                          affordable. Analogue sets will require an adapter to work at all.

                          A camera is also a mechanical device, with a shutter doing precise
                          repetitions of opening and closing along with the aperture which may
                          open and close with each shot. Any mechanical device has a finite
                          lifespan between failures.

                          High-end cameras may have an expectency of 150,000 shots before shutter
                          maintenance, while entry level cameras may be more like 20,000 shots.
                          When starting out, I found that the Pentaxs I owned were good for about
                          a year of use. I later found the same thing with a Nikon FE. Shooting
                          with the top of the line F series as newspaper photojournalists, a Nikon
                          F, F2, F3, ..., would last three or four years without maintenance,
                          doing five or six rolls a day - every day.

                          > Also my film camera sold after 990 served me for 11 years, and after
                          > me, still in service for 2 years at a friend.

                          One of my workhorses - a Brooks VeriWide 100 - was built in the late
                          1950s. It was sold recently, overhauled, cleaned and calibrated and is
                          still being used by the buyer. I also had this done at one point in
                          time. I also have a Linhof system and the first thing I did upon
                          purchasing it, was had each of the three shutters cleaned and
                          calibrated. Maintenance is simply part of owning a working camera. Even
                          Linhof's superb shutters need to be checked from time to time. The
                          Linhof was probably built sometime in the early 1960s.

                          > I have under 4000 shots with 990, why don't expect for it for a
                          > longer life?

                          I would expect it to do five to ten times as many shots before shutter
                          failure. Five years would be about the life of most batteries, I would
                          think, so probably this will be showing up on a pretty regular basis now
                          in cameras built around the year 2000. The switch also has shown itself
                          to be good for around this length of continuous use.

                          Cameras built for working photographers still need maintenance to last
                          as long as they do, no matter how robust. Maintaining one's equipment is
                          just part of the job. Entry-level cameras cost 1/10th as much and
                          probably wear out in 1/10th the number of shots. Mid-range cameras may
                          either be loaded with features or are much more robust - depends up on
                          the priority of the maker and the buyer.

                          larry!
                          http://www.larry-bolch.com/
                          ICQ 76620504
                        • rjfs
                          In article , Clark Ellison ... [...] ... Likewise, I started in photography in the 1950s using an old box camera
                          Message 12 of 25 , Jan 4, 2005
                          • 0 Attachment
                            In article <000d01c4f26f$5e2a2b10$3e337146@clarkphhr2pp6h>, Clark Ellison
                            wrote:
                            > A camera should still be able to take a picture when it is
                            > five years old.
                            [...]
                            > When I was shooting film I
                            > took thousands of photos a year with my camera and then passed the cameras
                            > on to my children and they still work with out a problem.

                            Likewise, I started in photography in the 1950s using an old box camera that my
                            father had used when he was a boy. I still possess it, and see nothing to
                            indicate that it wouldn't still work today - but only to its original standard
                            of performance of course, which is nothing compared to what a modern electronic
                            camera can do.

                            A film camera of yesteryear was a relatively simple mechanical device with few
                            moving parts, and several quite severe limitations as to what it could do. For
                            example, you couldn't see the exact picture you were taking, and had to place
                            your eye in a particular orientation relative to the camera to see any sort of
                            indication at all, it was expensive to run, and you generally wouldn't see the
                            resulting picture for several days, or even weeks. This sort of technology
                            belongs to the era when people lived pretty much the same sort of lives as
                            their parents or even grandparents, so it was common to keep things and hand
                            them on with every expectation that they would still be useful.

                            But times have changed. Modern technology is immensely more complicated and can
                            do wonderful things that cannot be matched by antiques - but there is a price.
                            The technological development that makes today's clever toys possible can only
                            happen if everything keeps changing, and that change is so rapid now that
                            parents have difficulty understanding the technology that their children have
                            grown up with, and their grandparents hardly recognise it at all. One
                            consequence is that there's no incentive for manufacturers to make things that
                            will last ten years if they're going to be obsolete in five. Nobody today would
                            be interested in a mobile phone the size of a housebrick however well made and
                            reliable it was, when they can upgrade to the latest matchbox sized one every
                            year for nothing. And just think that only about ten years ago hardly anybody
                            had a mobile phone at all; now hardly anybody hasn't.

                            Good luck to you if you can find somebody to fix your five year old electronic
                            camera at an economic price when you can buy a new one that is far better for
                            half the price. Anybody want to buy an Acorn electron for the price of a PC?

                            Rod.
                          • Renato Aranghelovici
                            My daughter has in his room my 6 years old Celeron 400 (PII architecture? I must open it to see :), and using the TV card from the same era can record movies
                            Message 13 of 25 , Jan 5, 2005
                            • 0 Attachment
                              My daughter has in his room my 6 years old Celeron 400 (PII architecture? I must open it to see :), and using the TV card from the same era can record movies with real time MP4-divx compression...

                              Regards,
                              Renato

                              ----- Original Message -----
                              From: "Joost den Hertog" <joostdenhertog@...>
                              To: <coolpix990@yahoogroups.com>
                              Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 13:56
                              Subject: Re: [coolpix990] Re: anyone replaced their internal battery yet?


                              >
                              > I do with plesure
                              >
                              > good old PII for every thing even harddiskk recording. editing movies
                              > still doesn't work..
                              >
                              > On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 13:23:19 -0700, Larry N. Bolch
                              > <lnbolch@...> wrote:
                              >
                              >>
                              >> Renato Aranghelovici wrote:
                              >>>> How many of you are still using a 5 year old computer and software?
                              >>>> If you are, I'd wager that you are looking to upgrade, digital
                              >>>> cameras are the same.
                              >>>
                              >>> My TV is 14 years old... it's an electronic thing, though...
                              >>
                            • Joost den Hertog
                              I do with plesure good old PII for every thing even harddiskk recording. editing movies still doesn t work.. On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 13:23:19 -0700, Larry N. Bolch
                              Message 14 of 25 , Jan 5, 2005
                              • 0 Attachment
                                I do with plesure

                                good old PII for every thing even harddiskk recording. editing movies
                                still doesn't work..

                                On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 13:23:19 -0700, Larry N. Bolch
                                <lnbolch@...> wrote:

                                >
                                > Renato Aranghelovici wrote:
                                >>> How many of you are still using a 5 year old computer and software?
                                >>> If you are, I'd wager that you are looking to upgrade, digital
                                >>> cameras are the same.
                                >>
                                >> My TV is 14 years old... it's an electronic thing, though...
                                >
                                > It is also an analogue device with few moving parts to wear out. In that
                                > 14 years, there has been some advances in TV technology, but an analogue
                                > set now is not a whole lot different than yours. This is about to change
                                > drastically as TV too becomes digital over the next couple of years - at
                                > least here in North America. Digital TV sets have dropped dramatically
                                > in price over the past three years and in about two more will be very
                                > affordable. Analogue sets will require an adapter to work at all.
                                >
                                > A camera is also a mechanical device, with a shutter doing precise
                                > repetitions of opening and closing along with the aperture which may
                                > open and close with each shot. Any mechanical device has a finite
                                > lifespan between failures.
                                >
                                > High-end cameras may have an expectency of 150,000 shots before shutter
                                > maintenance, while entry level cameras may be more like 20,000 shots.
                                > When starting out, I found that the Pentaxs I owned were good for about
                                > a year of use. I later found the same thing with a Nikon FE. Shooting
                                > with the top of the line F series as newspaper photojournalists, a Nikon
                                > F, F2, F3, ..., would last three or four years without maintenance,
                                > doing five or six rolls a day - every day.
                                >
                                >> Also my film camera sold after 990 served me for 11 years, and after
                                >> me, still in service for 2 years at a friend.
                                >
                                > One of my workhorses - a Brooks VeriWide 100 - was built in the late
                                > 1950s. It was sold recently, overhauled, cleaned and calibrated and is
                                > still being used by the buyer. I also had this done at one point in
                                > time. I also have a Linhof system and the first thing I did upon
                                > purchasing it, was had each of the three shutters cleaned and
                                > calibrated. Maintenance is simply part of owning a working camera. Even
                                > Linhof's superb shutters need to be checked from time to time. The
                                > Linhof was probably built sometime in the early 1960s.
                                >
                                >> I have under 4000 shots with 990, why don't expect for it for a
                                >> longer life?
                                >
                                > I would expect it to do five to ten times as many shots before shutter
                                > failure. Five years would be about the life of most batteries, I would
                                > think, so probably this will be showing up on a pretty regular basis now
                                > in cameras built around the year 2000. The switch also has shown itself
                                > to be good for around this length of continuous use.
                                >
                                > Cameras built for working photographers still need maintenance to last
                                > as long as they do, no matter how robust. Maintaining one's equipment is
                                > just part of the job. Entry-level cameras cost 1/10th as much and
                                > probably wear out in 1/10th the number of shots. Mid-range cameras may
                                > either be loaded with features or are much more robust - depends up on
                                > the priority of the maker and the buyer.
                                >
                                > larry!
                                > http://www.larry-bolch.com/
                                > ICQ 76620504
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                > To unsubscribe send an email to:
                                > coolpix990-unsubscribe@egroups.com
                                >
                                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >



                                --
                                Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
                              • Joost den Hertog
                                400 is a pIII.. a real modern PC.. On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 13:27:37 +0200, Renato Aranghelovici ... -- Using Opera s revolutionary e-mail client:
                                Message 15 of 25 , Jan 5, 2005
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  400 is a pIII.. a real modern PC..

                                  On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 13:27:37 +0200, Renato Aranghelovici
                                  <renato.aranghelovici@...> wrote:

                                  >
                                  > My daughter has in his room my 6 years old Celeron 400 (PII
                                  > architecture? I must open it to see :), and using the TV card from the
                                  > same era can record movies with real time MP4-divx compression...
                                  >
                                  > Regards,
                                  > Renato
                                  >
                                  > ----- Original Message -----
                                  > From: "Joost den Hertog" <joostdenhertog@...>
                                  > To: <coolpix990@yahoogroups.com>
                                  > Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 13:56
                                  > Subject: Re: [coolpix990] Re: anyone replaced their internal battery yet?
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >>
                                  >> I do with plesure
                                  >>
                                  >> good old PII for every thing even harddiskk recording. editing movies
                                  >> still doesn't work..
                                  >>
                                  >> On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 13:23:19 -0700, Larry N. Bolch
                                  >> <lnbolch@...> wrote:
                                  >>
                                  >>>
                                  >>> Renato Aranghelovici wrote:
                                  >>>>> How many of you are still using a 5 year old computer and software?
                                  >>>>> If you are, I'd wager that you are looking to upgrade, digital
                                  >>>>> cameras are the same.
                                  >>>>
                                  >>>> My TV is 14 years old... it's an electronic thing, though...
                                  >>>
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > To unsubscribe send an email to:
                                  > coolpix990-unsubscribe@egroups.com
                                  >
                                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >



                                  --
                                  Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
                                • Larry N. Bolch
                                  ... My first two Pentax film cameras were worn out in about a year each, and that was about the lifespan of a Nikon FE. The FE was repaired and lasted a few
                                  Message 16 of 25 , Jan 5, 2005
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Clark Ellison wrote:
                                    > My point exactly, when a computer is five years old it will not
                                    > handle the software of today but it will still function as it was
                                    > designed to do when it was built. A camera should still be able to
                                    > take a picture when it is five years old. It should not be in such
                                    > sad shape that it will not even turn on and if it does none of the
                                    > feature that it came with operates.

                                    My first two Pentax film cameras were worn out in about a year each, and
                                    that was about the lifespan of a Nikon FE. The FE was repaired and
                                    lasted a few more months. It was not about longevity in time, but in the
                                    number of cycles the mechanics went through.

                                    I have also worn out a couple of top of the line Nikon F cameras, but
                                    that took a whole lot longer. That is why they cost ten times as much.

                                    > I understand the point of view
                                    > that systems that are five years old are not as capable as the new
                                    > ones but these cameras are not failing at five years they are
                                    > starting to fail with in a year and the manufacture is silent.

                                    With normal wear, a five year old car - also a mechanical device - is
                                    likely to start needing periodic maintenance just like a well used
                                    camera. Once the warrantee runs out, the auto manufacturers are only too
                                    willing to sell you parts, and the local garages install them - at yor
                                    expense.

                                    The CP5000 is probably past 20,000 and doing fine for the moment, it has
                                    served me well.

                                    > If you
                                    > are a commercial photographer then you purchase your camera with the
                                    > knowledge that you will need to replace it with in a few years in
                                    > order to keep up with the improvements. It is a tool for work and has
                                    > a small write off as such but for the person just wanting to take
                                    > quality pictures, a five year life span to total failure is not
                                    > satisfactory. If your forty five thousand dollar Lexus was in
                                    > complete failure in only five years you would be outraged, even
                                    > though the new Lexus would have features that were unheard of when
                                    > you bought the “old” one.

                                    However, if you bought a Lada, Yugo or Trabant, each year it continued
                                    to start would be a blessed relief. The Coolpix line is certainly not on
                                    par with these, but it is not a Lexus either. The F6 is the Lexus.

                                    > If you take twenty thousand pictures a year then you are right you
                                    > should not expect the camera to last as long as someone that takes
                                    > two thousand a year.

                                    Exactly. And yes, if I were working my old job and still shooting film,
                                    I doubt that the F6 would last five years at six to ten rolls a day,
                                    every day on average. I probably shot more on my days off and holidays
                                    than on the job.

                                    Now if I wanted to keep a digital camera for more than a couple of
                                    years, I would be stuck with the D2H or D2X when it hit the market, or
                                    with the Canon 1D or 1Ds. It would cost many times as much, last much
                                    longer and become eclipsed by the next generation as quickly as the
                                    Coolpix cameras.

                                    The CP990 was legendary, a true classic, breakthrough camera. However,
                                    just 18 months later, the CP5000 came on the market and was better in
                                    every way. I was a bit loath to sell my CP990, but from the first shot,
                                    I had no regrets. Not only did the camera respond better in every way,
                                    the quality of my work went up. Though I am no longer shooting in the
                                    marketplace, pride in workmanship has not left me.

                                    Within days, I will purchase the CP8400. A much better lens/sensor
                                    combination, finally getting rid of chromatic aberation. A maximum now
                                    of a 10 minute exposure at night, with noise reduction. My night shots
                                    with the CP990 looked like I was shooting through a swarm of psychedelic
                                    fireflies. A real-time histogram - I only wish Ansel had lived long
                                    enough to see this.

                                    The equivalent of an 18mm lens - a focal length I have always
                                    appreciated greatly. Some of my proudest work was done with this width.
                                    Nothing like the barrel distortion of the WC-E63 on the CP990. Also the
                                    ability to project a grid on the screen, a definite assist to working
                                    with superwides. A hot shoe that will hold a level as well.

                                    Faster startup, minimal lag, faster saves, bigger buffer. All in all a
                                    more responsive instrument in the field. It also has RAW for handling
                                    mixed light far better than Fine JPEG, allowing one to very precisely
                                    balance the light in each area of the picture. More pixels for less
                                    noise and more cropping when needed.

                                    It also has four more areas for area metering/focusing - something I
                                    always use. Focusing is supposed to be very quick and positive, though I
                                    have not shot any out-of-focus shots with the CP5k. Again, it adds to
                                    the quickness of response, important because much of my shooting is
                                    "decisive moment" people photographs.

                                    None of these are cosmetic. They are factors that will show up in every
                                    photograph I make. I have spent a lifetime of shooting for other people.
                                    These few years that are left are my first chance to shoot for me
                                    exclusively since I was a kid. The CP5k has allowed me to truly shoot
                                    the consistently best that I have ever done. With the CP8400, I give up
                                    nothing, and make a considerable gain.

                                    So I will probably never wear out a digital camera. I had not planned on
                                    keeping the CP5k anywhere near this long, but the CP8400 was the first
                                    camera at any price that provided an equivalent extension to my optic
                                    nerve.

                                    I want the quality of an 8x10 view camera in a compact, light and mobile
                                    camera like a Coolpix. It is a transcendent experience to shoot with an
                                    8x10. I doubt that I will live to see this quality in a compact digital,
                                    but many will. At the moment, the CP8400 has the best combination of
                                    quality, features and form-factor of any camera on the market for me and
                                    my work.

                                    larry!
                                    http://www.larry-bolch.com/
                                    ICQ 76620504
                                  • Clark Ellison
                                    While I appreciate your point of view I will always stand with my point of the fact that the cp 990 did not go out because of outdated software or extreme use
                                    Message 17 of 25 , Jan 5, 2005
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      While I appreciate your point of view I will always stand with my point of
                                      the fact that the cp 990 did not go out because of outdated software or
                                      extreme use but it ran out of gas at half a tank. Several people have
                                      expressed their disappointment that their 990 died with less than five
                                      thousand snaps. Surly you are not going to try to tell me that that is all
                                      one can expect out of a camera that had a MSRP of a grand regardless of what
                                      format it uses. If I have a five year old car and it has ten thousand miles
                                      on it and starts but won't drive,the lights won't come on, and the brakes
                                      are out, then it is a P.O.S.. The problems with the 990 is not a lack of
                                      maintenance but poor design coupled with substandard materials. The 990 is a
                                      lot closer to a Lexus than a Chevy LUV, although it acts more like the LUV.
                                      I did not expect it to be a Rolls but then again I thought it would work
                                      longer than five years before coming to a complete stop. And remember it did
                                      not just up and die it started having major problems at one year of age. And
                                      how do you relate the battery door on each and every one malfunctioning with
                                      your theory of it being digital VS any other format? The camera lacks the
                                      quality it should have had.
                                      If an airplane had the reputation of the 990 no one would fly in it, even if
                                      it was new.
                                      Clark


                                      --
                                      No virus found in this outgoing message.
                                      Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                                      Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.7 - Release Date: 12/30/2004
                                    • Paul R Horton
                                      Hi Clark I m now pedalling an 8700, which I converted to after considerable advice from this group and it was a good decision, but I do not take as many
                                      Message 18 of 25 , Jan 6, 2005
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        Hi Clark

                                        I'm now pedalling an 8700, which I converted to after considerable advice
                                        from this group and it was a good decision, but I do not take as many
                                        photographs as before because the 990 was new and it was a considerable
                                        learning curve for me. I took thousands of shots as I trial and errored my
                                        way through the learning phase (still far from complete). I reckon you must
                                        have got a bad one, for sure, because mine has taken over 30,000 images
                                        (about 15,000 utilised during self training exercises) and only the external
                                        (3rd party) battery had given me any grief up until the time I got the 8700.

                                        Just after I made the 8700 I took the 990 back to Sydney for a service if
                                        required because I was having problems with an external battery setup.
                                        Camera checked out OK, but I now have to use only double AA cells. As the
                                        990 is now used for copy & studio work I can't see why it won't last for a
                                        considerable time yet.

                                        Regards
                                        ...........................
                                        Paul R Horton ADipJA
                                        OZ Down Under

                                        ----- Original Message -----
                                        From: "Clark Ellison" <harleyputter@...>
                                        To: <coolpix990@yahoogroups.com>
                                        Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 4:44 PM
                                        Subject: RE: [coolpix990] Re: anyone replaced their internal battery yet?


                                        > The problems with the 990 is not a lack of
                                        > maintenance but poor design coupled with substandard materials. The 990 is
                                        > a
                                        > lot closer to a Lexus than a Chevy LUV, although it acts more like the
                                        > LUV.
                                        > I did not expect it to be a Rolls but then again I thought it would work
                                        > longer than five years before coming to a complete stop. And remember it
                                        > did
                                        > not just up and die it started having major problems at one year of age.
                                        > And
                                        > how do you relate the battery door on each and every one malfunctioning
                                        > with
                                        > your theory of it being digital VS any other format? The camera lacks the
                                        > quality it should have had.
                                        > If an airplane had the reputation of the 990 no one would fly in it, even
                                        > if
                                        > it was new.
                                        > Clark
                                        >
                                        >
                                      • Clark Ellison
                                        I am glad to hear some have received the camera they purchased. My problem with it is so many complain about the thing that I feel Nikon could have taken those
                                        Message 19 of 25 , Jan 6, 2005
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          I am glad to hear some have received the camera they purchased. My problem
                                          with it is so many complain about the thing that I feel Nikon could have
                                          taken those back and offered a discount on a new camera. I guess that I am
                                          just tired of major corporations deciding that they can afford to burn
                                          customers like cord wood. I had one of the famous Chevy trucks that had what
                                          was referred to as a jump off paint job. Their bean counters decided that
                                          before the vehicle would lose enough paint to warrant repair it would be out
                                          of warranty. I decided they no longer wanted my business and have never
                                          purchased another Chevy. Had it been a few out of thousands I would have
                                          thought I had a bad one. But in this country there were more of them losing
                                          paint driving down the road than were not. At that time I was driving enough
                                          miles a year to need a replacement at the three year mark. Paint is not
                                          covered past a year. I had a Datsun truck that had an aluminum head and it
                                          had washer that the valve spring sat on to prevent the spring from digging
                                          into the head. At three months the washer broke in half, it was not covered
                                          under warranty either. Now they call themselves Nissan over here, which is
                                          what they were in the rest of the world then and I do not business with
                                          them. I know many that get three hundred thousand miles out of those
                                          vehicles with nothing more than the standard maintenance.
                                          I do not have a problem spending money for a decent product or do I gripe
                                          about a poorly designed or quality made product as I expect it to be a short
                                          lived device but I have to admit I do whine when I purchase from a leader in
                                          the industry and it has as many faults as the 990 does.
                                          Nikon should be sponsoring this site as the people here have done more to
                                          promote and arrange the repairs of the 990.
                                          Understand I would not want to drive around the country with a camera that
                                          has wires hanging out of it with switches on the end of the wire but if that
                                          is what it took, the people here would have the answer. What will this group
                                          be called in another two or three years when the 990 is no longer worth
                                          doing any repairs?
                                          So anyway I will attempt to sit down and be silent on the subject of the
                                          lack of quality as I am sure everyone is tired of the subject. This is a
                                          great group and I have enjoyed the responses to all the questions and
                                          comments along with the advice even if I was not in agreement with
                                          everything said.
                                          Clark

                                          --
                                          Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
                                          Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                                          Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.7 - Release Date: 12/30/2004
                                        • David J Taylor
                                          Clark Ellison wrote: [] ... [] ... Just how many 990s have the fault you mentioned compared to the number sold? The mode selector dial is a known issue, and
                                          Message 20 of 25 , Jan 6, 2005
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            Clark Ellison wrote:
                                            []
                                            > I do not have a problem spending money for a decent product or do I
                                            > gripe about a poorly designed or quality made product as I expect it
                                            > to be a short lived device but I have to admit I do whine when I
                                            > purchase from a leader in the industry and it has as many faults as
                                            > the 990 does.
                                            []
                                            > Clark

                                            Just how many 990s have the fault you mentioned compared to the number
                                            sold? The mode selector dial is a known issue, and has known fixes.
                                            Apart from that, our two 990s are soldiering on.

                                            What other faults are you experiencing? How many pictures have you taken
                                            with the camera. In what conditions has it been stored and used?

                                            David
                                          • Paul Berndt
                                            This started out with someone asking about replacing the internal battery and has evolved into discussion on longevity of digicams, no problem. Yet, I don t
                                            Message 21 of 25 , Jan 6, 2005
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              This started out with someone asking about replacing the internal
                                              battery and has evolved into discussion on longevity of digicams, no
                                              problem. Yet, I don't remember if anyone actually addressed the
                                              original question. My camera is 5 years old and is still going strong,
                                              but the question about the battery is one that I may/will have to
                                              address. Can a reasonably skilled person change the battery? Is it
                                              available? If not, can Nikon change it and for how much.

                                              I think that the battery should be renewable by the owner or by Nikon at
                                              a reasonable cost. Reasonable, to me, means $20 to $25 US + shipping
                                              etc. If it is more, then I consider it a design error.

                                              Although I'm looking into a new camera, I only have ~ 6000 shots on the
                                              990 and think it should have a lot more life in it. Interestingly, I
                                              scanned a couple of camera reviews from various sources and none of them
                                              mention the internal battery or if they are serviceable. I'd think that
                                              the sites need to add an area that addresses future serviceability and
                                              costs. With the industry maturing, I think we will start seeing some
                                              shakeout and the role that customer service plays would be important for
                                              those of us that are spending for top end cameras. As a counter to
                                              this, I think that them mass number of consumers in the USA will buy a
                                              camera, use it until it breaks and then throw it away and buy another
                                              one, much as the "cameras in a box." I tend to like nice things, keep
                                              and use them for an extended period of time, even if I have upgraded.
                                              For example, I'm looking at a CP8800 for the long lens. I intend to
                                              keep and use the 990 with the WA converter.

                                              Paul Berndt
                                              Ohio, USA
                                            • Clark Ellison
                                              It is hard to be silent when you ask for the faults. First problem I had was shutter lag. Trying to take a picture of my granddaughter walking down the aisle
                                              Message 22 of 25 , Jan 6, 2005
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                It is hard to be silent when you ask for the faults.
                                                First problem I had was shutter lag. Trying to take a picture of my
                                                granddaughter walking down the aisle and snapping the shutter to have the
                                                camera wait until two more people down the line had passed before actually
                                                taking a picture. I spent another couple of hundred on a faster card and
                                                this helped a lot. Not a big deal.
                                                Second problem I had was I was taking pictures one day and the batteries
                                                fell out of the camera. I contacted Nikon about what it would cost to fix
                                                this and where should I send it but they never replied.
                                                Next I noticed the buttons for changing settings were only operating
                                                sometimes. Unable to turn off the flash and then it not working because it
                                                thought it needed the falsh was the next problem. Then came the; unable to
                                                turn off the camera at all unless the batteries were removed. Of course the
                                                battery door was held closed by part of the tripod and a coin to keep the
                                                batteries from falling out increasing the pleasure of this operation.
                                                Then I had the, after one shot, I had to turn off the camera before it would
                                                take another picture.
                                                After that were the several times when I took the camera out of the bag and
                                                it was so hot I thought it was going to start on fire. It then became
                                                necessary to remove the batteries between shots due to fear it would
                                                actually catch on fire. The camera had all the indications it was off when I
                                                placed it in the bag and when it came out is still appeared to be turned
                                                off.
                                                I have not had the problem others have had with the twisting motion being
                                                restrained or the cable between the two parts shorting out.
                                                Care of the camera? I have not used it in the rain or even around water.
                                                I do not take it to the beach. When traveling it is kept in the carry bag
                                                and that is placed in the large camera bag. I always allow the camera time
                                                to adapt to the difference between air conditioned buildings and the out
                                                doors before removing it from the bag. I understand that if I remove a cold
                                                camera in a warm moist environment I am asking for trouble and that digital
                                                cameras are more likely than film cameras to have a problem with this so I
                                                took far better care of this than the cheap digital I had before this one.
                                                Sad thing is the cheap camera I used for work and it was taken from cold
                                                places to warm places and even used in the rain, dusty and dirty places and
                                                I never had problems with it. I just wanted a better camera that would take
                                                higher resolution pictures to use for the family and personal items I wanted
                                                pictures of. I ride a Harley and like to take pictures of the paint work and
                                                custom work done by others on their motorcycle. The camera is not
                                                transported in a saddle bag but has been taken on trips and was packed in
                                                the dual bag setup already mentioned and then centered in the clothes which
                                                are packed in a waterproof bag prior to being placed in the luggage.
                                                I do not have an actual count on the numbers of cameras that have had each
                                                complaint that I have, compared to the number manufactured but have heard
                                                enough from others that I have met around the country and online that I do
                                                know there are far to many problems for a camera that is supposed to be on
                                                the higher end of cameras. This forum is the only place that I have heard
                                                people state their 990 is operating as it should and you are one of only a
                                                few that have stated that.
                                                So what have I done that could have caused the problems? What would you
                                                recommend to do or not to do on the next one?
                                                Clark


                                                --
                                                Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
                                                Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                                                Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.7 - Release Date: 12/30/2004
                                              • Jon Glass
                                                ... When I bought my camera, the battery was dead. I typically just make sure that it s plugged in when I change batteries, and if not, it s rather simple to
                                                Message 23 of 25 , Jan 6, 2005
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  On Jan 6, 2005, at 3:59 PM, Paul Berndt wrote:

                                                  > I think that the battery should be renewable by the owner or by Nikon
                                                  > at
                                                  > a reasonable cost. Reasonable, to me, means $20 to $25 US + shipping
                                                  > etc. If it is more, then I consider it a design error.

                                                  When I bought my camera, the battery was dead. I typically just make
                                                  sure that it's plugged in when I change batteries, and if not, it's
                                                  rather simple to change the date, and I don't worry about custom
                                                  functions, liking things as they are, but it would be interesting to
                                                  see how complicated changing the battery would be...
                                                  --
                                                  -Jon Glass
                                                  Krakow, Poland
                                                  <jonglass@...>
                                                • David J Taylor
                                                  ... [] ... Clark, You experience has been far worse than mine, and perhaps worse than anyone I can recall in the group. Thanks for reminding me of the battery
                                                  Message 24 of 25 , Jan 6, 2005
                                                  • 0 Attachment
                                                    Clark Ellison wrote:
                                                    > It is hard to be silent when you ask for the faults.
                                                    []
                                                    > So what have I done that could have caused the problems? What would
                                                    > you recommend to do or not to do on the next one?
                                                    > Clark

                                                    Clark,

                                                    You experience has been far worse than mine, and perhaps worse than anyone
                                                    I can recall in the group.

                                                    Thanks for reminding me of the battery door issue - I had forgotten that
                                                    one. That and the mode switch I do regard as not acceptable manufacture,
                                                    and agree Nikon should rectify those as design or manufacturing defects on
                                                    request. Many people have had that problem repaired at cost by Nikon, so
                                                    it was unfortunate that you didn't persist in your efforts to contact
                                                    them.

                                                    I think that the shutter is working as designed, and if the lag was an
                                                    issue to you then perhaps you should have purchased a different camera.
                                                    At the very least, you could have rehearsed such an important shot. (I'm
                                                    assuming that it was focus lag which caused the delay rather than a defect
                                                    as such?).

                                                    Once you got the faulty buttons problem, I think you should have asked
                                                    Nikon (or your supplier) for a refund. It sounds as if you had a less
                                                    than perfect camera perhaps from day one. Same with overheating. I did
                                                    have that on the very old 900, but never on the 990. Back to Nikon for a
                                                    refund or replacement. There is an obvious safety issue involved.

                                                    I don't get the impression that you caused any of these problems.

                                                    With the next one, I'd suggest (a) trying it out at the dealer as much as
                                                    possible before purchase so that you can be aware of any limitations and
                                                    (b) persisting more to get problems fixed or a refund.

                                                    (I feel I'm being wise after the event. The time I have "practiced what I
                                                    preached" was when I bought a Minolta A2 camera as a step up from the
                                                    Nikon Coolpix 5700. I made sure the dealer had a "return if not
                                                    satisfied" policy because I'd read some reviews indicating certain
                                                    problems. I did indeed find those problems and more. The camera went
                                                    back for a full refund, and I explained politely what issues I had found.
                                                    Since then, not only have I recommended that dealer (Jessops) widely, but
                                                    my wife has bought a Panasonic FZ20 and I've bought a Nikon Coolpix 8400
                                                    from the same dealer.)

                                                    Cheers,
                                                    David
                                                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.