I'm trying to decide which one to get.  Does anyone know of any COMPARISONS between the two?  I already know that both are great.  My impressions so far:

The Sony has a movie mode that sounds interesting at first, but the movies are tiny and short (thumb-sized and about ten seconds).  The CD-RW media is a great feature, though.

The Nikon has better zoom and a great closeup mode, but image memory is limited so I'd have to get a laptop to transfer photos to as I took them.

What are your uses for the camera?
The CoolPix memory will be as much as the card size you invest in. I have no experience with Sony products but can tell you that Nikon should have them beat. Am using the CP 950 and am happy with it within its limitations. It's not a D1 or Kodak 760. The close-up functions are amazing. I'll try to find a comparison for you or until someone else comes up with one. I have been using Nikon cameras and Nikkor lenses for years and am pleased with the quality. Only drawback to Nikon is their Customer Service can be a bit lacking at times.

I would stay away from the CDRW cameras from Sony.  They have been known to have some problems because there are alot more moving parts in the CDRW's than in the memory stick models.  I'm on my second Sony camera and they are GREAT!  The Sony that I have now is the DSC-F505V, it's a 3.34 megapixel and has the macro mode whick allows you to zoom in and take picture at distances of 5 cm with great clarity.  I have the standard 8 MB card with my Sony and can take like 125 pics in 640 x 480 mode. I would highly suggest you look into this model.  You can probally get them for around $799 if you look around on the web.    

The Sony has a Carl Zeiss lens which is good glass. I'd still go Nikon though, guess I'm a bit biased. We are buying a new camera for our studio this Winter, it's the Kodak 760 and will replace some of my 2 1/4" camera shooting. Hope this stuff helps.

[url]http://www.dpreview.com/[/url]

Here is the Sony Review:
[url]http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonycd300/[/url]

Here is the 995 review:
[url]http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp995/[/url]

These are some close-ups from my CP 950:

BTW, this is not a bee.
[img]http://wsphotofews.excite.com/028/As/Ed/g9/sg91027.jpg[/img]

[img]http://wsphotofews.excite.com/032/tE/vG/si/NC83844.jpg[/img]

[img]http://wsphotofews.excite.com/032/tE/vG/si/NN64568.jpg[/img]

Didn't mean to get carried away. I love photography.

i have a sony mavica. very nice.

I've used "film" cameras for over half a century and finally got a digital about 6 months back (Canon G-1).

Most of the current 3megapixel+ cameras are pretty good, and I've been told that the Nikon connects more seamlessly than the Canon, but what drove my choice at the time was the media for the camera. I don't like Sony memory sticks and Nikon was just getting flash-card compatible at the time, but the best way to go (IMHO) was micro drive.
I stuck a one-gig IBM Micro Drive in the back of my Canon and I think I can shoot around 900 hi-res pics! Talk about a drum-fed camera!
Nikon may now also be micro-drive compatible?
Incidentally, microdrives fit into flash-card compatible cameras.

Hope this helps.

Go Nikon, the quality of the pictures is impressive

I have the Nikon CP995 and am very pleased!  No idea how it compares with the Sony!

Please don't tell me the Sony is better!  I've already made the investment in the Nikon!

DaMan

Edited 'cause I can't even remember the model number!

 

We just bought a Sony 4.1 megapixel cybershot, very nice. Although the Canon  EOD looked good, 5.3 Megapixel and takes 35mm lenses, but too much, $1800

Thanks, folks!  I'd heard about the CD-RW drive "risk" on the Sony, which does make me a little leery of them, but mostly these have been "it could break, so it probably will" comments.

Grundsau, those are GREAT photos.  Thanks especially for the review pointers;  25 pages covering every detail of the 995. . . .  Looks like it does have a couple of weaknesses, notably that the lens distorts around the edges (especially at higher zooms).  The colors aren't quite as sharp as the Canon, but Nikon has built-in adjustment modes to improve on reality.

number6, the microdrive is not officially supported in the 995, but the 512MB and 1GB drives appear to work according to the reviewer.  They also slow the camera down and eat battery life;  the slowdown problem is probably why they're not officially supported.

I just want to take the usual sorts of general photos that home users usually do -- a little nature, various people, boring vacation pix, household junk for auctions on EBay, that sort of thing.  Nothing fancy, but I'd like to be able to get good-quality photos at high resolutions.

What to buy, what to buy. . . .  Argh. [:D]

BTW, looks like Nikon is apparently releasing a 5.24 megapixel (2560 x 1920) consumer camera, the CoolPix 5000, in about a month. [:D]  I think I'll hold off so that they can drop the price on the 995, especially with the economy getting weird.  I don't think I need that much camera, and the one feature that would really sell me on it -- SLR -- isn't there yet again.  (If the Sony CD1000 just offered CD-RW, I'd be on it like a rottweiler on a sirloin.)

This site is one of the best I have found for deep information and reviews on digital camaras.
[url]http://www.dpreview.com/reviews[/url]

I've tried a bunch, but always return to my Kodak DC290 for the best pictures...

Daggar: That's a great site for in-depth reviews... VERY complete.
Jon3: I agree with you about the DC290; the review at the above mentioned site gave the long-exposure mode as a good point. I have had pretty good luck in low-light situations.

[img]http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=926068&a=6762421&p=32265616&Sequence=0[/img]

FITTER out