|
|
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
I have a Pentax Optio 33 WR that is 'water resestant' fits in a shirt pocket
and takes good enough photos for most uses but I'd like to have a similar type camera ( water proof, small, good optics ) that has a higher pixel rating .. ie takes 'bigger' photos I'm not interested in a bigger than pocket sized unit, or SLR or ... ... ( been there done all that photobug **** way back when, I once owned an 8x10 view, 4x5 view, 2 1/2 SLR and a couple 35mm SLRs + a Leica focal plane ... not to mention a full darkroom ... NOW I just want a 'good camera' to take digital pictures for hard copy printing at a decent size and high standard ) Suggestions? What's out there now that I should consider ? as always thanks in advance |
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:10:17 GMT, "Larry L"
wrote: but I'd like to have a similar type camera ( water proof, small, good optics ) that has a higher pixel rating . http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_se...digital_sw.asp It is "water proof", not "water resistant". Big difference. You can actually take these cameras underwater for shots of the fish before and after you remove the fly. And, they take a decent picture at a decent price. Dave |
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
Larry L wrote:
I have a Pentax Optio 33 WR that is 'water resestant' fits in a shirt pocket and takes good enough photos for most uses but I'd like to have a similar type camera ( water proof, small, good optics ) that has a higher pixel rating .. ie takes 'bigger' photos I'm not interested in a bigger than pocket sized unit, or SLR or ... ... ( been there done all that photobug **** way back when, I once owned an 8x10 view, 4x5 view, 2 1/2 SLR and a couple 35mm SLRs + a Leica focal plane ... not to mention a full darkroom ... NOW I just want a 'good camera' to take digital pictures for hard copy printing at a decent size and high standard ) Suggestions? What's out there now that I should consider ? Your camera has 3.2 megapixels. The Optio WP has 5 megapixels and is WATERPROOF to 1.5 meters. I've used one for years. It's a great fishing camera. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. |
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
"Dave LaCourse" wrote but I'd like to have a similar type camera ( water proof, small, good optics ) that has a higher pixel rating . http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_se...digital_sw.asp It is "water proof", not "water resistant". Big difference. You can actually take these cameras underwater for shots of the fish before and after you remove the fly. And, they take a decent picture at a decent price. Dave are you using this camara Dave? it's what my photo store guy ( also a fly fisherman with property right on a local River with big trout surface feeding on the flat right behind his house, it turns out :-) suggested. But it doesn't have a view finder and I find the LCD screen hard to see in bright light ... do you have that problem? |
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 20:10:26 GMT, "Larry L"
wrote: are you using this camara Dave? it's what my photo store guy ( also a fly fisherman with property right on a local River with big trout surface feeding on the flat right behind his house, it turns out :-) suggested. But it doesn't have a view finder and I find the LCD screen hard to see in bright light ... do you have that problem? I have the old model that is "water resistant". However, I have dropped it (twice!) into water knee deep with the lens open, and once with the lens closed (fall - it was in my vest), but no harm was done. Santa's gonna give me the water proof one. I'm going to opt for the "Frank Reid Signature Model", good to a depth of ten feet and dropped from six feet. I miss a view finder. That would be my only complaint. I understand that it is easier to make it water resistant and water proof without it. Dave |
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
Larry L wrote:
I have a Pentax Optio 33 WR that is 'water resestant' fits in a shirt pocket and takes good enough photos for most uses but I'd like to have a similar type camera ( water proof, small, good optics ) that has a higher pixel rating .. ie takes 'bigger' photos I'm not interested in a bigger than pocket sized unit, or SLR or ... ... ( been there done all that photobug **** way back when, I once owned an 8x10 view, 4x5 view, 2 1/2 SLR and a couple 35mm SLRs + a Leica focal plane ... not to mention a full darkroom ... NOW I just want a 'good camera' to take digital pictures for hard copy printing at a decent size and high standard ) Suggestions? What's out there now that I should consider ? as always thanks in advance This is a good site to compare cameras. Olympus makes nice "waterproof" cameras. I haven't read a lot of feedback on it, but what I have read, has mostly been positive. http://www.steves-digicams.com/2007_...stylus790.html http://www.steves-digicams.com/2008_...tylus1030.html You can stay with the Pentax, and just upgrade to the newer model. I'm leaning towards the Optio, because of the excellent macro specs it has. They have improved the display screen, so it can be viewed in bright light conditions(a knock on the earlier versions). http://www.steves-digicams.com/2007_...optio_w30.html brians |
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:10:17 GMT, "Larry L"
wrote: I have a Pentax Optio 33 WR that is 'water resestant' fits in a shirt pocket and takes good enough photos for most uses but I'd like to have a similar type camera ( water proof, small, good optics ) that has a higher pixel rating .. ie takes 'bigger' photos I'm not interested in a bigger than pocket sized unit, or SLR or ... ... ( been there done all that photobug **** way back when, I once owned an 8x10 view, 4x5 view, 2 1/2 SLR and a couple 35mm SLRs + a Leica focal plane ... not to mention a full darkroom ... NOW I just want a 'good camera' to take digital pictures for hard copy printing at a decent size and high standard ) Suggestions? What's out there now that I should consider ? as always thanks in advance Larry, Here's my take - I've been using digital for quite a while, and have had a string of cameras, PnS and SLR, from Sony, Olympus, Canon, Nikon. I've kept them until a "too good to pass up" deal came along rather than simply going out and upgrading for the mere sake of upgrading, and I can't remember any that I'd say I've been truly unhappy with. I would advise that all things being equal, I'd pick one with proprietary batteries last or one with an oddball memory card/stick - IOW, AAs - rechargeable Lith-Ions are well worth it, and SDs as first choice. As with laptops, I've found that unless there are some specific features you _need_ (or _want_), I'd look for used units, and for the same primary reason I suggested a used laptop. Many folks out there are "latest and greatest" types who will buy the latest without regard to what they actually need, and so, there are often great deals on perfectly good items that would meet most folks' (actual) needs. Plus, in the general consumer range of what you seem to be asking about, competition tends to keep most of the majors pretty close as far as features and quality. Finally, buying used is sorta like recycling. IAC, what I'd suggest is that you make a list of which 1-3 year old camera models from the "majors" - Olympus, Canon, Pentax, Nikon, etc. - will work for you as far as "must-have" general features (waterproof, "X" minimum MPs, type of memory, batteries, digital vs. optical zoom, size, etc.) and look around for any one of them. Check eBay for an idea of general "market price." Craigslist can be an excellent source for good "upgraditus" electronics. And I'd be careful about actually buying from eBay - if you must, buy from a long-time, highly-rated seller, etc. HTH, R |
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
"rw" wrote ... Your camera has 3.2 megapixels. The Optio WP has 5 megapixels and is WATERPROOF to 1.5 meters. I've used one for years. It's a great fishing camera. +1, except Santa brought me the WPi a couple years ago. 6 MP, so the pics are huge. -Dan |
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:10:17 GMT, "Larry L" wrote:
NOW I just want a 'good camera' to take digital pictures for hard copy printing at a decent size and high standard ) I've got an Optio Wp I carry in my vest, and it's a handy camera but I'm not sure the optics are up to the kind of prints you want to make. Above about 4MP or so it's more about the optics than the sensor, and I'd look at the Nikon Coolpix line or some of the Canon models - I think they've got the best optics of the 'shirt pocket size' group. fwiw -- Charlie... http://www.chocphoto.com |
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
"Larry L" wrote in message ... I have a Pentax Optio 33 WR that is 'water resestant' fits in a shirt pocket and takes good enough photos for most uses but I'd like to have a similar type camera ( water proof, small, good optics ) that has a higher pixel rating .. ie takes 'bigger' photos I'm not interested in a bigger than pocket sized unit, or SLR or ... ... ( been there done all that photobug **** way back when, I once owned an 8x10 view, 4x5 view, 2 1/2 SLR and a couple 35mm SLRs + a Leica focal plane ... not to mention a full darkroom ... NOW I just want a 'good camera' to take digital pictures for hard copy printing at a decent size and high standard ) Suggestions? What's out there now that I should consider ? as always thanks in advance I have the Optio 20 WP and I think it is 6 MP. It did leak this year in the surf in Costa Rica. Seems to be OK since it dried out, but seems as if the rubber seal gets weak after a while. |
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 18:19:14 -0400, Charlie Choc
wrote: On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:10:17 GMT, "Larry L" wrote: NOW I just want a 'good camera' to take digital pictures for hard copy printing at a decent size and high standard ) I've got an Optio Wp I carry in my vest, and it's a handy camera but I'm not sure the optics are up to the kind of prints you want to make. Above about 4MP or so it's more about the optics than the sensor, and I'd look at the Nikon Coolpix line or some of the Canon models - I think they've got the best optics of the 'shirt pocket size' group. fwiw FWIW, based solely on personal experience, between what I've personally owned, as well as what friends and family have, I've not noticed a tremendous difference in _image_ quality among the "majors" in the 4-5 MP range PnS/shirtpocket models. And while I cannot recall any (purposeful) "high-end" prints from any of these images, everything I've seen in the "basic" output/prints from these has been more or less the same. So there's no confusion, what I'm saying is that we've had images from a veritable host of PnS type/size cameras, printed many of them, although most are viewed via various panels/monitors/frames, and I've noticed no significant quality difference among them. Now, where I have seen an obvious difference is comparing them to images made with either my or my BinL's SLRs with high-end lenses with output on high-end printers/papers, but that isn't surprising, nor, given that you don't want an SLR, all that relevant. TC, R |
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 18:44:24 -0400, Charlie Choc
wrote: On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 17:39:09 -0500, wrote: On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 18:19:14 -0400, Charlie Choc wrote: On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:10:17 GMT, "Larry L" wrote: NOW I just want a 'good camera' to take digital pictures for hard copy printing at a decent size and high standard ) I've got an Optio Wp I carry in my vest, and it's a handy camera but I'm not sure the optics are up to the kind of prints you want to make. Above about 4MP or so it's more about the optics than the sensor, and I'd look at the Nikon Coolpix line or some of the Canon models - I think they've got the best optics of the 'shirt pocket size' group. fwiw FWIW, based solely on personal experience, between what I've personally owned, as well as what friends and family have, I've not noticed a tremendous difference in _image_ quality among the "majors" in the 4-5 MP range PnS/shirtpocket models. My comments are based on PnS cameras I have owned. Fair enough. I've just not noticed much if any difference among a moderately large group of cameras (both mine and others') as far as their images and prints from those images. I'd offer that the camera's owner is not all that important in such a review, but YMMV. TC, R |
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
Charlie Choc wrote:
On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:10:17 GMT, "Larry L" wrote: NOW I just want a 'good camera' to take digital pictures for hard copy printing at a decent size and high standard ) I've got an Optio Wp I carry in my vest, and it's a handy camera but I'm not sure the optics are up to the kind of prints you want to make. Who make prints? :-) I don't think I've printed more than a half-dozen photos in the past year, but I'm not as seriously into photography as you are, Charlie. To me, prints are things that eventually goes into the trash or into a cardboard box in a closet. Digital is forever, as long as you back up. A 5 megapixel camera with so-so optics is good enough for me. My biggest problems with the Optio WP are the lack of a viewfinder and the somewhat unusual battery. Both are mere annoyances compared to the compactness and waterproofness (is that even a word?) of the Optio WP. It's a lot better than my cell-phone camera. :-) -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. |
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:10:02 -0700, rw
wrote: Charlie Choc wrote: On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:10:17 GMT, "Larry L" wrote: NOW I just want a 'good camera' to take digital pictures for hard copy printing at a decent size and high standard ) I've got an Optio Wp I carry in my vest, and it's a handy camera but I'm not sure the optics are up to the kind of prints you want to make. Who make prints? :-) I don't think I've printed more than a half-dozen photos in the past year, but I'm not as seriously into photography as you are, Charlie. That's sorta my point - a shirt-pocket type 5ish MP camera really isn't for anyone seriously into photography. As the technology has progressed, and "tricks" have been employed to get the claimed MP rating up, the "end-user" _effective_ quality (consumer-grade stuff) hasn't, IME, increased all that much because the display options are about the same as they were 2-4 years ago. IOW, unless you're using high-end display stuff and/or high-end output stuff for prints, somewhere around 5 MP is enough for anything less than production stuff. Which is why, IMO, none of the variety of cameras from which we regularly see images is all that different, again, as far as image and output on "basic" devices. To me, prints are things that eventually goes into the trash or into a cardboard box in a closet. Digital is forever, as long as you back up. If you haven't seen such, we got digital picture frames for friends as presents this past Christmas (there were on sale all over for around $50USD or so), and all have been shickled tickless with them. You simply slip in the memory card/stick, and it's a slide show. A 5 megapixel camera with so-so optics is good enough for me. My biggest problems with the Optio WP are the lack of a viewfinder and the somewhat unusual battery. Both are mere annoyances compared to the compactness and waterproofness (is that even a word?) of the Optio WP. Man, the proprietary battery thing is, IME, a whole lot bigger thing than a mere annoyance - obviously, YMDV, but I'd offer that if Larry is planning on taking this thing down south, it might be a deal-breaker for him - I'd stick with standard battery types (AA, AAA) - again, YMMV. It's a lot better than my cell-phone camera. :-) A whiteboard, markers, and a moderately talented 5 year old child are better than most cellphone cameras... TC, R |
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
|
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
wrote That's sorta my point - a shirt-pocket type 5ish MP camera really isn't for anyone seriously into photography. that is very true ... but I have been seriously into photography ( made my living selling artsy fartsy b&w prints for a couple years, had shows in galleries etc ) and I never want to go there again....... My wife has a Cannon digi SLR she got late last year, that would do the quality, but I don't want to "go looking for photos." I do want to take the ones that jump out at me and I do want to print them in hardcopy at decent size and resolution. They will simply be "purdy" pictures, none of the attempt to be arty of my youth. I'm simply looking for the best technical "quality" images available in a small water resistent package. |
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:59:06 -0700, rw
wrote: wrote: Man, the proprietary battery thing is, IME, a whole lot bigger thing than a mere annoyance - obviously, YMDV, but I'd offer that if Larry is planning on taking this thing down south, it might be a deal-breaker for him - I'd stick with standard battery types (AA, AAA) - again, YMMV. I thought it would be more of a problem than it is. Two fully charged batteries (I carry three) are adequate for a week-long float trip in the wilderness, taking hundreds of photos. Those lithium-ion batteries are powerful and compact. If you're somewhere that you can buy AA or AAA batteries, you're probably somewhere that you can recharge your "special" batteries. It's really a matter of priorities. My number one criterion is that the camera be waterproof. I've ruined a couple of cameras by taking unplanned dips. I especially don't want to be carrying a camera that inhibits my already marginal wading skills. My number two criterion is that it fit into a shirt pocket. Lithium-ion batteries easily have the highest energy density, so they're the natural choice for compactness. I don't know of any generic-battery cameras that fit those criteria. Maybe there's one. I don't know of it. I'd think you'd be right as far as the smallest of the small ones, but unless it has swung back to all "special" batteries, Canon, Olympus and Nikon all had? smallish PnS's that used AAs. Another possible reason to look at used cameras. And I'd agree that lith-ion AAs are the way to go when possible. I didn't realize that the "special" batteries had gotten to the point of hundreds of pictures per charge. My experience with them was that they seemed to go when you at the most inopportune time, but that is with cameras 2-4 years old. If that is the case, I'd not worry about it, but take at least one extra and make sure to take adaptors that might be needed to recharge, or, if you're camping and/or spending lots of time outdoors, think about one of the solar chargers. TC, R BTW, I also dislike the lack of a range finder, but that's another story. |
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 00:19:10 GMT, "Larry L"
wrote: wrote That's sorta my point - a shirt-pocket type 5ish MP camera really isn't for anyone seriously into photography. that is very true ... but I have been seriously into photography ( made my living selling artsy fartsy b&w prints for a couple years, had shows in galleries etc ) and I never want to go there again....... My wife has a Cannon digi SLR she got late last year, that would do the quality, but I don't want to "go looking for photos." I do want to take the ones that jump out at me and I do want to print them in hardcopy at decent size and resolution. They will simply be "purdy" pictures, none of the attempt to be arty of my youth. I'm simply looking for the best technical "quality" images available in a small water resistent package. Well, if it matters/helps, I regularly see such "snapshots" from about 8-10 people using 8-10 different cameras, and IMO, there isn't enough difference in them, when viewed via "standard" displays or printed on mid-grade but business-grade printers (DT color lasers, proof-class DT IJs, etc.) or via Wal-Mart/"drug store" type of printing. As you probably know, once you step to something like your wife's camera and print out at on lab-type/production-class printers, there is a difference. And AFAIK, there's nothing that would be even marginally justifiable, from a monetary standpoint, that combines the small size and that level of quality, nor is there a reason to try. TC, R |
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
wrote difference. And AFAIK, there's nothing that would be even marginally justifiable, from a monetary standpoint, that combines the small size and that level of quality, nor is there a reason to try. TC, R I feel sure you are right. And I'm far less interested in the photos to ( maybe ) be had than in maintaining freedom from the enslavement of 'serious photography' ... My reason, btw, for shopping isn't really to upgrade ... I'm giving my kid my Pentax to take to Chile so he can send us photos ... I need a new fishing camera and it might as well be as good a one as 'fishing camera' allows thanks for all your input ... all you input-ers |
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
|
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
|
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 08:16:08 -0400, Dave LaCourse
wrote: On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 21:51:31 -0500, wrote: And for the record, I admit somewhat of a bias against "special" batteries due to personal experience in having issues with them - not defective or anything, just trying to find replacements in areas that replacements would seemingly be readily available - for example, trying to locate a particular Canon battery, for a year or so old camera, in DT Philly AND New Orleans. Finally had to go online - PITA for a friggin' battery. I had, some time back, an Olympus that took AAs (and came with a set of lith-ions, and a cigar lighter charger, to boot) - worse case, pop into just about any store and pick up a set of batteries. It was either a 4 or 5 MP (a 5050 or 8080Z, IIRC), and it wasn't all THAT big, but it damned sure wasn't WP...or even WR... My Olympus Stylus 810 comes with the lithium-ion battery with recharger and a spare battery. Very small battery but lasts a loooong time. I have always brought the spare battery with me on trips but have yet to use it. They easily charge up over night. Well, this is my thing with "special" batteries - suppose you ain't got a place to recharge it, overnight or otherwise. Apparently, they are lasting longer than they used to, which is good, and certainly, such would mitigate my desire to have "normal" cells, but I would still choose "normal" cells over special batteries, all else being fairly equal. Remember that you can get ni-cad or lith-ion AA/AAA/C/D cells, and the recharging options are vast, from mains to solar and even wind. TC, R Dave |
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
|
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 09:24:29 -0500, wrote: even wind. Wind would suit you best. d'o) |
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 08:48:42 -0700, rw
wrote: Very bad advice. If you use "standard" sized lithium-ion batteries in a camera designed for "normal" batteries you'll fry your camera. Lithium-ion batteries produce twice the voltage of alkaline batteries and three times the voltage of NiMH batteries.. I have yet to run out of battery power on my Stylus. There certainly wasn't anywhere to charge it while in Russia. If I can take two or three hundred pictures on one battery, I doubt I'll need any other, but I usually travel with at least one spare (very small and light). Dave |
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 08:48:42 -0700, rw
wrote: wrote: Well, this is my thing with "special" batteries - suppose you ain't got a place to recharge it, overnight or otherwise. Apparently, they are lasting longer than they used to, which is good, and certainly, such would mitigate my desire to have "normal" cells, but I would still choose "normal" cells over special batteries, all else being fairly equal. Remember that you can get ni-cad or lith-ion AA/AAA/C/D cells, and the recharging options are vast, from mains to solar and even wind. Very bad advice. Yeah, as I re-read it, it's worded dangerously, confusing the common terms for "battery" with "cell" etc., but you can sub Lith-ion for AA, just not _cell_ for _cell_ - it's battery for cell - see below. If you use "standard" sized lithium-ion batteries in a camera designed for "normal" batteries you'll fry your camera. Lithium-ion batteries produce twice the voltage of alkaline batteries and three times the voltage of NiMH batteries.. I'm not (just) talking about _batteries_ (or "batteries"), I'm talking about cells - IOW, 1 lith-ion "unit" to replace 2 AA cells ("battery" in common speech). However, I have AA (and AAA and D cell) sized NiMH and NiCad "units" that are direct 1-for-1 replacements for "standard" AA, D, etc. I also have a few _batteries_ that are lith-ion and take the place of 2 (or 4) AA _cells_ - i use them in digital cameras, GPS/Nav gear, etc. I have a backup nav setup whereby I can run my GPS/Chartplotter. laptop, and a HH VHF via NiMH (or alkaline, NiMH, or NiCad) trickled/topped off by solar or wind or via house batteries, for example. Here is the first link Google produced, and it appears to be a good one (but I have nothing whatsoever to do with it, nor did I fully examine it, and as such, I make suggestions either way as to doing business with them): http://www.steves-digicams.com/nimh_batteries.html (scroll down for lith-ion info and replacements) So, if one wishes to get non-"standard"/alkaline "batteries" for something, make sure that you are getting the right power "unit" (and charger) for the intended device. AFAIK, the NiMH and NiCad "AA", etc. _sized_ units are 1-to-1 replacements for the "standard" alkaline counterparts, but ??? - the packaging should clearly indicate such. TC, R |
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 09:24:29 -0500, wrote:
Well, this is my thing with "special" batteries - suppose you ain't got a place to recharge it, overnight or otherwise. My truck has an inverter. I can recharge my batteries while I'm driving you to town to buy some AA's. ;-) -- Charlie... http://www.chocphoto.com |
Ot? .. digi-cam upgrade
On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 18:49:46 -0400, Charlie Choc
wrote: On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 09:24:29 -0500, wrote: Well, this is my thing with "special" batteries - suppose you ain't got a place to recharge it, overnight or otherwise. My truck has an inverter. I can recharge my batteries while I'm driving you to town to buy some AA's. ;-) HOLY CRAP!! How do they charge in overweight baggage charges for a truck?! Heck, even if you're like Juan Trippe, Jr. or something, it seems a bit excessive to avoid a lil' larger camera...on this one, your mileage has just GOTTA vary... TC, R |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:27 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2006 FishingBanter