Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3751

Subject: [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3751
From: Stephen Scharf <scharfsj@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 23:33:14 -0800

Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 09:35:39 -0800
From: "William Sommerwerck" <williams@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [OM] OM vs. Leica; digital photos


<Snip>


At the Mike & Key Christmas party, one of the members called me over to her
table. "I want to show you something." She opened a thick folder with dozens
of incredibly beautiful prints. The colors were rich and accurate, densities
were dead-on, and the images reasonably sharp (though not quite up to what I
expect from 35mm -- but still acceptable). I was particularly impressed with
shots of a sunrise and a sunset that were perfectly printed. "Those are
really beautiful prints. Who did the photofinishing?"

She dropped the bombshell -- "Nobody. They're digital photos from our Kodak
camera. They were printed by sticking the memory chip in an Epson printer
and pushing the Print button."

!!!

So there's no question about it -- for those who can afford a digital camera
and photo-quality printer, conventional color-print film will soon be
"dead."

It is dead as far as I am concerned....I've even gotten great results from scanning color print negatives on my Minolta Dimage Scan Elite II and printing on my Epson 820. The prints look WAY better than what you get printing conventional prints.




Marc
I'm still not sure which way I'll go, as I'm having trouble justifying the
extra dollars for the Oly C-5050 over the C-4000. I'm not sure what that
extra megapixel will do for me for what I'll be mostly using it for, and
some of the other extras don't mean a lot to me right now.  But since
digital is all new to me, go with your heart, not what I think.
The lens difference is sort of a toss up. The C-5050 has a 35-105mm
equivalent, starts at 1.8, but is at 2.6 when zoomed (and to f/10). The
C-4000 has a 32-96mm equivalent, and is constant 2.8 throughout (and to
f/11). I think I'd almost prefer the slightly wider of the C-4000, and the
slightly faster lens on the C5050 is only at the wider settings.
(Uhhhh, yes, don't sell your 35RC just yet.)
Wayne

I wouldn't be able to justify the extra dollars for a C5050Z, either.
I think of the three cameras mentioned here, the C4000Z would have the best image quality (resolution differences aside). The new 5 megapixel Oly's have been getting some comments about noise issues. For $460 at Best Buy, the C4000Z is a killer deal. You won't notice the difference in lens speed to speak of, but you WILL notice less CA at full wide angle.


Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 12:36:22 -0800
From: Keith Whaley <keith_w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [OM] OM vs. Leica; digital photos

I just bought an early present for my little office...an Epson 820
printer. I'm going to be installed and printing by the next couple of days.
My Epson digital camera (PhotoPC 750 Z) is supposed to connect
directly to the printer, and print right from the camera, instead of
having to go thru uploading etc... We'll see!

keith whaley

You're going to love it.


Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 17:49:53 -0500
From: "om@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <om@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [OM] Day out with friends

I've been a VERY HAPPY G2 user for a year, and I'd enthusiastically
recommend the G3=2E  Read Phil Asky's review on dpreview=2Ecom=2E  I was
initially underwhelmed by the G3, but after reading all the little goodies=

and improvements that Canon has put into that camera, I'm sold=2E  Many ar=
e
really user features, not extra specifications=2E  Canon's really refined
this camera since the G1 and except for infrared performance, has really
hit the mark=2E

Skip

I wouldn't get rid of a G2 for G3, if it were me, Skip. I like the G2 better. Remember that when you live with a camera day after day, year after year, little irksome things that seem niggles in the showroom can prove to be hard to live with in the long haul. The one thing I don't like about the G3 is that the len barrel *really* obstructs your vision through the viewfinder when the lens is at full wide angle. I found this to be a major shortcoming, and if I owned the camera, I think it drive me nut when in a "live with it in the real world" situation. While I really liked my C4040Z (especially the image quality), there were some things about living with it that drove me to distraction at times. Most notable were the shutter lag and the slow boot times. The shutter lag on a G2 is WAY better than the C4040.

-Stephen.


Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:05:03 +0800
From: "Clemente Colayco" <litefoot@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [OM] Day out with friends

How would the G2 or 3 compare against the equivalent Olympus model? Would
that be the 4040? or 5050?
Okay, here's a comparison from someone who has played with a G2 a lot and owned a C4040Z. G2 is very comparable to a C4040Z for image quality. The G2 has some nicer features, e.g. the ability to shoot in RAW mode, to use Compact Flash, and the way cool LCD that is multi-position-able. The G2 also has a center positioned viewfinder, which I like more than the C4040 or C5050Z viewfinder. The C4040Z is a bit smaller, has more shutter lag, but a slightly faster lens. The build quality of the Olys is better, with a very nice magnesium body. The LCD screen on the C4040Z sticks out from the body though, and is easily scratched as a result. The boot-up and boot-down times on the Oly 4040Z drives me nuts, along with Oly's incredibly stupid lens cap design, which causes the camera to go into error mode if you turn the camera on with the lens cap on. The C5050Z is a clear design improvement over the C4040Z in terms of ergonomics and using the controls, but the (yes, once more) incredibly stupid lens cap design is retained, and the camera takes an annoyingly long time to lock focus, notably longer than the C-50Z. There are also concerns about noise issues with the C5050Z. There are good reasons Canon decided to stay with 4 megapixels for the G3. If I had to choose between a G2 or C4040Z, I would likely take the G2. If I had to choose between the G3 and an Oly, I would take an Oly C4000Z. If I had to choose between the Powershot S-40 and the C-50Z, I would take the Oly. I don't think I would buy a C5050Z for $800 retail when there are C4000Z's avaiable for $469 retail.

None of them are perfect....like anything in life, you have to make compromises...

-Stephen

--


2001 CBR600F4i - Fantastic!

< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [OM] Re: olympus-digest V2 #3751, Stephen Scharf <=
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz