Best mini digital camera : Nikon coolpix S9, Canon SD400, Pentax S7
anir...@yahoo.com
S9, Canon SD400, Pentax S7, Casio Exilim EX-S600, etc?
I like to have a good quality, durable and strong camera that I can put
in my pocket. Unfortunately, Sony, Fuji, Olympus are out of the
picture, as I only want a camera supported by SD cards.
Among the top shown cameras, which one is the best?
I don't mind about gadget like Wifi, big screen, etc. The important one
is size, and therefore I have tentatively selected above. I am not
looking anything larger than 6 megapixels. I think it is a good size
quality and don't need anything larger than that. I now own a Panasonic
Lumix/Leica, but rather big in size.I don't have any complaint and they
have excellent picture quality. I must have clicked over 3000 shots,
and still going strong. Does Panasonic/Lumix make a mini one like one
of the above model? Perhaps not in the same range price such as the
above list (i.e more expensive)?
Is Nikon lens better than Canon or Pentax lenses? The Casio exilim has
excellent large screen, but a little to skinny for me and therefore
awkward in the hand. SD 400 or Pentax S7 seems perfect on my hand.
Nikon S9 is a little to thin, but I like the Nikon brand name.
Which one is more rugged? I also owned an older Pentax Optio 30, and I
noticed picture quality is just a notch lower than my Panasonic/Lumix
(perhaps unnoticable by regular photographers).
any comments on the above cameras?
Thanks for info.
Tony Polson
>
>Does Panasonic/Lumix make a mini one like one
>of the above model? Perhaps not in the same range price such as the
>above list (i.e more expensive)?
The Panasonic DMC-LX2 is fairly small and has excellent performance at
low ISOs. It has a "Leica" 28-112mm (equivalent) lens and a 16:9 wide
aspect feature which is excellent for landscapes. The rear LCD is
large at 2.8 inches. It has Panasonic's very impressive Mega Optical
image stabiliser to help eliminate the effects of camera shake.
As you posted this to a UK newsgroup I assume you are in the UK. The
Panasonic DMC-LX2 comes in silver or black finish and sells here for
as little as £270 (www.ebuyer.com).
There is a Leica version of the same camera - the D-Lux 3 - that sells
for as much as £490, but you get a longer no-quibble Leica Passport
warranty which covers accidental damage, and a nice leather case.
Whether this is worth the additional £220 is a moot point. The Leica
version lacks the hand grip of the Panasonic and is more difficult to
hold, though it looks very nice. <g>
[In case the pound sterling sign got munged, the prices are GBP 270
for the Panasonic DMC-LX2 and GBP 490 for the Leica D-Lux 3, a
difference of GBP 220.]
mari...@nb.sympatico.ca
I had a HP 707 that I carried in my shirt pocket as a go everywhere camera.
After about 30 months of uses It needs to be replaced.
I am looking at the Nikon P4, 8MP X 3.5 Optical zoom, vibration reduction
with 2 years warranty for $299,00 CAD.
My other choice is the Samsung 530, 5.1MP X 3.0 Optical zoom with 1 year
warranty for $129.00 CAD. The dpreviews gives it a 4 1/2 stars.
As I have learned most Cameras are designed to operate at a max. of 80-90
degree of relative humidity and a not to exceed around 90 degrees of heat.
So should I pay big money for a pocket camera that will have a life span of
approx. 30 months?
The Luminix/Leica is my first choice for artistic shots and far away
subjects. However, its size makes me look conspicuous and it does not carry
as well as a small camera that fits into your shirt pocket. Unless I hear
negative feedbacks at the end of the day I may go with the Samsung 530 at
$129.00 CAD and replace it when it stops working?
<anir...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1164345879.5...@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
mari...@nb.sympatico.ca
volts ion battery and charger. The Samsung 530 uses SD card and comes with
two supplied alkaline AA batteries with no charger? I already have NiMh
rechargeable batteries.
<mari...@nb.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:IgB9h.24184$cz.3...@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
Daniel Silevitch
> Could anyone comments about mini digital camera, such as Nikon Coolpix
> S9, Canon SD400, Pentax S7, Casio Exilim EX-S600, etc?
> I like to have a good quality, durable and strong camera that I can put
> in my pocket. Unfortunately, Sony, Fuji, Olympus are out of the
> picture, as I only want a camera supported by SD cards.
> Among the top shown cameras, which one is the best?
> I don't mind about gadget like Wifi, big screen, etc. The important one
> is size, and therefore I have tentatively selected above. I am not
> looking anything larger than 6 megapixels. I think it is a good size
> quality and don't need anything larger than that. I now own a Panasonic
> Lumix/Leica, but rather big in size.I don't have any complaint and they
> have excellent picture quality. I must have clicked over 3000 shots,
> and still going strong. Does Panasonic/Lumix make a mini one like one
> of the above model? Perhaps not in the same range price such as the
> above list (i.e more expensive)?
If you want to stay with Panasonic, the FX series (I'm not sure off-hand
what the latest model is) is roughly the equivalent of the Canon SD and
so forth. They also make the LX series, which is a bit bigger, has a
higher-end lens, full manual controls, and costs quite a bit more.
-dms
thoss
One point you might like to bear in mind is: does the camera have an
optical viewfinder? They seem to be vanishing fast, but some Canons
seem to still have them.
--
Thoss
minnesøtti
anir...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Could anyone comments about mini digital camera, such as Nikon Coolpix
> S9, Canon SD400, Pentax S7, Casio Exilim EX-S600, etc?
>
Panasonic FX01. Or, its successor FX03. Or, maybe the FX01's successor
is FX50 or FX07 ? I tottally got lost in thos cameras. They look so
much the same, and have very similar features.
They are small. Just what you need.
minnesøtti
thoss wrote:
> One point you might like to bear in mind is: does the camera have an
> optical viewfinder? They seem to be vanishing fast,
Optical viewfinder is a toss (ha-ha). Who needs them besides the old
geezers ?
Geoff Berrow
minnesøtti contained the following:
>> One point you might like to bear in mind is: does the camera have an
>> optical viewfinder? They seem to be vanishing fast,
>
>Optical viewfinder is a toss (ha-ha). Who needs them
People who want to take unblurred pictures in daylight?
--
Geoff Berrow (put thecat out to email)
It's only Usenet, no one dies.
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Simple RFDs http://www.ckdog.co.uk/rfdmaker/
mari...@nb.sympatico.ca
optical viewfinder? They seem to be vanishing fast, but some Canons
seem to still have them.
--
Thoss
The Samsung 530 has an optical view finder and a LCD viewer. The Nikon only
has a larger LCD viewer.
I spoke to the technician at Nikon.CA and his answer was that Nikon is
responding the people preferences.
Plus it takes less space not having an optical view finder and does not add
up to the cost of the camera.
I am from the old school and I find it faster to capture an image using an
optical view finder than a larger LCD screen.
Especially when you are doing outdoor activities like canoeing, skiing,
sailing etc etc.
"thoss" <use...@thoss.plus.com> wrote in message
news:MnwpfsAa...@thoss.plus.com...
minnesøtti
mari...@nb.sympatico.ca wrote:
> I am from the old school and I find it faster to capture an image using an
> optical view finder than a larger LCD screen.
> Especially when you are doing outdoor activities like canoeing, skiing,
> sailing etc etc.
This thread is not about discussing whether it is better to have the
optical viewfinder in the modern P&S or not (this is the same kind of
discussion -- what is better, Mac or PC ?).
I agree it is faster to use the optical viewfinder when you are
canoeing or sailing. However, the modern digital P&S aren't fast (the
shutter lag is about half a second). If you want a fast camera, you
need the camera which is pre-focussed and pre-set for aperture and
exposure time. That's where you might want an optical VF. It is a
different beast to the modern digital P&S cameras.
mari...@nb.sympatico.ca
S9, Canon SD400, Pentax S7, Casio Exilim EX-S600, etc?
I like to have a good quality, durable and strong camera that I can put
in my pocket."
a view finder or camera that have both a view finder and LCD screen. It up
the the users preferences. Sure there are many good digital cameras on the
market that can suit the original thread requirement. However, knowing that
carrying a camera in your shirt pocket every day of the week may reduce its
longevity.
At $129.00 CAD with a 4 1/2 stars DPreview, a view finder and LCD screen
the Samsung 530 is worth placing on the short list as a go everywhere
camera.
Not to mention that the Samsung 530 uses an SD card and conventional AA
batteries. The other camera to consider would be the Canon PowerShot A530
"minnesøtti" <minne...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1164379162.1...@45g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
J. Clarke
> Message-ID: <1164376701....@l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com> from
> minnesøtti contained the following:
>
>>> One point you might like to bear in mind is: does the camera have an
>>> optical viewfinder? They seem to be vanishing fast,
>>
>>Optical viewfinder is a toss (ha-ha). Who needs them
>
> People who want to take unblurred pictures in daylight?
How does using the optical finder help you avoid that? If you've got
daylight you can use a high shutter speed so camera movement is not an
issue and there's no focusing aid in the finder so it doesn't improve
focus, thus I don't see any real benefit to using it except where there is
sunlight directly on the LCD, but even there a piece of cardboard takes
care of the problem.
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
mari...@nb.sympatico.ca
sunlight directly on the LCD, but even there a piece of cardboard takes
care of the problem."
When I am going downhill on my skis and the sun behind me reflecting on
white snow I do not feel comfortable using a piece of cardboard nor would I
be able to.
The same thing takes place when sailing, I have to steer my boat and the
subject has to be captured quickly.
If I am standing still then I can arranged to have some shielding from the
sun and press on the trigger at the most pertinent time.
"J. Clarke" <Jclarke...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:ek74u...@news2.newsguy.com...
Steve B
Uh, people who want to compose their picture and view all the icons on the
viewer? Those who want to use manual mode and adjust focus? Those who want
to be able to see what they're taking a photo of when it's bright sunlight
outside, and the back screen washes out from bright light?
Just a couple of guesses.
thoss
And what's wrong being an old geezer? You will probably be one some
day.
--
Thoss
thoss
Also those who want to steady the camera against their foreheads rather
than holding it at shaking-arms length.
--
Thoss
thoss
>
>mari...@nb.sympatico.ca wrote:
>
>> I am from the old school and I find it faster to capture an image using an
>> optical view finder than a larger LCD screen.
>> Especially when you are doing outdoor activities like canoeing, skiing,
>> sailing etc etc.
>
>This thread is not about discussing whether it is better to have the
>optical viewfinder in the modern P&S or not (this is the same kind of
>discussion -- what is better, Mac or PC ?).
>
This thread is about advising the OP as to which camera to buy. And the
presence or absence of an optical viewfinder may well sway him one way
or another.
--
Thoss
harrogate3
Canon SD600 - which we in the UK know as the Ixus 60. I have one,
along with a Nikon D70s SLR and an Olympus C5050 - and I use the Canon
more than the other two put together.
One thing that you may not have considered is shutter lag. Nikon and
Olympus are notorious for shutter lag (the time between pressing the
button and the picture being taken) during which you could fall
asleep. On the other hand the SD600 is probably about a half second -
certainly less than a second. The Casio is even quicker - one of their
earlier models used to boast a shutter lag not exceeding 220mS, and I
can vouch for that as I have one - when it works!
Have a look at www.steves-digicams.com - you might find it
enlightening.
--
Woody
harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com
J. Clarke
> This thread is about " Could anyone comments about mini digital camera,
> such as Nikon Coolpix
> S9, Canon SD400, Pentax S7, Casio Exilim EX-S600, etc?
> I like to have a good quality, durable and strong camera that I can put
> in my pocket."
> My observations are: you can get a suitable camera like the Nikon P4 without
> a view finder or camera that have both a view finder and LCD screen. It up
> the the users preferences. Sure there are many good digital cameras on the
> market that can suit the original thread requirement. However, knowing that
> carrying a camera in your shirt pocket every day of the week may reduce its
> longevity.
> At $129.00 CAD with a 4 1/2 stars DPreview, a view finder and LCD screen
> the Samsung 530 is worth placing on the short list as a go everywhere
> camera.
> Not to mention that the Samsung 530 uses an SD card and conventional AA
> batteries. The other camera to consider would be the Canon PowerShot
> A530
Personally if the requirement is for "durable and strong that I can put
in my pocket" the Olympus Stylus 720SW is the obvious choice. Drop it,
roll your kayak, fall off your surfboard, it doesn't care.
> "minnesøtti" <minne...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1164379162.1...@45g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> mari...@nb.sympatico.ca wrote:
>>
>>> I am from the old school and I find it faster to capture an image
>>> using an
>>> optical view finder than a larger LCD screen. Especially when you are
>>> doing outdoor activities like canoeing, skiing, sailing etc etc.
>>
>> This thread is not about discussing whether it is better to have the
>> optical viewfinder in the modern P&S or not (this is the same kind of
>> discussion -- what is better, Mac or PC ?).
>>
>> I agree it is faster to use the optical viewfinder when you are
>> canoeing or sailing. However, the modern digital P&S aren't fast (the
>> shutter lag is about half a second). If you want a fast camera, you
>> need the camera which is pre-focussed and pre-set for aperture and
>> exposure time. That's where you might want an optical VF. It is a
>> different beast to the modern digital P&S cameras.
>>
--
J. Clarke
> "minnesøtti" <minne...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1164376701....@l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> thoss wrote:
>>
>>> One point you might like to bear in mind is: does the camera have an
>>> optical viewfinder? They seem to be vanishing fast,
>>
>> Optical viewfinder is a toss (ha-ha). Who needs them besides the old
>> geezers ?
>>
>
> Uh, people who want to compose their picture and view all the icons on the
> viewer?
??? I'm sorry, but how does the optical finder let you do that?
> Those who want to use manual mode and adjust focus?
What point-and-shoot has an optical finder that is useful in adjusting
focus?
> Those who
> want to be able to see what they're taking a photo of when it's bright
> sunlight outside, and the back screen washes out from bright light?
Piece of cardboard and some duct tape fixes that.
>
> Just a couple of guesses.
--
J. Clarke
> " I don't see any real benefit to using it except where there is
> sunlight directly on the LCD, but even there a piece of cardboard takes
> care of the problem."
> The idea of using a piece of cardboard is doable.
> When I am going downhill on my skis and the sun behind me reflecting on
> white snow I do not feel comfortable using a piece of cardboard nor would I
> be able to.
> The same thing takes place when sailing, I have to steer my boat and the
> subject has to be captured quickly.
You bend the cardboard to make a three-sided shield and tape it to the
camera.
But if you have those specific requirements then you probably want a
camera with an optical finder.
AT
> What point-and-shoot has an optical finder that i
Is useful in adjusting focus?
anir...@yahoo.com
The following are dimension of each of the camera (in mm, with inch in
bracket)
Nikon P4 - 92x61x31mm (3.6x2.4x1.2 in)
Nikon CoolpixS9 - 90.5x58x20.4mm (3.5x2.2x0.8 in)
Pentax S7 - 85x53.5x19.5mm (3.3x2.1x0.8 in)
Samsung 150 - 92.3x60.2x17.7mm (3.6x2.4x0.7 in)
Samsung i5 - 89.6x59.8x17.3mm (3.5x2.4x0.7 in)
Sony DSCT 50 - 95x56.5x23.4mm (3.7x2.2x0.9 in)
Lumix/Panasonic FX01 - 94x51x24.1mm (3.7x2x1 in)
My question is still about quality and long lasting camera. In the old
days, Nikon, Canon, Pentax are excellent cameras with good lenses.
However, in the digital age, lenses alone could not make it, if they do
not have electronics that can make good image/pixels. So, perhaps those
others may beat the top of the classical camera choices.
I checked Samsung this morning, and in one of the flyer, they sell
Samsung i5 cheap!. I am a little worry of using Samsung. Usually a good
and average camera are decided by how good the buttons and mechanical
things (switch, trap doors, etc) around the camera work. Those little
things can make things worse if they do not work properly, or worn out
quickly.
Should I buy a Samsung and ended up getting mad after 1 year, or is it
really a good camera? We bought a Samsung MP3 player and after 1 year,
the screen is blank (but it still plays!).
Sony DSCT has a sliding cover, which is good for the lens, as I usually
shove my camera in my pocket - no camera bag. unfortunately, it is
beyond my reach (because I do not want to us other than SD card).
Similarly Olympus has one with sliding cover.... and it is using xD
card.
I like to hear more comments about Canon SD400, Nikon P3/S9, Pentax S7,
and perhaps Lumix FX01..
Another thing... Canon started to advertise about ISA 1600. Is it a
good additional feature? My Lumix is bad to take picture where the room
is very large and dark. I need to over exposed it and still not enough
(flash is too small). Is pushing the ISo from 400 (or 800) to 1600 in
newer Canon a good feature?
Thanks for info and discussions!
anir...@yahoo.com
chosen SD card and I do not want to invest anything other than the ones
that handles with this type of card.
Long time ago, I used an Olympus OM-1 SLR camera, and at that time, it
was one among the smallest and smartest SLR camera in the market. It is
an excellent camera, and Olympus is known for its lenses (also famous
in medical equipment, microscopes, etc).
I do note that they make small and thin digital camera. Thanks for the
info anyway.
anir...@yahoo.com
I notice that the body of Canon SD (400, 600, or others) seems to be
more rigid than Nikon. Did you ever have any trouble with your Canon SD
?
Thanks for info.
I also notice that Nikon Coolpix s9 has slightly different lens
style/system than Canon SD or Pentax S7. Coolpix S9, when it is turned
on, the lens does not come out. It has tiny lens, and wonder if it can
create better images, if compared to larger lenses in Canon SD.
But, on the other hand, since the lens is so small and does not move
much, it may have less mechanism to break down. So, is it better?
Comments on quality of picture from S9?
anir...@yahoo.com
is more steady to place the camera against the face and eye.
I also like to hear the "deep" clicking sound of an old SLR camera....
and assurance that the picture is taken. My Lumix sometimes has a mind
of his own (because of automatic features). They refuse to click or
so... annoying. I like to hear a sound when the picture is taken... but
perhaps it is just an old habit.
Some fancy Canon camera even has a pivot in the screen (like in
handycam movie camera), so that you can take picture upside down or
sideways, etc.... without looking at the viewfinder.
In my choice for this next camera... it does not bother much for me. I
am looking for small, just fit in your hand and also in your pocket,
and rugged and long lasting, and good pictures! (almost anything
good!).
Initially, I was looking for the one that can use AA battery (so that
if you get stuck somewhere in a foreign land, you can still buy AA
battery). But, the ones which uses AA or rechargeble AA battery is a
little thick for my pocket. So, I decided to get the one with
rechargeble battery.
Tony Polson
>
>The 10X optical zoom on the Nikon would be all I need to make a
>decision.
You're right. No 10X zoom could possibly be optically good enough for
anyone who is serious about the quality their images.
if
> I like to have a good quality, durable and strong camera that I can put
> in my pocket. Unfortunately, Sony, Fuji, Olympus are out of the
> picture, as I only want a camera supported by SD cards.
> Among the top shown cameras, which one is the best?
> I don't mind about gadget like Wifi, big screen, etc. The important one
> is size, and therefore I have tentatively selected above. I am not
> looking anything larger than 6 megapixels. I think it is a good size
> quality and don't need anything larger than that. I now own a Panasonic
> Lumix/Leica, but rather big in size.
You say the Lumix is too big, but which Lumix do you have? There are many
Panasonic/Leica cameras bearing that name. I have the Lumix FX01 and I
think you'd be hard pressed to find anything smaller that made good
pictures. It is only half the size of my old Olympus MyuII which was
already a very small camera (though they are the same weight (160g) as the
FX01 is an all-metal body, very solidly built).
Since I just spent a long time examining reviews and scrutinising many
sample images to choose a digital compact, I will share some of what I have
learned.
Assuming you don't have the FX01 already I would comment that the 28mm wide
angle end is very nice to have and the image stabilisation works very well,
I have hand held shots at 1/2 second and (with care) they came out sharp.
The downside to Panasonics is noise (and worse, noise-reduction smearing)
in shadow areas or dark situations, adding +1 EV compensation is very
effective in cutting noise though, and you can view histogram either live
or during review to check highlights have not clipped.
As for sturdiness, although strongly built with sturdy metal covers for
battery and USB contacts, the FX01 has a large number of unsealed buttons,
switches and little holes, plus the retracting concentric rings around the
lens, all bad news for possible dust/moisture ingress - the camera really
needs a case, just a thin plastic one would be enough to protect from the
dust in your pocket etc, but Panasonic are cheapskates and provide nothing
at all. Even my £10 Alba mp3 player came with a little drawstring bag to
protect it but not the precision Panasonic camera! (I now use the Alba bag
for the camera!) (I have since found Panasonic do make a case for the FX
series but AFAIK nobody actually sells it.)
The 6 Mpixel FX01 can be got for about £170 if you shop around. For about
£20-30 more you can get its 7 Mpixel successor the FX07 (panasonic model
numbers are COMPLETELY random and make no sense at all!). This has worse
(ie. more) noise reduction, I am told that if you post-process on your PC
then FX01 is better but if you print direct from camera FX07 is better.
There is a Leica equivalent to the FX01, the C-Lux1, AFAIK they are
identical apart from the price, the badge and the bundled editing software
(which most people here would probably not need).
About £100 more expensive at £280 is the Lumix LX2, it is quite a bit
bigger as the lens protrudes permanently but has many more features.
However images still show some noise in the shadows even in bright sunny
conditions (e.g. look at the grass in the shade on test images at
dpreview.com) in the end I didn't think it was worth the extra compared to
FX01 in terms of image quality, though the extra manual controls & RAW
option would make it a winner for many people. The Leica version (D-Lux3)
is a whole lot more expensive and only benefit in test images that I could
see was 10% less sharpening of images and slightly lower noise (I suspect
the latter is due to the former).
In between for price (£225) is the Canon Ixus 800, this has the advantage
of optical viewfinder and lower noise, but not as wide a lens (35-140mm).
I nearly bought this as I felt image quality was better than the more
expensice LX2 but in the end chose the FX01 for its wider lens and more
feedback about exposure etc during shooting. There is also a successor Ixus
850 (£250) which does have 28-105 zoom but apparently the lens is soft at
edges and it has as much noise as the FX01, not at all like the Ixus800.
If I was buying again with hindsight, it's 50-50 whether I'd get FX01 or
Ixus 800, I do miss not having optical viewfinder. If you do low light
photography the Ixus 800 would probably be better I think.
(I would note that outside Europe, the Ixus models have different names and
numbers, the 800 is "700", 850 is "800", why do manufacturers do such crazy
antics? If their goal is to confuse us, I confess they have won.)
Batteries - Panasonics only take lithium-ion, you can get a spare for £10
if you shop around, genunine Panasonic one is ridiculous £35 though. The
Canons are the same. There are also mains adaptors, which IME nobody
actually stocks. This is a shame as the Panasonic uses battery power even
when on USB for image uploading (why don't they use the USB power?).
If you want ability to use 3xAAA alternative for cost-saving or emergency
backup the only one I know offhand is the Ricoh GR, which is good for all
manual controls etc but bad for its fixed 28mm lens, relying on digital
zoom for most pictures. I was tempted due to its high quality add-on 21mm
ultra-wide adaptor but the whole bundle was £400, far too much for a camera
with no optical zoom and no image stabilisation. Optical viewfinder is
another £100 again I think. If the Ricoh GR had had optical zoom and image
stabilisation I would certainly have paid £400 though, since it would
(apart from sensor size) be like a D-SLR in the body of an ultra-compact.
Again though, as with all the other extras like cases and mains adaptors,
almost no online retailer stocks the Ricoh 21mm lens adaptor, which is
plain crazy as it's the only reason anyone would buy this camera IMHO.
--
_______________________________________________________
The faster we go, the rounder we get.
-- The Grateful Dead
_______________________________________________________
ASAAR
> (I have since found Panasonic do make a case for the FX
> series but AFAIK nobody actually sells it.)
If anyone does, it's probably Panasonic. I've ordered parts and
accessories from them over the phone so you could try getting the
case that way. I'm not sure that you can use their 800 phone number
as you appear to be located in the UK but it's 1-800-211-PANA (7262)
If not and you want to try, check the packaging of any Panasonic
product, as every one I've ever seen in the USA shows their contact
phone number, and if the above number isn't suitable for the UK, I'm
sure that the appropriate number will be included on the packages in
your area. You could also try ordering from Panasonic's website,
but it could be trickier if you can't find the specific case that
you want and don't know its part number.
mari...@nb.sympatico.ca
digital camera to comment.
However, does your observations mean that if I purchase a non SLR Digital
Camera with a 10X optical zoom I will not be able to capture the details of
a bird flying out of the crow's nest.
"Tony Polson" <t...@nospam.co.uk> wrote in message
news:063gm21kks3c2bso6...@4ax.com...
Trev
<mari...@nb.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:pW5ah.24970$cz.3...@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
will have so many compromises to lower the quality. Where as a good 500
prime lens will well out perform it. and an excellent even more so.
mari...@nb.sympatico.ca
Or you can hire a lens Caddy. ;-)
"M-M" <nospa...@ny.more> wrote in message
news:nospam.m-m-7F45B...@newsread.uslec.net...
> In article <GcadncKWArL...@pipex.net>,
> "Trev" <trevbowdenAT.dsl.pipex.COM> wrote:
>
>> I think what he means is that any lens Dslr or otherwise, with 10x zoom
>> will have so many compromises to lower the quality. Where as a good 500
>> prime lens will well out perform it. and an excellent even more so.
>
>
> Yea, but can you carry a 500 prime lens in your shirt pocket?
>
> --
> m-m
anir...@yahoo.com
appears to be solid in its performance. Currently I am thinking about
getting the big DMC-FZ50 someday. However, I also need to get a mini
one for quick use. The DMC-LC50 is relatively small in width and
length, but it is rather thick as it uses 2 AA batteries.
Yesterday, I was in a store and ended up buying a Samsung Digimax i5.
It may not be the greatest, but it is cheap, and I am still thinking
about the large and more expensive DMC-FZ50 to consider. Anyway, its
dimensions at 89.6x59.8x17.3mm (3.5x2.4x0.7 in.) are perfectly fit
into my pocket. It also includes a docking station, and even a tiny
pouch. I have not tried the connection to my computer, but it appears
to be cumbersome. I wonder if I can just take the SD card and push it
into my computer and download the files... like my Lumix. This way I do
not neet to get all of the special cables to the docking station, etc.
So, in the mean time, I will use the Samsung and see how it goes. If it
breaks down, then I will think seriously about the Panasonic FX series.
I would like to thank all who contributed to my questions.
Tony Polson
>I do not know enough about the functioning of the 10X optical zoom on a
>digital camera to comment.
>However, does your observations mean that if I purchase a non SLR Digital
>Camera with a 10X optical zoom I will not be able to capture the details of
>a bird flying out of the crow's nest.
Ideally, you should try the camera you intend to buy in the
situation(s) you intend to use it.
Only you can decide whether a non SLR Digital Camera with a 10X
optical zoom will be good enough for you.
mari...@nb.sympatico.ca
optical zoom digital camera.
Your advise is a good one, you do not buy a suit until you try it on.
It is just that the size of a 10X SLR would be bulky for me to carry around.
Most of my shots are taken when I am not looking for the subject and then it
shows up.
The only friend I know that has a 300mm Nikon lens is thinking about moving
up to 500.
His drawback is the purchasing cost. Plus he said that it would be a good
time to upgrade to 10MP.
Thanks for the suggestion.
"Tony Polson" <t...@nospam.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ckrlm2lu4vq7orejq...@4ax.com...