camera pros?

[destillat]

Are there any camera pros out here?
I'm looking to get a rugged camera for a trip i'm taking soon.
I've narrow it down to:

http://www.pentaxcanada.ca/digital/digital_ps/optiow80/index.php?gal=1
and
http://www.olympuscanada.com/cpg_section/product.asp?product=1446

Based on sheer numbers, the Pentax looks better... 12 megapixels instead of 10... 5x optical zoom instead of 3.6...

Those are the only variables that I know anything about. Any experts out there that can comment on which on is the better choice?

 

[HAMSTER INSPECTOR]

The reality of owning a digital camera.

You will have to throw away your camera in about 4 - 5 years. The reality is that the batteries in the camera are so expensive to replace that you may as well buy a new camera in 4 - 5 years and get a better camera rather than spend about half the price of the camera to keep the old one.
The best thing you can do is to take advantage of the pre-Chistmas sales and get a good camera at about $100. If you can wait till after Chistmas, there will be plenty of camera sales to reduce stocks. In the $100 range, most cameras are pretty much the same. If you are looking to spend big bucks, check out this site:

www.dpreview.com

 

[Godiva]

it depends on the price range and what you want to do with it...

Megapixel is all marketing, as long as it's more than 5 and you don't plan to print posters, you are fine.

If you want a camera that works well in a low light situation i.e. at a club, restaurant, etc. Canon S90 is yours, but its pricer.

good luck

 

[blackrock13]

You will have to throw away your camera in about 4 - 5 years. The reality is that the batteries in the camera are so expensive to replace that you may as well buy a new camera in 4 - 5 years and get a better camera rather than spend about half the price of the camera to keep the old one.
The best thing you can do is to take advantage of the pre-Chistmas sales and get a good camera at about $100. If you can wait till after Chistmas, there will be plenty of camera sales to reduce stocks. In the $100 range, most cameras are pretty much the same. If you are looking to spend big bucks, check out this site:

www.dpreview.com

Your comment on batteries is a good one. That's one reason I'm strongly against proprietary batteries made specifically for certain cameras. No matter where you travel you will always be able to get AA batteries and that makes them the best bet for travelers, but harder to find offered in cameras.

When you buy any camera get extra media cards and batteries as you can get a better price for them because the mark ups on these are huge. Also get small storage bag or sleeve for protection. Believe me hit happens. If you have all your photos on one humongous media card and someone spills a drink or the ever popular toilet swim will ruin you treasured shots. Look very carefully at the numbers claiming waterproof, often it just means puddle proof and not much more. If all you're looking for is around the $100 mark then you basically looking at throw-aways and then batteries are less important except get more than one. You can use one will the other is charging and believe you'll leave the power on and kill your one and only battery accidentally more often than you think.

 

[nofrill]

From your links, I guess you are looking for waterproof cameras?

Just want to let you know - these "waterproof" cameras are really only "splashproof".

True they are "waterproof" (ie. can be completely submerged in water for a certain amount of time) for the first few months, but from what I read in camera forums, the water seal of the door that covers the battery / memory card / USB cable socket / charging socket will eventually fail. Many people start to notice water inside the door, and some blame this for their camera eventually failing.

Remember, you must open this cover door every time you transfer your pictures and charge your camera, therefore its seal is an inevitable wear-and-tear item.

Also, the deeper in water you go, the greater the pressure and the more likely water may seep in.

Therefore you should really use these as "splashproof" cameras (ie. not totally submerged into water). Some people claim that sealing the door with duct tape helps, but that sort of defeats the purpose of a waterproof camera! Some also claim that buying one of those silicone camera skin that envelopes the body including the cover door may also help, but I have no experience with this claim. The silicone skin may also help with your grip on the camera when it is wet.

If you go diving (even snorkeling) into deeper water, you probably need true waterproofing of the camera. You should buy an underwater camera hard case - these are usually designed specific to the brand and model of the camera. They easily cost as much as the camera itself, and they are bulky. They also won't last forever but many have replacement seals you can buy.

There are cheaper soft underwater cases which can accommodate different brands and models of cameras - the major problem is that under water, the pressure compresses onto the soft case against the camera, making operating the buttons on the camera difficult. Also you may find it difficult to take it into greater depths, because it is too light and floats. It may work OK in shallow water like 1-2 feet (I don't dive or even snorkel therefore I dunno what depth is ideal).

------------------------------------------------------

OK going back to your choices .....

Take a look at this camera review:

Waterproof camera group test

Both Pentax and Olympus have been producing "waterproof" cameras for some time, and their (initial) weatherproofing quality is good (but as I said, it is only a matter of time and frequency of use). I don't own a weatherproofing point & shoot camera therefore I don't know their longevity in terms of waterproofing.

The optical quality of both cameras are good but not the best compared to eg. Canon. If you use the camera on the beach in sunny condition, most cameras give you good picture quality.

If you take it deep under water with less light, you need a camera with good light sensitivity (ie. good "high ISO performance"). You may need to boost the sensitivity to ISO 400, 800 or even higher. Unfortunately both the Pentax and Olympus (the latter more so) are not so good in this area (but neither are most of these point & shoot waterproof cameras). I don't believe you should take any waterproof point & shoot camera into great depths anyway.

Some general tips:

"Megapixels" does not always mean better quality (particularly for small point & shoot cameras). The megapixel count only really matter if you intend to make large paper prints of the pictures.

If you intend to view your pictures on low resolution devices such as your camera, your computer screen or your digital photo frame, then you don't really need any resolution setting higher than 6 MP (actually more like 3 or 4 MP).

"The number of X" power of the zoom lens does indicate the range of zooming, but you need to know what the starting (wide angle end, the lower number) and finishing (telephoto end, the larger number) levels are.

Most of these compact cameras have non-standard (ie. not referring to 35mm cameras) focal lengths such as "2 - 11.5mm", which makes not much sense on their own. You need to google the camera's specification to look for the focal length range in terms of 35 mm camera standard.

For the wide angle side, a starting point of 28-35 mm is good. For telephoto, around 100-120 mm is also good (I don't think these waterproof cameras have long telephoto range anyway). Some lens are designed more for wide angle shots and some not, it depends on what you want to shoot (scenery, candid bikinis or topless .....)

 

[nofrill]

If you don't want to read all those cr@p I wrote above:

Buy a point & shoot waterproof camera just to use on the beach where you may get splashed and/or not totally submerged in water for long periods of time. Using duct tape (ugly, yuk!) or silicone camera skin on such a waterproof camera may further protect the cover door from water and may increase the effectiveness (eg. water slides) and/or longevity of waterproofing.

Buy an expensive waterproof camera (or an underwater hard case specifically designed for your camera) if you want to go diving or even snorkeling.

 

[Rockslinger]

"Megapixels" does not always mean better quality (particularly for small point & shoot cameras). The megapixel count only really matter if you intend to make large paper prints of the pictures.

Yes, beware of "megapixel hype". Most pocket cameras that boast 10-12 megapixels don't tell you that they are still using the same size sensor as a 6 megapixel camera. Think of a basket of peaches. One store advertises 30 peaches (megapixels), another store advertises 20 peaches (megapixels) but both use the same size basket (sensor).

Personally, I avoid Sony cameras because they use batteries and memory cards that are overpriced and that nobody else uses. On most trips, I simply use a $6 disposal camera. No big deal if it is lost or damaged and easy to use and carry around.

 

[tboy]

I too say don't get caught up in the megapixel hype. As stated, unless you're printing wall size, you dont' need anything more than 5 or 6 and if you never plan on printing...ever.....2 will do.

I equate it to this:

You can buy a car that does 140 kph or spend twice as much on one that does 240. Are you ever really going to be able to drive at 240 kph? No so why pay the money for the capability when you won't ever need it. (other than bragging rights that is....)

As for the peaches/basket scenario: Rock forgot to tell you that the basket holding the more peaches, the peaches are better tasting, have better nutrition and are better for you (even if you don't need all that "extra").....

 

[Stoo]

I agree about the MP for most uses. I'm not a pro but know a bit about cameras and photography. I own one of the earlier Stylus' and it's been bombproof. I use it dingy sailing in salt water, skiing, boating... It has been dunked, dropped, frozen and still functions very well...

It isn't an DSLR, but If I took my big camera where this one has been... Well, I'd have gone through a lot of cameras.

The thing with all of these cameras is that generally you are limited by the quality of the lens.... and none of these point and shoots have great lenses, but they do an amazing job.

 

[nofrill]

RE: The megapixel hype

Unfortunately the megapixel count will only move up but not down. No major brand names will produce 6 MP cameras in their latest model lines ever.

It is true that there are huge advances in sensor technology and quality, which is catching up with the pixel count (being squeezed into these tiny sensors).

We are not really against high MP cameras, we are just trying to warn the less knowledgeable mass public that "megapixel" is not everything, and

NEVER

go "pixel peeping", or you will believe that all the newest cameras are cr@p!!


--------------------------------------------------

WARNING: SCIENCE CONTENT MAY HARM YOUR BRAIN (or at least give you a splitting headache)

Pixel peeping

When you open a picture file on your computer screen, it is usually automatically shrunk to fit the size of your screen.

The average computer monitor screen has low resolution setting - even the high definition (HD) setting is only 1920 x 1080 or around 2 MP in camera terms.

If you squeeze a 10 MP picture, you shrink the height and width of the picture by about 2.2 times (square root of 5 (10/2 MP) - the megapixel count is the product of number of pixels in the height and width of the picture).

When you shrink the picture into smaller size, it looks cleaner and maybe sharper - this is because shrinking hides all the small imperfection. This is just like taking a picture of a face from far away.

This is the reason why the megapixel count is less relevant if you only want to see your pictures in the computer or similar electronic devices with low screen resolution.

HOWEVER

if you decide to see the 10 MP picture in its true non-shrunken size (your picture viewer may have an option to "view full size"), sudden all you see are grains and blotches, and fuzzy borders of objects.

WTF ???? This is a brand new latest model camera and it looks so much worse than my 10-year-old 3 MP clunker????

This is called "pixel peeping". It is more like an optical illusion created because you are looking "too close" to the picture with device which has far lower resolution.

In a sense, it is like zooming in too close or looking through a magnifying glass, when you start to see all the imperfection you normally won't see.

Remember, this is not really relevant because you are viewing the picture with an electronic device, in which you can change the setting. In general, even viewing on big screen HD TV, human eyes find it comfortable (ie. they won't see the little imperfections) when the resolution is around 6 MP (in most cases as low as 3-4 MP).

High megapixel is only important in two situations:

(1) when you want to make large paper prints

Megapixel and Print Size Chart

(2) when you want to crop out certain parts of the picture (which is the same method of the cameras' "digital zoom" function).

 

[Dewalt]

I have had unbelievably great luck with the Olympus waterproof cameras over the past 3 yrs. I am on my third generation one (believe me I use them hard when I am overseas) they are small enough for your pocket and even though it says "waterproof to 33ft" - that is conservative. I took one down to 100' scuba diving before it crapped out without any sort of protective case. Then I took it back to the store I got it from and they honoured the warrenty and fixed it for free.

I have dropped them, taken them to -36 Celcius, and then to +100 F, they have been parachuting and whitewater rafting, caving etc - great little cameras and the new olympus doesn't even have as many buttons as the previous ones - you just tap the case anywhere to select the menu. Less moving parts the better.

I will continue to buy them and use them hard and then buy replacement ones as I go since they are so cheap now you can't say no.

Don't worry about the whole megapixel thing, it is just a marketing ploy - olympus knows what they are doing and my vacation pics always look amazing with this little camera.

Enjoy!

 

[The Fruity Hare]

It has already been mentioned in this thread that megapixels should not be the driving point behind a camera purchase. It depends on where and how you will use the camera the most.

Apart from your apparent desire for a waterproof camera, the attributes I would look for are optical zoom and the ability to take good photos in low light.

I have a bulky Panasonic Z 30, 8MP camera which I have set the resolution to 5MP for the past several years. It has 12x optical zoom, and I find that is more important than higher MPs. I had the original version which only had about 2.1 MP but took amazing photos. I was able to bring the subject in with the lens rather than crop the photos afterwards.

In addition to the peaches analogy, if you can visualize the fact that you are directing light, another may help. I usually explain that the higher number of number of pixels on the same size sensors can sometimes make a photo worse in low light.

If you could, imagine say 5 million people all jam packed into the Skydome with little hand held mirrors trying to deflect the light coming through the roof onto the jumbotron. It is difficult to get everyone working together, not much room to manouvre, and the clarity will suffer. Then imagine putting 12 million people in there with little pixel mirrors instead. Now they are all squashed, with their faces in someone else's behind, and the last thing they are thinking about is reflecting that light up to the sensor.

Unfortunately, public perception is that pixel count is sexy, so it will take a brave camera manufacturer to reverse that trend.

Panasonic has several decent compact cameras with high optical zoom, however I don't know if they carry any in the waterproof category.

 

[Damondean]

The choices look good but to get more useful information it would be good to know:

1. How rugged? Does it have to be waterproof?

2. What size camera? Does it have to pocketable?

3. Does it have to be digital?

4. What will you do with the photos? Post online? Make large prints? Make small prints?

5. Is price a factor?

The best camera is the one you have with you when you want to take a pic.

 

[alexmst]

I use different cameras for different purposes.

For use in the water and at the beach I have an Olympus 1030SW. Th newer itough 8000 is basically the same. Dozens of time in salt water up to 8 ft depth and I've never had a leak that damaged the camera. The picture quality isn't quite as good as many non-waterproof cameras, but for 4x6" prints it is fine so long as you are in bright outdoor light (like the beach down south)

For my hobby photographing nude models I use a Nikon D-SLR which has 12MP. The sensor is bigger than compact cameras and can make much bigger enlargements (I often print 16x20" and 20x30") and shoot in much lower light levels handheld without flash. Of course it is a big camera, but not to me more so than the Nikon film SLR cameras it replaced.

** P.S. If you want my opinion of which of your two choices you mentioned I would suggest, I'd say take the Olympus itough 6000

For a pocket camera to take pics in low light (clubs, restaurants) with no flash, as another poster said the Canon S90 is supposed to be good, and I've heard the Sony WX1 is also above average. The Sony though has lower contrast so in bright sun with water I think the Olympus blows the Sony away, but indoors the Sony blows the Olympus away. Of course a Nikon D-SLR (D90 say) would blow both away quality-wise but isn't pocketable.

So I use:

1 pocket camera for beach, pool, ocean

1 pocket camera for low light indoors when I can't drag an SLR

1 D-SLR for when I can bring a big camera and interchangable lenses, or when shooting models on location.

A pocket camera you can take everywhere is great for capturing life's spontaneous moments for the photo album. A D-SLR tends to get left at home unless you are going somewhere specifically to photograph things/people. If I had an SLR around my neck at a restaurant I'd look like a geek. If I showed up at a photoshoot I booked with nude models and my camera was a pocket Olympus waterproof point and shoot I would look like a goof. Like clothes, cameras have their places and jobs.

 

[destillat]

I'm leaning towards the Olympus 6000 tough, but now I see they have a 8000 tough.
Oh boy!
I've basically decided the MPs don't really matter. What about optical zoom? Is that a significant property?

 

[wonderboy007]

Yes, beware of "megapixel hype". Most pocket cameras that boast 10-12 megapixels don't tell you that they are still using the same size sensor as a 6 megapixel camera. Think of a basket of peaches. One store advertises 30 peaches (megapixels), another store advertises 20 peaches (megapixels) but both use the same size basket (sensor).

Personally, I avoid Sony cameras because they use batteries and memory cards that are overpriced and that nobody else uses. On most trips, I simply use a $6 disposal camera. No big deal if it is lost or damaged and easy to use and carry around.

The more pixels you have on the same sensor size, the smaller the photosite, and the less light that hits it.

I still prefer film over than digital because film has greater dynamic range and organic feel. They're only a few 35mm sized CMOS sensors anyways.

If you look at a lens of a Panavision PRIMO lens which is insured for $20,000, the size of the aperture is just huge.

Ofcourse there were a few idiots on here who said film is dead, and everything is going straight to DI, which is not the point because film is the sensor, the recorder, and the storage medium. If film was dead, KODAK VISION FILM 3 wouldn't see the light or day. Long live film for the people who know how to use it.....

 

[shakenbake]

Are there any camera pros out here?
I'm looking to get a rugged camera for a trip i'm taking soon.
I've narrow it down to:

http://www.pentaxcanada.ca/digital/digital_ps/optiow80/index.php?gal=1
and
http://www.olympuscanada.com/cpg_section/product.asp?product=1446

Based on sheer numbers, the Pentax looks better... 12 megapixels instead of 10... 5x optical zoom instead of 3.6...

Those are the only variables that I know anything about. Any experts out there that can comment on which on is the better choice?

I have a 3.4 mergapixel camera that outs my 10 megapixel to shame in terms of image quality, sharpness and colour resolution. The lower resolution camera probabl has a better sensor and definitely a better Schneider-designed lens. The cameras are both from reputabe manufacturers. So much for numbers. While numbers and features can be an indication of quality, they aren't always that reliable.

 

[shakenbake]

The more pixels you have on the same sensor size, the smaller the photosite, and the less light that hits it.

I still prefer film over than digital because film has greater dynamic range and organic feel. They're only a few 35mm sized CMOS sensors anyways.

If you look at a lens of a Panavision PRIMO lens which is insured for $20,000, the size of the aperture is just huge.

Ofcourse there were a few idiots on here who said film is dead, and everything is going straight to DI, which is not the point because film is the sensor, the recorder, and the storage medium. If film was dead, KODAK VISION FILM 3 wouldn't see the light or day. Long live film for the people who know how to use it.....

Very true. Otherwise, the likes of Nikon would have stopped making their top model 35 mm camera. Film is used especially in larger format professional work, as well. I often walk downtown and visit the likes of Downtown Camera and Darkroom, as well as Henry's. Film is not dead. I have rediscovered my Leica rangefinder and have my colour films processed at Downtown. However, digital has its advanatges, too.

 

[Rockslinger]

While numbers and features can be an indication of quality, they aren't always that reliable.

The only true test is "out in the field". A lot of Black's staffers know their products because the company lets them field test their products.

 

[blackrock13]

The only true test is "out in the field". A lot of Black's staffers know their products because the company lets them field test their products.

About half the time i've popped into Black's for a Q&A, the staffers fumble the ball. I still feel Vistek or Henry's are better, in that order.