Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Casio

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 2, 2004, 9:44 AM   #21
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 41
Default

I do not want to discuss your opinions on z55 but creed that many times the good quality of the photos does not depend also on the photographer who is not skillful to make just and correct the formulations. I see ugly photos made from not good persons to photograph and for this I am not conditioned. In order to make single a beautiful photo servants not to make click but they serve many other qualities. Robert
robyy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2004, 2:48 PM   #22
Administrator
 
steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,535
Default

Folks I did not simply "drop a comment" and then run ... we are swamped with cameras to be reviewed before the end of the month ... myself and two other reviewers are quite busy at the moment and have been for the last two months!

The Z55 and all the other Exilims along with the similar Pentax Optio and the Canon ELPH cameras are all quite good -- for their size. I was asked which gave the best image quality (in my opinion) and I answered the Canon ELPHs. I personally carry the Canon S410 with me everywhere I go regardless of what other camera I may be testing/ reviewing. All of these small (tiny) cameras with theirtiny lenses are not the equal to larger cameras with larger optics and imagers. You must be willing to make some tradeoffs if you want something that fits in your pocket.

As onereader said earlier -- the conclusion comments are based on the category that the camera is in -- not as whencompared to every other digicam available. People shopping for tiny pocket cameras do not care how it rates against a mid-size digicam or dSLR with interchangeable lenses. We're dealing with three or four distinct consumer markets here: (1) Point n shoot newbies, (2) Advancedpoint n shooters, enthusiasts(3)Semi-pro and (4) Professional users.

Our criteria when reviewing a pocket camera is vastly different from that used when reviewing a prosumer digicam or digital SLR. For tiny cameras it's size, durability, usability, image quality and value - pretty much in that order. Whereas for prosumer digicams (over $600) or digital SLRs we would be looking at image quality first and foremost as this is the most important thing to the buyer.
steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2004, 6:25 PM   #23
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 47
Default

Steve, Thank you for your reply, Makes perfect sense. I guess everyone hopes that there tiny camera in some way with keep up with a SLR in picture quality but more often then not falls short. Ron
kazman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2004, 6:28 PM   #24
Member
 
dalick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 69
Default

Shu wrote:
Quote:
Dalick--Thank you for posting the two comparison shots. Seeing is believing!
No problem. Both photos are in an area of acceptable image quality, but its just the price ratio Vs quality was the reason I turned for an Olympus 765. It was cheaperthan my Z-40 and took better pictures. Though they are both in different camera categories

I think thatSteve has just hit the spot, what you get from a small camera can't be compared to other camera's which are larger. Just like my Olympus 765, it would be wrong to compare it with my Z-40 as they are both in a different class. As I have said earlier on, its up to youwhat kind of camera you want and what you want it for.



dalick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2004, 7:12 PM   #25
Member
 
Dark Cobra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 60
Default

AMEN !!!

Well said "Steve" and your position made perfect sense to me and I'll bet to at least most of us. Keep doing what you're doing and remember to take time to rest ! I rely on this site more than any of the others and I don't mind waiting on a review because I know when it finally comes it will be a good one.
Dark Cobra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 3, 2004, 10:52 PM   #26
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 3
Default

My z50 pictures show minimal, if any softness. Maybe you got a bad one. Sure looks like it from those pics you guys posted. Or maybe if you hold the camera more steadily?
The only softness I can see in my pics is the fur on these animals. (I actually hate cats just for the record.)





Crypty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 2004, 6:03 AM   #27
Member
 
dalick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 69
Default

Yes the picture is clear, but this is simply because you have used the flash, pictures come out sharp and there is no softness. You take a photo without flash in the room and see what you get. Here is a photo with the flash on, its come out really great
Attached Images
 
dalick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 2004, 6:14 AM   #28
Member
 
dalick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 69
Default

Crypty wrote:
Quote:
My z50 pictures show minimal, if any softness. Maybe you got a bad one. Sure looks like it from those pics you guys posted. Or maybe if you hold the camera more steadily?

But if you look at this picture you will see it has come out soft and quality is bad. I have been using digital cameras for years now and will say for the price you are paying for a z55 the quality is a big let down, there is no bad batch or if the camera is held steadily, its simply lack of knowledge in the cameraworld for casio. They make better calculators and digitalwatches. I have been to many forums and all Iread isthat the Exilim range are the most dished cameras on the planet.


Attached Images
 
dalick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 2004, 6:46 AM   #29
Shu
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 37
Default

We all get soft images now and than, but when the majority of the shoot is soft, it becomes a problem. I now have the Canon A95 and have gotten some terrific images! I'm glad I switched, although it cost me $60 for Circuit City to send the cam back to the vendor. A steep price for a return, but I had no choice. Best Buy, where I purchased the A95, does not charge to restock, but too late now! This has been such a hassel...........!! Shu
Shu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 5, 2005, 4:56 PM   #30
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1
Default

I have been taking pics for a year with a Z4. In the beginning the pics were awfull, not sharp and dark. I skipped the best shots and use only snapshot, 50 iso and pan focusing. Now I mostly get what I want, sometimes not. Indoors is difficult, the flash reaches about to 2 metres (6 ft), beyond that it´s not worth trying.

Here is one pic, which is taken this autumn

http://photos1.blogger.com/img/147/2...het-007bwg.jpg

To my mind blur is not the problem.



Kerwins is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:53 AM.