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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 30, 2009, 3:37 AM   #11
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by felice View Post
I wonder why you ever purchased the SP-590.
The fixed position LCD you should have known of, since the beginning...
Quote:
I wonder why you ever purchased the SP-590.
The fixed position LCD you should have known of, since the beginning...
I purchased the SP-590 because I was hoping Olympus had optimized its design -- I had used various Oly and Pana super zooms for a long time -- and wanted to get a smaller and lighter camera, and (supposedly) a more powerful zoom lens with updated and improved sensor and processing. Instead, I found their failure to incorporate a vary-angle LCD was a decision made despite the clear superiority of this arrangement -- especially for this ultra-zoom function. So I just reconfirmed my conclusion from past experience -- and my comments here were intended to pass on this insight to anyone else who might think the SP-590 is a miracle combination of the best ultra-zoom features. It's not. It's a poor set of design trade-offs intended to capitalize on the allure of a huge lens in a small package.
In fact, the more I try to use it, the worse I think it does in comparison to the other, older ultra-zooms I mentioned, mainly the Panasonic FZ-50 and FZ-28.
Although there are now reviews of the SP-590, I have seen no mention of the weird automatic default of resolution down to 5,3,2 or even 1 mpixels when you employ "fine zoom," a menu choice with an impenetrable explanation. It's, apparently, a kind of behind-the-scenes and uncontrollable image crop. Like many features in the camera, it is poorly done and gets in the way, rather than helping you take better pictures.
ghopper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 30, 2009, 7:10 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
gjtoth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Louisville, KY, USA
Posts: 6,938
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ghopper View Post
I purchased the SP-590 because I was hoping Olympus had optimized its design -- I had used various Oly and Pana super zooms for a long time -- and wanted to get a smaller and lighter camera, and (supposedly) a more powerful zoom lens with updated and improved sensor and processing. I expected that Oly used the fixed back LCD because it wasn't needed -- or even useful -- maybe because they had improved other things. Instead, I found their failure to incorporate a vary-angle LCD was a decision made in spite of the clear superiority of this arrangement -- especially for this ultra-zoom function. So I just reconfirmed my conclusion from past experience -- and my comments here were intended to pass on this insight to anyone else who might think the SP-590 is a new miracle combination of the best ultra-zoom features. It's not. It's a poor set of design trade-offs intended to capitalize on the allure of a huge lens in a small package.
In fact, the more I try to use it, the worse I think it does in comparison to the other, older ultra-zooms I mentioned, mainly the Panasonic FZ-50 and FZ-28.
Although there are now reviews of the SP-590, I have seen no mention of the weird automatic default of resolution down to 5,3,2 or even 1 mpixels when you employ "fine zoom," a menu choice with an impenetrable explanation. It's, apparently, a kind of behind-the-scenes and uncontrollable image crop. Like many features in the camera, it is poorly done and gets in the way, rather than helping you take better pictures.
If it's that bad, perhaps you should get a refund or sell it and get one you're not disappointed with. Good luck with that. As Eric pointed out, no camera is perfect. I have the SP590. I had the SP550 and SP570 before it. I have also had quite a number of other super-zooms including the FZ-28 and Nikon P-90. In my opinion, the SP590 IS superior to those. It performs very well provided you take the time to use it to it's capabilities and full potential. The menu system is a take-off of Canon's VERY popular menu system. Hardly mysterious. Want mysterious? Get a Nikon P-90. Want vari-angle? Get a mirror. The points you focus on are all readily available in the specs from Oly or from here or from just about any other decent photo site.

See the little white spots across the inlet?



This is what they look like at 26x -- HANDHELD.




It seems to me, you failed to do any research and made an impulse buy. Take it back for a refund.
__________________
Gary ---- "The best camera is the one you have with you."
<><~~~~~~~~~~~
Pentax K-70 ~ Panasonic FZ1000
My Gallery

--
Hebrews 13:3
gjtoth is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 30, 2009, 3:10 PM   #13
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 6
Default

My Opinion about SP590 is positive, it is a good camera with decent pic quality and good performance, please see below samples all handheld.



The below using TCON 17

Last edited by sioyed; Sep 30, 2009 at 3:12 PM.
sioyed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 13, 2009, 7:27 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
onlooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Armidale, New South Wales, Australia
Posts: 660
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sioyed View Post
My Opinion about SP590 is positive, it is a good camera with decent pic quality and good performance, please see below samples all handheld.

The below using TCON 17
This is the type of shot my husband recently bought the PS 590 for - little, flighty birds, usually brownish, flittering around in the bush during his walks in our surrounding National Parks. He still hasn't got used to its intricacies.

So far he has only used the 'Scene Birdwatching' mode to get in ultra close and has been disappointed. Have you used the built-in 'Birdwatch' or did you graduate straight to the TCON-17 (and adapter)? He doesn't yet have the TCON-17 and I'm researching it as a birthday present in the new year.

How far away were you from this little bird, and was it an out-in-the-country shot or an at-home-in-your-garden shot?

thanks for any help
onlooker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2009, 7:00 AM   #15
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by onlooker View Post
This is the type of shot my husband recently bought the PS 590 for - little, flighty birds, usually brownish, flittering around in the bush during his walks in our surrounding National Parks. He still hasn't got used to its intricacies.

So far he has only used the 'Scene Birdwatching' mode to get in ultra close and has been disappointed. Have you used the built-in 'Birdwatch' or did you graduate straight to the TCON-17 (and adapter)? He doesn't yet have the TCON-17 and I'm researching it as a birthday present in the new year.

How far away were you from this little bird, and was it an out-in-the-country shot or an at-home-in-your-garden shot?

thanks for any help
The bird was about 20m -30m and the shot was in desert valley in Saudi Arabia.

Please see my flicker bird shots using this camera + TCON-17, all the shots are post processed and croped.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/
sioyed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2009, 4:46 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
onlooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Armidale, New South Wales, Australia
Posts: 660
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sioyed View Post
The bird was about 20m -30m and the shot was in desert valley in Saudi Arabia.

Please see my flicker bird shots using this camera + TCON-17, all the shots are post processed and croped.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/
Thank you sioyd. Really like your selection of photos! I believe using the teleconverter lens results in a smaller image off-the-camera than a shot without it eg the 26x zoom will give a 12 megapixel image (11.8 on our camera). What image size off-the-camera do you get with the teleconverter?

You help is appreciated.
onlooker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2009, 12:59 PM   #17
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 6
Default

Well, I'm using 5 megapixel which produce about 2 mb image file size.
sioyed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2009, 4:43 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
onlooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Armidale, New South Wales, Australia
Posts: 660
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sioyed View Post
Well, I'm using 5 megapixel which produce about 2 mb image file size.
Thanks sioyed. Are you deliberately using 5 megapixels or is that the default image size when using the TCON-17? Our interest is in being able to produce good quality larger prints on the odd occasions of that 'spectacularly good' shot which, hopefully, will occur more often with practice/experience!
onlooker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2009, 3:15 AM   #19
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by onlooker View Post
Thanks sioyed. Are you deliberately using 5 megapixels or is that the default image size when using the TCON-17? Our interest is in being able to produce good quality larger prints on the odd occasions of that 'spectacularly good' shot which, hopefully, will occur more often with practice/experience!
Yes I Choose 5 megapixcel instead of 12 megapixcel.
I don't know if this camera can producr larger quiality print, may be you can think about Dslr.
sioyed 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 12:17 PM.