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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 20, 2002, 11:36 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 1
Default C series

Combining the 10x optical zoom of the 730 with 4mp of the 4000 would seem to make for a highly desirable camera. Wondering out loud why Olympus wants to make us choose between two such features...
trudyscout is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 20, 2002, 1:00 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 668
Default

Trudy,
the 730 will be 3.2 vs the 4000 at 4.0, I shoot more with my 2.1 2100UZ than my 3040 3.34.
Gary
Gary Senkus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 21, 2002, 11:07 AM   #3
lg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 823
Default ...to keep cost down?

Trudy, I searched for two years for the best digital camera to buy, and I really like the features that Olympus cameras had to offer. Your same question came to my mind when they dropped the image stabilization feature of the 10x zoom of the C-2100. I was ready to buy the D-490, but they came out with the D-510 to replace it. But... they dropped some features of the 490 that I liked! When the 510 was replaced with the 520, they equipped it with a smaller LCD. When the 720 came out, you just had to ask yourself, why not a 10x Zoom, and when will they come out with 3-4 MP camera equipped with image stabilization? My perception is that they are taking away costly features to sell a cheaper camera to a larger audience.
lg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 21, 2002, 7:35 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,585
Default Olympus Cameras

I agree with lg about Olympus trying to reach the consmumer market. The C4000Z has a few features removed from the C4040, thus a $200 price difference. The C4000Z is still a great camera even with the missing features. I wanted those missing features and purchased the C4040Z. I bought it on the web for $500. The C4000 can be purchased from a good reseller on the web for about $400. What a deal a great 4 mega pixel camera for $400. Maybe Olympus has the right idea. Let the public decide what they want in their camera features.
gibsonpd3620 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 21, 2002, 10:28 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 143
Default

As for the IS they got that from Canon and lost the rights to it. Canon seems not to want to come out with another with it in either. Apparently they didnt make enough on them at the original price. Or maybe they prefer to keep it in their slr lenses? Even tho I have a D30 I just bought a used UZI. I also have a Pro90. The UZI is really a nice little camera and has fast focus and turn on. The Pro90 while it takes a great picture has a very slow full time unturnoffable focus and shutter. I like the deeper DOF with the digicams for many shots compared to the slr.
sasc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 1, 2002, 10:34 PM   #6
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 94
Default Sarah is right!

And if you have seen Sarah's work, you would know that SHE knows what she's talking about! (Sorry for the shameless plug, Sarah, but I love your stuff!)


Willa
Willa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2002, 11:04 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,910
Default

It's a shame though that Oly still hasn't realized the benefit of having (or at least the rail for) a proper eyecup! The first month I owned my C700 I tried it without, and (being left-eyed) it was totally useless! If it wasn't for the other benefits of the camera I wouldn't have bought it (especially finding out since that Oly treats their digital customers who need service like dirt).
Mike_PEAT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2002, 12:58 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,050
Default

Sara tells us Oly lost the right to IS. That's the first time I've heard that mentioned and explains a lot. Did Oly lose it or did Canon start charging too much royalty? IS is old technology, you'd think oly could devise their own. Even stranger, virtually all camcorders have it so why not digicams. What's going on???????
steve6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2002, 2:04 PM   #9
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 94
Default Good question, Steve ...

I've read/heard the same story; that Sony's 'lease' of the IS technology from Canon had expired.

I have thought the same as you ... if all the camcorders have it, why not all the digicams as well?
Willa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2002, 2:18 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,050
Default

Imagine the position Canon would be in, if only they had IS. They're not using it liberally with their cams though, dam strange all this.

We should start digging, asking Oly, Canon, Nikon etc why they are so mean with IS on digicams.
steve6 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 11:46 PM.