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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 27, 2002, 1:08 AM   #11
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 93
Default

I'm not sure if this should be a new topic or not, but since it has a bearing on my original question, I'll ask it here:

What's the correct way to use/measure a camera's macro capabilities? For instance, if a camera has a 35-105 mm zoom lens and a closest macro distance of 7.9 inches, is that 7.9 inches at the 35 mm focal length, or is it 7.9 inches at the 105 mm focal length?
Owlz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2002, 1:54 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 163
Default

Macro settings are usually locked at a wide angle. If you check out the reviews at imaging-resource.com and some other sites they'll give the exact area covered by a camera's closest macro shot.

By the way, from the samples I've seen I'd say the C-4000 has better image quality than the C-4040, and for less ($375 online). The lens isn't as fast though.
Sanpete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2002, 8:05 AM   #13
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 93
Default

Thanks, Sanpete. I went to the 'close-up shots section' here at Steve's. It may be sacrilege here in an Olympus forum, but the images from the C*n*n C-90 are AMAZING! Also, whenever I go to www.activebuyersguide.com and use their configurators, the camera that comes up most often seems to be the C-4040. Interesting... Still, if prices continue to fall, I just might get the Oly E-10.
Owlz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2002, 9:07 PM   #14
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 93
Default

O. K.. I'm about 90% sure the camera I want is the C-4040 (famous last words). Now, I need to know if the camera is used professionally by others in graphic design (I don't want to spend that kind of money on a point-and-shoot.), and please refresh my memory about the lens. Does the C-4040 use add-on lenses or interchangeable lenses? I'd prefer add-on.

Thanks again.
Owlz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 29, 2002, 2:47 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 163
Default

The C-4040 uses add-on lenses via a tube adapter that goes over the lens barrel. But what add-on lenses would you be needing? The (C-4000 has a built-in supermacro comparable to Nikon's. If you need more zoom, you might as well consider cameras that already have it, as the quality and convenience will be better.)
Sanpete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 29, 2002, 5:14 PM   #16
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 93
Default

Thanks for replying to my post, Sanpete. Since the C-4040's lens is the equivalent of a 35-105 mm lens and the C-4000's is 32-96, they're both 3x. I used to own a Nikon N4004s. It had two lenses, a 35-70 mm and a 70-210. I figure with a 2x tele-converter on the C-4040, that would give me pretty much the same thing. As for macro, I love looking at macro shots. I would consider the C-4000 except that the lens is an f 2.8, whereas the C-4040 is an f 1.8.
Owlz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 30, 2002, 11:15 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 163
Default

A fast lens is a fine thing, if you have need of it. Handy if you'll be shooting in low light with no flash.

With the amount you'll spend on adapters to get tele and macro, and maybe wide angle, you might want to consider a camera with the features you want built in. That would give you better image quality in the long half of that zoom range than a 2x converter, for example, along with other benefits. I'd take a good look at the Fuji S602 and the Minolta 7i, the first available for about $500 online, and the second for $700. The Fuji goes from 35 to 210 mm, the Minolta from 28 (!) to 200, at 5 MP. The Fuji also has a very nice supermacro, though it does have some barrel distortion at that setting--whether that's a problem depends on how you intend to use it. Two very flexible cameras. Reviews here, at imaging-resource.com, dpreview.com, dcresource.com, etc. You might even consider the Sony F707, though it's not quite as flexible as the other two. It's 5x, with some outstanding image qualities. Very fine cameras.

Just something to mull over, if the zoom and such is important.
Sanpete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2002, 9:17 AM   #18
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 93
Default

Thanks again, Sanpete. I'll take another look at the Minolta 7i. To be truthful, I've been looking at the Olympus and Nikon cameras because I've owned cameras from both manufacturers, and their 'cheering sections' on-line have been quite vocal. BTW, are the Minoltas Mac OS X v. 10.2-compatible?
Owlz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2002, 9:38 PM   #19
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 93
Default

I should add that I'm hesitant to buy a Fuji because I don't know how good the quality/durability of the camera is. I also have heard no one else suggest Fuji over Olympus or Nikon. FWIW, I was at my mall today (not the best place from which to buy my next camera, I discovered), and the Nikon CoolPix 4500 felt very small in my hands (and I don't have large hands). Thus far, the larger cameras have felt better. Right now, it looks like this process of looking for a camera will continue past the holiday season, and thus far, the E-10 looks like the strongest candidate, though I can't find one to hold in my hand. Likewise for the Minolta.
Owlz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2002, 9:48 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 163
Default

Not sure, but I imagine the Minoltas are 10.2 compatible. Ask at the Minolta forum.
Sanpete 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 9:19 PM.