Fuji FinePix F10 or Casio EX-Z750?

[Zcarroll]

slipe wrote: The reviewers have lowered their standards so much it is hard to tell when a really good one comes along. Maybe if one comes along that is actually good in sunlight they could say something like "it is really really really good in sunlight" to differentiate them from those that are good in bright sunlight that you can't see.



This is exactly why I've had such a difficult time finding the right camera recently. Back in '98 it was the awesome digital camera review sites that first made me believe the internet was actually useful for something, so I was very sadly disappointed when I more recently tried to purchase a digital camera based on reviews and found the camera to be terrible for my needs. I've actually found user comments at places like amazon.com to be more useful in choosing a camera! The proreviews as incredibly awesome and detailed as they are and as much as I want to love them don't actually seem to address real use issues.



Oh, and I should add in response to the OP, even as an extremely happy z 750 owner I would say wholeheartedly that the fuji f10 would be better suited to your needs, especially with regards to the macro shots. Also, when I was using an f10 at first I noted the flash seemed too harsh but discovered manually setting the iso to the lowest helped, I may have changed another setting as well, but at any rate I was able to get beautiful non harsh flash macros with the f10. I found the f10 lcd to be much more usable in bright light compared to my casio as well.

[rinniethehun]

I too, have felt the frustration of reading professional reviews that make every camera sound great. Some of the reviews are little more than a regurgitation of the manufacturer's web site hype. I even find the sample pictures to have been selected to make the camera look good...if the camera takes horrible pics in low light, the only pics shown will be taken in bright sunlight, or with flash.

Be that as it may...

Personally, I don't think I would be comfortable with a camera that has no viewfinder. However, for the uses stated here, macros and party pics, I think the F10 is definitely the way to go.

the Hun

[sellers]

I too am looking for a compact high quality p&s digicam and the F-10 would be perfect if only it had an optical viewfinder. I just don't think I can get arount that.

Anyway, I wanted to ask if anyone knew what ever came of Kodak's "OLED" technology to replace the LCD screens? This technology is supposed to be excelent. It gives you a full 180 deg viewing angle, it is not backlit like LCD's are (thus making it more energy efficient ... smaller batteries) yet is brighter and more vibrant than any LCD out there.

As the story goes, Kodak used this screen on one of their model cameras in 2002 (i think) and the technology was supposed to be pretty widespread by 2006 but I haven't heard anything to back this up. Has anybody else heard of this, or am I going bonkers??!?

Michael

[slipe]

sellers wrote:

Anyway, I wanted to ask if anyone knew what ever came of Kodak's "OLED" technology to replace the LCD screens? This technology is supposed to be excelent. It gives you a full 180 deg viewing angle, it is not backlit like LCD's are (thus making it more energy efficient ... smaller batteries) yet is brighter and more vibrant than any LCD out there.

As the story goes, Kodak used this screen on one of their model cameras in 2002 (i think) and the technology was supposed to be pretty widespread by 2006 but I haven't heard anything to back this up. Has anybody else heard of this, or am I Michael

They sell cameras in stores where the advantages of OLED and transreflective screens aren't at their best. From what I have read transreflective is better in direct sunlight and OLED better otherwise. It appeared that both were destined for large scale production for digital cameras but fell by the wayside. They are putting them in MP3 players, laptops and palmtops, but I don't know of a current camera with either technology.

Kodak and Olympus have regular LCD screens with a wider viewing angle in some newer model cameras. And they are better than average in bright sunlight. Still not up to the level of OLED from what I have read and certainly not as good as transreflective in bright light.

I have no idea why they aren't putting them on digital cameras.

[sellers]

Hey slipe,

So here's the only camera that I found to support the oled technology, but it was never reviewed be Steve. Oh well.

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/kodak/ls633-review/

And here's some more recent info on OLED technology

http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,120509,00.asp

Hope it becomes more affordable soon because they seem like they would kill the LCD market.

[Mercury694]

I also own an F-10 and don't know where people get the idea that the lcd is not viewable in direct sunlight. It is easily viewable, even if you don't use the extrabright setting. I've tried to take it to placeswhere the bright ambient light would pose an issue, and found it never did. Not having a viewfinder is a drawback, but every camera has its compromises. As far as the manual options go, there are few, but I bought this as a p&s for the whole family. It's easy to use and takes great pictures very quickly. If I want manual controls, I take a different camera.

[jude_mc]

hi , I just wanted to know if u can get good A3 or A4 prints with th Fuji Finepix F10, would appriciate the info very much.