Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 15, 2004, 10:38 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 34
Default

Hello all,

I'm waiting until after Christmas to get myself one of the above and in the meantime I'm trying to read as much as I can.

Yesterday I had my heart set on a 5700, today I read Steves review for the 5060 which made me think again. Below are some thoughts on each from what I've read…


Nikon…seems to have as many negative comments as positive…the owners opinions on dpreview seem to be full of gripes although there is plenty of praise generally for the camera. Its highly recommended both by Steve and Phil Askey over on dpreview yet there seem to be plenty of negative comments around. Is this because people expect a lot from Nikon and they are under more scrutiny? The zoom is the main benefit on this camera I can see compared with the Oly.


Olympus….this seems like a nice camera that has plenty of positive owners reviews on dpreview and a good review by Steve. It's a shame the zoom is only 4x but everything else seems very positive…apart from the mechanical defects which have affected some irate owners.



So which should I go for.

I'm looking for something that takes lovely pictures that can be blown up to A4. Something with good macro capabilities (this is the reason I shelved the Fuji S7000 as the sample pics of super macro on dpreview are pretty distorted)

Something that has plenty options to play with as I learn.

Something that is nice to use as this will be my first proper camera.


Please reply even to express a short opinion.

Many Thanks,
Tom (uk newbie!)
Heavymental is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 16, 2004, 5:03 AM   #2
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 34
Default

Oh come on now!? Nobody have an opinion on this?

Give me a hand with this descision!
Heavymental is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2004, 5:36 AM   #3
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Well, your question is sort of like asking whether a Ford F150 Pickup Truck or a Chevrolet Malibu Sedan would be the best vehicle. The models you're looking at are very different from a size, weight and focal range perspective.

The Coolpix 5700 has a much longer lens (35mm equivalent focal range of 35-280mm) , compared to the Olympus C-5060WZ which has a 35mm equivalent focal range of 27-110mm (which starts out with a much wider angle of view compared to most models, but only goes as long as some of the 3x Zoom models). The Nikon uses an Electronic Viewfinder (which can be difficult to use in lower light), and the Olympus uses an Optical Viewfinder.

Nobody can make the decision for you. I'd suggest reading the reviews here, paying close attention to the review conclusion sections (this is where you'll see many of the details discussed, including startup times, autofocus speed/reliability, cycle times between photos, viewfinder usability, etc.).




JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2004, 8:47 AM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 34
Default

Yes but it seems that besides the lens differences and the physical dimensions they are fairly similar and would compete for the same market I would have thought. Am I wrong?

Besides the question of the zoom capacity, on which I have to decide how much zoom I need, which would people go for?
Heavymental is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2004, 9:08 AM   #5
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

I'd suggest trying them out in a store (many stores have demo models).

Personally, I'd go with the Olympus (I don't like Electronic Viewfinders, the Olympus focuses better in low light, and I wouldn't need the longer optical zoom of the Nikon since I take most of my photos nearer to the wide angle setting).

But, someone takingphotos of distant subjects, where a longer optical zoom is needed, may prefer the Nikon, and they may like it's image processing and ergonomics better. It's also got some unique features like Best Shot Selector, and uses a larger CCD.

Just like buying avehicle, there is no one best camera choice for all users. Each user will have differentthings theylike and dislike about a model, and any opinions you getwill likely be biased, including mine.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2004, 9:29 AM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 18
Default

I cant comment specifically on which camera is better suited but I can give you something to think about............

I have used an Olympus C3000 Zoom for about 3 years and have always been more than pleased with the results. Recently I was poised to purchase a 5060 and at the last moment purchased a Minolta Z3 (12x optical, image stabilization) just to get that zoom. The image stabilization was a bonus and the camera with 512mb media card was roughly75 bucks less for the Minolta vs the 5060 alone.

Instantly it became obvious I made a mistake. My Olympus c3000 blows the Minolta into the weeds with image quality and total usability, especially in low light situations. I am totally kicking myself in thebutt for changing my mind essentially to get more zoom (more is not better necesarrily) image stabilization and pay less. You get what you pay for. My next purchase will be either the Panasonic FZ3 or the Olympus 5060

Now, as for that something to think about.... For some time I wanted more optical zoom than the 3x on my C3000. My solution was to purchase a 1.4x Telephoto Lens. I got a refurb from Olympus which came with an adapter ring for $79 bucks. I had to buy one more adapter which I purchased for 19 bucks. I would have gotten the 1.7x telephoto but couldnt find one for less that $180 bucks and I did want to preserve my marriage... I rarely see recommendations for external lenses when someone says they want more zoom. The 5060 will accept external lenses. So, if Zoom is your consideration and a deciding factor dont forget that you can purchase additional lenses.

Everyone I speak with gives the 5060 high marks across the board and I am totally a fan ofOlympus products. I also own a 1.3 megapixel Olympus that I use for snaps and it has great image quality as well.

Sorry so long winded. Now, I am off to ponder what to do with this Minolta that is being used to keep papers from blowing off my desk.....


David756 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2004, 5:40 AM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 34
Default

Ah....additional lenses! Thats a good idea...how much additional zoom could I get out of the Oly with an add on?



Edit: Ah yes I see a 1.7x telephoto lens and adaptor would cost about £110 all in.

What does 1.7 mean in terms of zoom though...how does that work? 4x1.7=6.8x zoom?
Heavymental is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2004, 7:22 AM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 18
Default

Now we are getting past my ability to answer that. Perhaps someone else can do a better job.

My uneducated guess is that if you have a 4xzoom and put a 1.7x telephoto lens on you would be up around a 6x or 7x zoom, perhaps higher....

Again, if the only thing keeping you from purchasing the Oly is only a 4x zoom, I think teh lens is the answer your looking for. It is not the most inexpensive solution but the Olympus is a camera I am sure you wont be disappointed iwth....
David756 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2004, 8:46 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 378
Default

The "x" lens factor is just the dividend of the longest focal lenght of the lens divided by the widest lens focal length of the lens. So in the Oly's case,

27-110mm (35 mm equivalent): 110/27 = 4x "magnification"

When you buy an external "multiplier" the "x" lens factor will not change, but the minimum and maximumfocal lengths will change. So you'll get:

27mm (wide) x 1.7 = 46mm to

110mm (tele) x 1.7 = 187 mm

(Remember that the human eye "sees" at about the same magnificationas a 50mm lens).

Note that, with the coupler on, the most telephoto focal length is still four times as zoomed as the widest focal length. But the lens can now be "zoomed in" a lot farther (187 mm is almost four times as telephoto as the human eye sees)

If you compare the widest the lens can be without the external (the original 27 mm) to the most telephoto the lens can be with the coupler (187 mm), you get a "6.9x" magnification factor. But now you see why the "x" factor is not very informative... it tells you how versatile the lens is, but it doesn't really tell you how close-in and far-out the zoom will be.



Clear as mud?
perdendosi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2004, 3:32 PM   #10
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 18
Default

You have a way of explaining these things that even us idgits can understand

The only caveat I would make is that with the Zoom lenses we spoke of, in order for them to work properly your cameras Optical Zoom must be extended to its full range, otherwise you get a dark circle around teh subject of teh picture.

It becomes something you get used to if you need to shoot some pictures with and some without the lens as I do at basketball games. I have become adept at pulling the lens off the camera very quickly and reattaching it. It is very easy to do but I did want you to be aware that when teh Zomm lens is on the camera, if you want to use less zoom than you have with teh lens on, you have to take it off, you cant just use teh zoom control on your camera to pan back...
David756 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 4:55 AM.