High zoom cameras

Kimberlee wrote:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...essage=9404579
David,
You will have to register to view the above 32X photo, but it's a fine
example of Canon quality.

Cool photo, although at the moment I'm leaning towards the Panasonic
unit.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus_405080/
Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html
Olympus 5060 resource - http://www.molon.de/5060.html
Olympus 8080 resource - http://www.molon.de/8080.html

Kimberlee wrote:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...essage=9404579
David,
You will have to register to view the above 32X photo, but it's a fine
example of Canon quality.

Cool photo, although at the moment I'm leaning towards the Panasonic
unit.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus_405080/
Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html
Olympus 5060 resource - http://www.molon.de/5060.html
Olympus 8080 resource - http://www.molon.de/8080.html

Okie doke.
I'm going to play with this, so I know what to expect!
Thanks, Hans-Georg
~Kimberlee


"Hans-Georg Michna" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 08:37:04 -0800, "Kimberlee"
wrote:

On my pics, I haven't experienced issues with either noise or chromatic
aberrations.
I shot 400 photos, most of which were outside in bright conditions (water
skiing).

Kimberlee,

no surprise. The chromatic aberration is strongest at max zoom
and aperture wide open (1 : 3.1).

When it's bright, the aperture is closed further, which reduces
the aberration, but doesn't eliminate it entirely. Look at sharp
high contrast edges and you will see the color seams.

Hans-Georg

--
No mail, please.

On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 09:53:48 -0700, Pete wrote:

On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 22:19:14 +0200, Alfred Molon wrote:

Which of the compact cameras with at least 3MP and an 8x or more zoom
(at least 300mm at the tele end in 35mm equivalence) is best in terms of
image quality ? I was thinking of using one in the tropical rainforest,
where illumination conditions are not always perfect.

I am very pleased with my Panasonic FZ10 with 4MP and 12X optical.

You can see my detailed comparison of this camera versus the Olympus C-720
(3MP and 8X optical) at

http://www.seanet.com/~pgm/panasonic.htm

HTH
David, on the Canon S1 IS
1. yes, you sacrafice on the resolution with a 3.1; but
honestly, the practical reasons you would need more than 3 meg is if
you will be doing professional editing or printing larger than 8.5 x
11 prints. For me, no sacrafice there.
2. The optical zoom is among the highest in a small body camera; Kodak
has a nice 10X opt zoom in the same size body,and others in the same
price range do too but NO IMAGE STABILIZATION!. IS is just terriffic
to have. I have had two long optical zoom digital cameras, both with
IS, I'll never do without now.
They were big clunkers, my first was the sony fd92 that had 10x
optical, then I went to the sony mavica CD1000 which only had 8x zoom,
but still had the IS. Borrow someones camera that has a long optical
zoom digicam with IS, look through with the IS off, then turn it on
while looking. Beautiful. I like to travel lite, so, no tripod, no
clunkers, hence Canon S1 IS.
You already crave the optical zoom so you already know the obvious
advantages; however one un-heralded big advantage of IS is when you
hand your camera to a stranger and ask them to take your picture, with
IS the results are less likely to be blurry. Ring any bells?
Rick

On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 09:53:48 -0700, Pete wrote:

On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 22:19:14 +0200, Alfred Molon wrote:

Which of the compact cameras with at least 3MP and an 8x or more zoom
(at least 300mm at the tele end in 35mm equivalence) is best in terms of
image quality ? I was thinking of using one in the tropical rainforest,
where illumination conditions are not always perfect.

I am very pleased with my Panasonic FZ10 with 4MP and 12X optical.

You can see my detailed comparison of this camera versus the Olympus C-720
(3MP and 8X optical) at

http://www.seanet.com/~pgm/panasonic.htm

HTH
David, on the Canon S1 IS
1. yes, you sacrafice on the resolution with a 3.1; but
honestly, the practical reasons you would need more than 3 meg is if
you will be doing professional editing or printing larger than 8.5 x
11 prints. For me, no sacrafice there.
2. The optical zoom is among the highest in a small body camera; Kodak
has a nice 10X opt zoom in the same size body,and others in the same
price range do too but NO IMAGE STABILIZATION!. IS is just terriffic
to have. I have had two long optical zoom digital cameras, both with
IS, I'll never do without now.
They were big clunkers, my first was the sony fd92 that had 10x
optical, then I went to the sony mavica CD1000 which only had 8x zoom,
but still had the IS. Borrow someones camera that has a long optical
zoom digicam with IS, look through with the IS off, then turn it on
while looking. Beautiful. I like to travel lite, so, no tripod, no
clunkers, hence Canon S1 IS.
You already crave the optical zoom so you already know the obvious
advantages; however one un-heralded big advantage of IS is when you
hand your camera to a stranger and ask them to take your picture, with
IS the results are less likely to be blurry. Ring any bells?
Rick