FS: Olympus C-2500L

"Bill" wrote in message
gy.com...

I have recently used several brand new cameras at work, some were 5
megpixel, some were 4 and
several were 3. NONE of them were as accurate as the 2500 in color and in
focus when using
the macro settings. NONE were as easy to use when following moving objects
to photograph.

I own an Oly E-10, Canon S200, Olympus 2500 and a box of 35mm cameras.

Name a mid range digital camera out right now with a real optical
viewfinder
that can compete? NONE
ZIP.

Name the ways this camera is way behind a midrange camera? Less pixels? SO
WHAT, many
journalists are still using 2.5's and the like. Don't throw some bull****
statement without
backing it up with some facts.



Bill:
PJ's are shooting 1D and 1Ds Canon bodies or Nikon D1x bodies, all of which
have more than 2.5 mp. The Uzi was a great camera a few years ago, but it's
not even average by today's standards. Better midrange cameras? Canon
G3/G5/A80, Oly C-740/C-750, even the Kodak 6490 to name just a few that
start at the same range as the original poster's $400 price. And they're
brand new, not a tired old 3 or 4 year old camera that had a bad rep for
dying unexpectedly even when new.

Tom P.

Tom, I agree those are good cameras, but what do they offer aside from an
increase in MP over the 2500?
We're not talking an UZI, this is the 2500, not the same camera. I always
wished I'd gotten an UZI for the
zoom, but I hated the viewfinder. The 2500 has a true through the lens
system. I can't find a one today that
has that in that price group.

Bill

"Tom Pfeiffer" wrote in message
...


Bill:
PJ's are shooting 1D and 1Ds Canon bodies or Nikon D1x bodies, all of
which
have more than 2.5 mp. The Uzi was a great camera a few years ago, but
it's
not even average by today's standards. Better midrange cameras? Canon
G3/G5/A80, Oly C-740/C-750, even the Kodak 6490 to name just a few that
start at the same range as the original poster's $400 price. And they're
brand new, not a tired old 3 or 4 year old camera that had a bad rep for
dying unexpectedly even when new.

Tom P.

Olympus is the cause! They're dumping their old 2500s with that ring flash
on the market! I'd love to get
one of those flashes, maybe I'll bid 250 for a set and then Ebay the
camera?

"Tom Pfeiffer" wrote in message
...
Amazing that bidding ended at $152.50!!! Don't you feel even more foolish
now?

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 19:52:19 -0500, "Ger" wrote:

As usual I was right.

"As usual"? How would we know when you're right? Everytime you post,
you're a new person.

You'll be lucky to get $250.

Wow, then there's a lot of lucky people on eBay getting that and more.

It was a nice camera FOUR years ago but is way behind even a
good midrange camera nowadays.

Do us a favor and stick to one Identity so we can all plonk you.

Thanks.

To e-mail me, remove theobvious from my e-mail address.

"Bill" wrote in message
gy.com...
Tom, I agree those are good cameras, but what do they offer aside from an
increase in MP over the 2500?
We're not talking an UZI, this is the 2500, not the same camera. I
always
wished I'd gotten an UZI for the
zoom, but I hated the viewfinder. The 2500 has a true through the lens
system. I can't find a one today that
has that in that price group.

Bill

First, my apologies for confusing the c2100 and c2500s. As for the EVF, You
were wise, I had a Pro90IS and that was the only thing I really hated about
it.

Of course, now that I realize we're talking about a camera with only a 3x
zoom, I'm even more convinced its not worth $400. While an SLR might be
preferable to a rangefinder, with a 3x zoom there's not much difference
since the viewfinder does zoom and the viewfinder on most slrs dont show the
entire frame anyway. The resolution to print 8x10 without compromise versus
5x7s alone would be worth the newer camera, not to mention a bigger frame
buffer, more ISO range, warranty, and so forth.

Tom P.


Tom P.

how much it worth will be determined by what bids the seller get, which will
be a known fact in 2 days. Some people got more than $250 on this camera and
some people got less than $250. $269 openning bid is a bit to the high end,
but with some luck, it may get a bid. If it doesn't sell, the seller will
lower the price. There is no need for bashing him, nor claiming it is worth
way more than $400. Let the market plays it out, can we?

I agree, the bashers continue to spout off about newer, better, without
indicating what
it is that is newer and better about the new cameras. Tom's reasoning is
well thought out
and explained, the other moron is just that.

Anyone have one of those ring flashes they want to sell? Olympus is pushing
the dental
packages like crazy on Ebay!
Bill

"Q. Lu" wrote in message
...
how much it worth will be determined by what bids the seller get, which
will
be a known fact in 2 days. Some people got more than $250 on this camera
and
some people got less than $250. $269 openning bid is a bit to the high
end,
but with some luck, it may get a bid. If it doesn't sell, the seller will
lower the price. There is no need for bashing him, nor claiming it is
worth
way more than $400. Let the market plays it out, can we?

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 19:52:19 -0500, "Ger" wrote:

As usual I was right. You'll be lucky to get $250.

As usual, you certainly were. One bid, $269, 13 hours remaining.

I'm glad I listened to you.

To e-mail me, remove theobvious from my e-mail address.

Did you see one of Olympus's packages with the 2500 and ring flash went for
over $700? I can't freaking believe it!

"Evan Platt" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 19:52:19 -0500, "Ger" wrote:

As usual I was right. You'll be lucky to get $250.

As usual, you certainly were. One bid, $269, 13 hours remaining.

I'm glad I listened to you.

To e-mail me, remove theobvious from my e-mail address.

And if a dentist or other medical professional bought it believe it. not
every one is in your words freaking cheap.

"Bill" wrote in message
gy.com...
Did you see one of Olympus's packages with the 2500 and ring flash went
for
over $700? I can't freaking believe it!

"Evan Platt" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 19:52:19 -0500, "Ger" wrote:

As usual I was right. You'll be lucky to get $250.

As usual, you certainly were. One bid, $269, 13 hours remaining.

I'm glad I listened to you.

To e-mail me, remove theobvious from my e-mail address.