Author | Thread |
|
09/13/2003 06:30:52 PM · #1 |
I have a Olympus 2100 with 10X optical zoom and want a camera with more pixels.... will I be disappointed if I get a camera with 5 or 6 pixels and only 7 or 8 optical zoom? Do you have zoom and do you like it? If you have it would you be willing to do without it for more pixels? |
|
|
09/13/2003 06:44:23 PM · #2 |
only 5 pixels? Can I sell you something....? (I think you mean 5 million)
If you get a camera with the option to add a tele lens then you can end up with the ability to zoom more than you can now. Why not have it all?IMO it would definitely be worth it if you have less than 2mp now. |
|
|
09/13/2003 07:32:19 PM · #3 |
yes, I mean 5 mp.....it is hard to type and hold a sleeping baby... :) |
|
|
09/13/2003 08:56:47 PM · #4 |
It really depends on what you want to do with the final pictures. Some of the very high end, extremely expensive cameras aimed at sports photography are only 3MP for example. Because the prints are never going to be enlarged much.
I found that 4Mp is certainly more than enough if you only ever want to use it for the web, 4 inch by 6 inch prints and the occasional 8 inch by 10 inch picture. With a Canon G2 (4MP camera) I could quite acceptably go to about 11" x 14" for posters and the like.
More pixels than 4MP are only really useful if you are considering doing bigger prints than that, in my opinion.
There are other factors such as pixel size rather than count that start making a difference between SLR cameras and point and shoots and all that sort of thing - but basically, unless you know you plan on doing really big enlargements, or feel that you need to crop out small parts of your normal shots, then lots of pixels just make your computer work harder for the editing and take up more storage space. |
|
|
09/13/2003 10:32:27 PM · #5 |
I do want to make poster size prints in the future so I know I need more than the 2MP I have now but I have not seen a 5 or 6 MP camera with 10X optical zoom.... and I have never used lenses or filters or anything like that... the Olympic 2100UZ is really my first camera and I am enjoying it so much that I want to do more but I don't really have the time or money to invest in equipment and learning about lenses and filters. I really have enjoyed the zoom feature. Is there a camera out there that has it all yet... the larger MP and image stabilier AND at least 10X optical zoom? |
|
|
09/13/2003 11:19:39 PM · #6 |
First, I think you are right that you need more than 2Mp. Might I ask what you are wanting to take pictures of with the 10x zoom ? I'm just wondering from your name if it is wildflowers you want to shoot ? If that is true then maybe it is more the macro capabilities of the camera that you are really interested in ? If I'm totally wrong, please let me know!
I had a quick look and noticed that the Minolta DiMAGE 7 series have 7x optical zooms - hopefully someone else can chime up if they are aware of cameras with higher power zooms than that. I think mostly image stabilisation is only found on the SLR interchangeable lens cameras from Canon and Nikon - though some company did announce they had built it into a sensor in the camera body - not sure if that is available yet or not.
Sorry for not being very helpful! |
|
|
09/13/2003 11:21:10 PM · #7 |
I also had a look around and found this page
Recent digi-cams with high power optical zooms
Hope it helps. |
|
|
09/14/2003 03:00:04 AM · #8 |
I have had the C-2100UZ and it´s a fantastic camera. My wife has the Olympus C-730UZ and I was very disappointed when it arrived because it was very shaky. The C-2100 has a fantastic stabilizer. It´s not easy to find a camera as easy to use as the C-2100 for reasonable money. You will probably have to go for a DSLR(Canon 300D?) and IS(Image Stabilizer) lenses. Or you can go for the Olympus C-5050 and keep the C-2100 för long shots. |
|
|
09/14/2003 05:49:06 AM · #9 |
the answer is simple... because only olympus have the 10x zoom in this class of camera. Check out the Olympus C-740 (3.2mp) or the c-750 (4 mp). These are very nice. The only thing else with this amount of zoom is that 12x zoom Panasonic, which only has 2mp. |
|
|
09/14/2003 09:14:31 AM · #10 |
Thanks everyone for all the help with this...I like the zoom for lots of reasons...catching candids of people, getting closer to the subject when the landscape and my physical abilities won't allow me to get closer, easily spooked wild animals. I guess my question is if I go to the 7 or 8 optical zoom will I be disappointed after having the 10X first. From what everyone seems to be saying the bottom line is right now to get the 10X and image stabilizer and 5 or 6 MP I would have to go to DSLR .....and to show my ignorance ...what does DSLR mean?
How difficult is it to learn to use one of these.... since I am not very good yet at getting out of the program mode? |
|
|
09/14/2003 10:55:33 AM · #11 |
DSLR = Digital Single-Lens Reflex
This basically means that the image in the viewfinder is created by diverting the image from the lens using a mirror. When you take the shot, the mirror is moved and the light is able to hit the sensor. It is preferred because what you see in the viewfinder is exactly what the sensor sees, but they are a lot more expensive to build. |
|
|
09/14/2003 01:09:17 PM · #12 |
Hi wildflowerjoy! Check out the nikon coolpix 5700. It's 5 mp with an 8x zoom. You should be able to get 16 x 20 prints without a problem.
|
|
|
09/14/2003 03:05:45 PM · #13 |
Keep in mind the range of a zoom and not just the number of X's it zooms. For example, the Sony F7x7 has a 5x zoom and it reaches to a 35mm equiv. of 190mm and the Minolta DiMage cameras have a 7x zoom and reach to a 35mm equiv. of only 200mm. The difference is in the wide angle end not the zoom end.
Another thing to keep in mind is that while a long zoom is nice you may want to consider the resolution of the shots when your are not using the zoom. As apposed to a 2 or 3 mp camera that has a 10x zoom you may want to consider that with a 4 or 5 mp camera with a 5x zoom you still have the option of cropping a little bit to close the gap in the zoom difference. I would personally rather have 5 mp images for everything except when I crop than to sacrifice 2 or 3 mp for everything just to get a longer zoom.
It just comes down to what your needs and wants are.
T
|
|
|
09/14/2003 03:50:11 PM · #14 |
so, which is better the 35 equivalant of 190 or 200mm .... sorry, I am really new at this and trying to learn. My Olympic 2100 has 7-70 on the lense. What is that the equivalant of? By the way, I am checking out your web site... you have some great photos there. |
|
|
09/14/2003 04:10:02 PM · #15 |
Thank you for the nice compliment Wildflower.
Your camera has a 35mm equiv. of 38 to 380mm. Wow! not much of a wide angle but a great reach.
I can only get hat kind of reach when I use a tele-extender which isn't an ideal solution because the quality isn't as good as with a dedicated lens. My F707 has a long snout and it is bothersome to always carry that around. Sometimes it gets more attention than I want. I also have to use another wide angle adapter for wide angle shots and I don't like that solution either, I find teleconverters to be tedious and clunky. For these reasons, and many others, I am ready for a DSLR where I could just carry a small lightweight lens if I want or a massive zoom if I need that. I really miss using my Canon Rebel film camera because I loved how it fealt while taking photos. I will be trying to get the Digital Rebel soon and then I should be in heaven, for a little while at least.
T
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/09/2025 05:45:31 AM EDT.