Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Olympus C-740 - opinions? telephoto?

Reply
Thread Tools

Olympus C-740 - opinions? telephoto?

 
 
JK
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-04-2003


Larry Caldwell wrote:

> http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) (JK) writes:
> > Larry Caldwell wrote:

>
> > > The high end point and shoot market is exactly who the camera is aimed
> > > at.

>
> > Not really. Most experienced photographers want a camera with a faster
> > lens(f2.8 or faster throughout the entire zoom range), and would rather
> > have a lens with less of a zoom range that is sharper.

>
> So you are saying you really want a digital SLR with interchangeable
> lenses?


I would if they weren't so expensive. Perhaps in a few years I might buy one?


> That is not a point and shoot camera, though they all come with
> an automatic mode.
>
> The other option is those pathetic little 3x optical zooms,


LOL! 3x is fine. Many experienced photographers produced great images
using a small number of prime lenses.

> which aren't
> much better than a fixed focal length lens. That is your low end point
> and shoot market.
>
> As for sharpness, stop down to f8 and the OM zoom sharpens right up.


LOL! F8? What do you do in low light situations? Do you always
carry a tripod and hope the subject doesn't move? How far will
your flash reach if the lens is f3.7 at telephoto(and especially
when you stop it down to f? That makes the ultra telephoto
slow lens not very useful in many situations.

>
>
> > > he camera is too bulky to fit in a shirt pocket, so it is not
> > > compact by today's standards. You need to carry a camera bag, so you may
> > > as well lug along a filter adapter and a polarizing filter.

> >
> > You will also need a tripod, especially if you plan to use the lens
> > at its telephoto end in conditions other than the brightest sunlight.
> > The lens is f3.7 at the telephoto end. At 380mm equivalent,
> > figure on using a shutter speed of at least 1/500th of a second
> > if you want sharp images while hand holding the camera.

>
> Fortunately, the light little compact cameras don't require much of a
> tripod. A little 6" plastic jobby with extendable legs only weighs about
> 4 ounces and tucks right into the camera bag. My brother even came up
> with one that has a velcro strap that will tie it to lamp posts or fire
> hydrants. You can also plant it against a wall or table. Nobody expects
> to take low light super telephoto shots hand held with a $400 camera.
>
> > That
> > will require plenty of light, even if you are using the ISO 400
> > mode. Perhaps if the camera had a low noise ISO 1600
> > or even ISO 800 mode, and the lens was faster than f2.8
> > at the telephoto end, the long zoom would be much more
> > interesting? Even then, the sharpness of 10X zoom lenses
> > are no where near those for lenses with a 5x or smaller zoom
> > range.

>
> Certainly a fixed focal length lens or near-fixed can be pretty sharp,
> even when they are molded plastic. That's why they are so cheap.
> Admittedly, the Olympus ultra zoom is pretty soft in the corners when it
> is wide open, but the center of the field is nice and sharp. Stop down a
> couple stops and you get nice edge to edge sharpness.


That makes the lens not very useful in many situations.

>
>
> If you just read reviews, you will never learn how to operate a camera.
> If you look at the EXIF data on the photos where reviewers "discover" the
> corner softness of the zoom lens, you will see that they never bothered
> to switch it out of Auto mode, even though Olympus offers a depth of
> field preferred landscape auto exposure mode right there on the top of
> the camera that would have given much better results.
>
> > > You could also switch your resolution to 1024x768 and enable the digital
> > > zoom.

>
> > UGH!

>
> That is preferable to the interpolated graininess that digital zooms
> introduce into the picture. If you start at a lower resolution, at least
> you will hold that resolution throughout the digital zoom range. If you
> try to hold full CCD resolution, a digital zoom just adds crap to your
> photo.
>
>
> --
> http://home.teleport.com/~larryc


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Larry Caldwell
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-04-2003
(E-Mail Removed) (JK) writes:
> Larry Caldwell wrote:


> > 3x zooms were standard equipment 20 years ago,


> 20 years ago, experienced photographers wouldn't even think of
> using a zoom lens. Now many will use high quality 3x ones.


One wonders where you were 20 years ago, when the 35-105 or 35-135 zooms
were so common. I still regret passing up a 24-48 zoom when I had the
chance to buy it.

There were a few situations where a zoom would not serve, like long lens
sports photography or low light, and zoom lenses were practically
nonexistent for medium format, but the only photographers who didn't have
one or more 35mm zooms in their kit were the ones who just were not
keeping up with modern technology.

> > before CAE. A 3x zoom
> > today just means either the manufacturer wasn't willing to spend any
> > money on the lens, or they wanted to keep the camera shirt pocket size.


> Or they wanted good image quality.


How much image quality do you get when you have to crop half of your
frame out of the shot, or kick in a digital zoom? You need to quit
photographing test patterns and get out in the real world.

> Digital zooms are worthless. One can "zoom" in Photoshop for the same
> effect.


Which is why an optical zoom is superior.

> > Those are also high end for point and shoot
> > cameras. If you stay within the optical range of their lenses, they will
> > outperform the ultra zooms. If you need the extra focal length, they
> > don't do as well. In either case, your next step up is a digital SLR.

>
> Or a film slr and a film scanner.


Of course. Film is still superior to digital, though with enough CPU and
a good printer they can produce pretty good movie screen sized images
today. The tradeoff is money. A film SLR and film scanner that will
outperform a $500 digital camera will cost you a whole lot more than
$500.

--
http://home.teleport.com/~larryc
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Charlie D
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-04-2003
In article <(E-Mail Removed) t>,
Larry Caldwell <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> I still regret passing up a 24-48 zoom when I had the
> chance to buy it.


I hope it was the Vivitar Ser. 1

--
Charlie Dilks
Newark, DE USA
 
Reply With Quote
 
Larry Caldwell
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-04-2003
(E-Mail Removed) (Greg) writes:

> I'm using an Olympus C-750 with 10x optical and 4x digital zoom.
> The optical zoom is very sharp right up to 10x and the digital zoom is OK up
> to 2x.


I'm sure the 4 mp CCD helps a lot with the digital zoom. Doesn't the 750
give you a max 4x digital zoom?

> 10x optical and 4x digital requires a sturdy tripod and a very light touch
> on the shutter button !


I use the self timer a lot for long shots. That allows the use of a
light weight tripod without wiggle. Doesn't the 750 also have an IR
receiver for an IR remote? I thought Olympus added back all the doodads
that they took off of the C-700.

> Overall I am very impressed with the camera.


OK, I have never seen the camera, just photos of it. Where do they hide
the hot shoe? Is it under that cover looking thingy on top?

--
http://home.teleport.com/~larryc
 
Reply With Quote
 
Larry Caldwell
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-04-2003
(E-Mail Removed) (Charlie D) writes:
> In article <(E-Mail Removed) t>,
> Larry Caldwell <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> > I still regret passing up a 24-48 zoom when I had the
> > chance to buy it.

>
> I hope it was the Vivitar Ser. 1


No, it was a Zuiko. I have always resisted the temptation of aftermarket
lenses.

--
http://home.teleport.com/~larryc
 
Reply With Quote
 
Greg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-04-2003

"Larry Caldwell" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) k.net...
> (E-Mail Removed) (Greg) writes:
>
> > I'm using an Olympus C-750 with 10x optical and 4x digital zoom.
> > The optical zoom is very sharp right up to 10x and the digital zoom is

OK up
> > to 2x.

>
> I'm sure the 4 mp CCD helps a lot with the digital zoom. Doesn't the 750
> give you a max 4x digital zoom?


Yes, 4x digital 10x optical.

> > 10x optical and 4x digital requires a sturdy tripod and a very light

touch
> > on the shutter button !

>
> I use the self timer a lot for long shots. That allows the use of a
> light weight tripod without wiggle. Doesn't the 750 also have an IR
> receiver for an IR remote? I thought Olympus added back all the doodads
> that they took off of the C-700.


Thanks for the tip... and yes it does come with a remote.

>
> > Overall I am very impressed with the camera.

>
> OK, I have never seen the camera, just photos of it. Where do they hide
> the hot shoe? Is it under that cover looking thingy on top?


Yes right on top of the pop-up flash !

Greg


 
Reply With Quote
 
JK
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-05-2003
They were also quite cheap. I bought them all used. I think I paid less
than $400 for the three.

JK wrote:

> The series one primes are good. I have a Series One 135mm f2.3
> and 200 f3. I also have a Series One 70-210 f2.8-4 zoom.
> Nice lenses, but quite heavy! The Series One primes are so sharp!
>
> Charlie D wrote:
>
> > In article <(E-Mail Removed) t>,
> > Larry Caldwell <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >
> > > I still regret passing up a 24-48 zoom when I had the
> > > chance to buy it.

> >
> > I hope it was the Vivitar Ser. 1
> >
> > --
> > Charlie Dilks
> > Newark, DE USA


 
Reply With Quote
 
Larry Caldwell
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-05-2003
(E-Mail Removed) (gr) writes:

> The Olympus ultra-zooms are really about
> the only digicams that offer zooms much more than 3x,


The Minolta DiMage 7xx cameras have a 7x zoom and a 4.9 MP CCD. It is
also a high end point and shoot. The Minolta zoom is a bit more wide
angle than the Olympus zoom, but has an almost identical aperture range.
--
http://home.teleport.com/~larryc
 
Reply With Quote
 
Earl Lewis
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-05-2003
On Sun, 03 Aug 2003 15:31:47 GMT, Larry Caldwell <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>(E-Mail Removed) (Earl Lewis) writes:
>
>> I've just purchased an Olympus C-740 Zoom. I am not even an amateur
>> photographer, just the last computer nerd in the US who didn't have a
>> digital camera yet. I am very impressed by the photos I'm getting
>> (what do I know, I never was much interested before), but somewhat
>> disappointed by not finding any discussions about this model on this
>> newsgroup. I suppose this model is not aimed at high end
>> photographers, rather guys like me who are mostly click-and-shoot?

>
>With minor variations, the Olympus C-7xx ultra zoom models are pretty
>similar.
>
>The high end point and shoot market is exactly who the camera is aimed
>at. The camera is too bulky to fit in a shirt pocket, so it is not
>compact by today's standards. You need to carry a camera bag, so you may
>as well lug along a filter adapter and a polarizing filter. The 3
>megapixel CCD will give you pretty fair prints up to 8x10. The 10x
>optical zoom is an impressive piece of glass for a point and shoot
>camera.
>
>Some of the camera's features work very well, some don't. The viewfinder
>blanks out when you press the shutter, so the automatic sequential
>exposure feature is pretty useless. I really wish it had a sports finder
>for action shots. There is no external flash sync, so additional strobes
>have to be triggered with a photocell. OTOH, the zoom has a very nice
>macro mode, and the camera has excellent manual control options.
>
>> I'm interested in getting a telephoto lens for it, Olympus sells a
>> TCON-17, which requires a CLS-4 adaptor tube for this camera.
>> This lens weighs the better part of a pound, and upon looking at the
>> threads it's intended to screw onto, I'm wondering about how much
>> stress this weight will put on the barrel that moves in and out to
>> 'zoom' the camera. Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

>
>Your zoom lens is already a telephoto lens that is pushing into super
>telephoto territory. Try walking instead of zooming. No amount of
>magnification will substitute for camera position. If you are willing to
>move around, most shots can be taken with no telephoto at all. However,
>you should definitely get the CLS-4 and a polarizing filter.
>
>You could also switch your resolution to 1024x768 and enable the digital
>zoom. That will give you adequate resolution for a 4x6 print, and triple
>the magnification of your ultra zoom.


How come Photoshop tells me that a 1024x768 pic has a print size of
14" x 10"? But you're saying 4x6? What am I missing?

I am loathe to experiment and find out myself, as I own a 1993
dot-matrix printer. I can't print in any color. As long as it's black.
As you can see, I'm not too interested in accumulating pics on paper.
EArl
Remove no_spam to reply email
 
Reply With Quote
 
Larry Caldwell
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-05-2003
(E-Mail Removed) (Earl Lewis) writes:
>
> How come Photoshop tells me that a 1024x768 pic has a print size of
> 14" x 10"? But you're saying 4x6? What am I missing?


Resolution. You could print it 20x30 if you want to, and if you stand
far enough away that it is really small, it might not even look that bad.

> I am loathe to experiment and find out myself, as I own a 1993
> dot-matrix printer. I can't print in any color. As long as it's black.
> As you can see, I'm not too interested in accumulating pics on paper.
> EArl


Photography is about experimenting.

--
http://home.teleport.com/~larryc
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

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 On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Olympus D 490-Z won't turn on; common Olympus problem? Robert Oliver Digital Photography 9 02-05-2012 04:48 PM
As the "S/S Olympus 4/3rds" ship sinks, (Olympus abandoned it), thecrew get more violent! RichA Digital Photography 19 10-06-2010 03:25 PM
Olympus OM lens with a Olympus DSLR Peter Stacey Digital Photography 43 04-02-2007 09:35 PM
Olympus OM lenses to Olympus E-500 camera. Pvest Digital Photography 11 02-25-2006 07:43 PM
proprietary Li-ION battery for Olympus C-50. Should I buy non Olympus? Mr. Rather B. Beachen Digital Photography 3 07-11-2004 08:25 PM



Advertisments