New Olympus 5060 Announced

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Tink, Oct 4, 2003.

  1. Tink

    Tink Guest

    Does anyone here who understands camera jargon better than I have a nutshell
    comparison between the Olympus 5050 and the recently announced 5060?

    Thanks!

    --

    Tink

    www.blackswampglassworks.com
    Sign Up Now For Fall Workshops!
    Hollows, Vessels & Florals...
     
    Tink, Oct 4, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Tink

    Tink Guest

    Partially answering my own question here in case others are interested...

    The 5050 allows for the use of standard AA cells which would be great, and
    it also has a 1.8-2.8 aperture for better low light capability.

    Those two differences alone sway me towards the 5050 as opposed to the new
    release. The 5060 should be out next month, and maybe it will effect a price
    drop on the 5050. If I can wait that long :)

    --

    Tink

    www.blackswampglassworks.com
    Sign Up Now For Fall Workshops!
    Hollows, Vessels & Florals...

    "Tink" <> wrote in message
    news:GFofb.5433291$...
    > Does anyone here who understands camera jargon better than I have a

    nutshell
    > comparison between the Olympus 5050 and the recently announced 5060?
     
    Tink, Oct 4, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Tink

    gr Guest

    "Tink" <> wrote
    > Partially answering my own question here in case others are interested...
    >
    > The 5050 allows for the use of standard AA cells which would be great, and
    > it also has a 1.8-2.8 aperture for better low light capability.


    The 5050 zoom is 1.8 on the wide end, and 2.6 on the long end. The bright
    lens of the C5050 is one of the great features of it. The 5060 is 2.8 on the
    wide end, and something like 4.8 on the long end! That alone, is enough to
    make me think Olympus made a big mistake with this camera, unless they plan
    to sell it for less than the 5050.

    I have no idea why Olympus went to those damn proprietary batteries in the
    C5060... again, a big mistake!

    The good thing about the C5060 is the 27mm wide angle. That would be handy,
    but again... it isn't worth sacrificing the fast lens to get it. You can
    always get a wide-angle adapter for the C5050 if you need wide-angle ability
    (or use the panorama function as a last resort).

    The other benefit is supposedly a faster autofocus time. I'm not really sure
    if this is much of a benefit, since anyone who needs low lag time uses
    manual focus or pre-focus.

    Oh, there's the higher-res movie mode of the 5060. That could prove useful,
    but movies tend to be a gimmick most of the time and chew up card space real
    fast! (And with the slow lens of the 5060, you'd be stuck shooting movies
    outdoors only.)

    I guess we'll have to wait and see some test results. I wouldn't hold off
    buying the C5050, though, unless you really want the features the 5060 is
    offering (and don't care about the slow zoom lens or proprietary batteries).
     
    gr, Oct 4, 2003
    #3
  4. Tink

    Charlie D Guest

    In article <1Mofb.5436428$>,
    "Tink" <> wrote:

    > Partially answering my own question here in case others are interested...
    >
    > The 5050 allows for the use of standard AA cells which would be great, and
    > it also has a 1.8-2.8 aperture for better low light capability.
    >
    > Those two differences alone sway me towards the 5050 as opposed to the new
    > release. The 5060 should be out next month, and maybe it will effect a price
    > drop on the 5050. If I can wait that long :)


    You're on the right track.
    One plus of the 5060 is that it supposedly fires the shutter with less
    delay than the 5050 after pressing the button.
    Another plus for the 5050 is that can use CF, SM and XD memory cards.
    The 5060 has less of a selection if any. Only XD?

    With the addition of closeup lenses I find my 5050 excellent for macro.

    --
    Charlie Dilks
    Newark, DE USA
     
    Charlie D, Oct 4, 2003
    #4
  5. Tink

    Tink Guest

    I think I'm sold on the 5050. After years of dealing with proprietary,
    high-priced batteries, I love the flexibility of the 5050. And it comes with
    an IR remote, something I planned to buy anyway. And I like the feel of
    magnesium bodies. I think it will do the job for me.

    I, too, had to wonder specifically about the logic of the changes in the
    5060. From what I've gleaned from the web, the street price will be $799...
    Same as the 5050 when it came out. That makes me think the 5050 may see a
    nice price drop once the 5060 hits the streets in November.

    --

    Tink

    www.blackswampglassworks.com
    Sign Up Now For Fall Workshops!
    Hollows, Vessels & Florals...

    "gr" <> wrote in message
    news:bll66c$djhj0$-berlin.de...

    > I guess we'll have to wait and see some test results. I wouldn't hold off
    > buying the C5050, though, unless you really want the features the 5060 is
    > offering (and don't care about the slow zoom lens or proprietary

    batteries).
     
    Tink, Oct 4, 2003
    #5
  6. Tink

    gr Guest

    "Tink" <> wrote
    >
    > I, too, had to wonder specifically about the logic of the changes in the
    > 5060. From what I've gleaned from the web, the street price will be

    $799...
    > Same as the 5050 when it came out. That makes me think the 5050 may see a
    > nice price drop once the 5060 hits the streets in November.


    I doubt you'll see a big price drop in the C5050. Probably a small one, but
    that's just the usual price drop of electronics. It's going for around
    $575USD now. I'd expect it to be selling for about $525-$550 for Christmas.
     
    gr, Oct 4, 2003
    #6
  7. In article <1Mofb.5436428$>,
    "Tink" <> wrote:

    > Partially answering my own question here in case others are interested...
    >
    > The 5050 allows for the use of standard AA cells which would be great, and
    > it also has a 1.8-2.8 aperture for better low light capability.
    >
    > Those two differences alone sway me towards the 5050 as opposed to the new
    > release. The 5060 should be out next month, and maybe it will effect a price
    > drop on the 5050. If I can wait that long :)


    The other thing I noticed is that the 5060 drops SmartMedia support. It
    accepts xD cards and Compact Flash (including Microdrives). In its
    favor is its 4X optical zoom.

    --
    Hank Shiffman http://www.disordered.org
    Have Opinion, Will Travel
    Mountain View, California
     
    Hank Shiffman, Oct 4, 2003
    #7
  8. Tink

    Frank ess Guest

    "gr" <> wrote in message
    news:bll771$dnb2t$-berlin.de...
    > "Tink" <> wrote
    > >
    > > I, too, had to wonder specifically about the logic of the changes in the
    > > 5060. From what I've gleaned from the web, the street price will be

    > $799...
    > > Same as the 5050 when it came out. That makes me think the 5050 may see

    a
    > > nice price drop once the 5060 hits the streets in November.

    >
    > I doubt you'll see a big price drop in the C5050. Probably a small one,

    but
    > that's just the usual price drop of electronics. It's going for around
    > $575USD now. I'd expect it to be selling for about $525-$550 for

    Christmas.
    >
    >


    I see Mr Nikon has reduced the price of the CP5700. Was that the shadow of a
    300D in the background?
     
    Frank ess, Oct 4, 2003
    #8
  9. Tink

    George Guest

    REALLY a big mistake on the batteries especially since Rayovac came out with
    those 15 minute NiMH rechargeable AA (2000mAh) batteries. I've been using
    them in my C4000, like them, and they are reasonably price (even the charger
    which has a "rebate" that doesn't get you any $$$ back but does get you a
    free cigarette lighter adapter for the charger). I paid about $30 for a
    four battery charger with two batteries and an additional $13 for four more
    batteries at a local discounter. You cannot believe how nice it is to be
    able to get fully recharged batteries in 15 minutes at home or in the car...

    "gr" <> wrote in message
    news:bll66c$djhj0$-berlin.de...
    > "Tink" <> wrote
    > > Partially answering my own question here in case others are

    interested...
    > >
    > > The 5050 allows for the use of standard AA cells which would be great,

    and
    > > it also has a 1.8-2.8 aperture for better low light capability.

    >
    > The 5050 zoom is 1.8 on the wide end, and 2.6 on the long end. The bright
    > lens of the C5050 is one of the great features of it. The 5060 is 2.8 on

    the
    > wide end, and something like 4.8 on the long end! That alone, is enough to
    > make me think Olympus made a big mistake with this camera, unless they

    plan
    > to sell it for less than the 5050.
    >
    > I have no idea why Olympus went to those damn proprietary batteries in the
    > C5060... again, a big mistake!
    >
    > The good thing about the C5060 is the 27mm wide angle. That would be

    handy,
    > but again... it isn't worth sacrificing the fast lens to get it. You can
    > always get a wide-angle adapter for the C5050 if you need wide-angle

    ability
    > (or use the panorama function as a last resort).
    >
    > The other benefit is supposedly a faster autofocus time. I'm not really

    sure
    > if this is much of a benefit, since anyone who needs low lag time uses
    > manual focus or pre-focus.
    >
    > Oh, there's the higher-res movie mode of the 5060. That could prove

    useful,
    > but movies tend to be a gimmick most of the time and chew up card space

    real
    > fast! (And with the slow lens of the 5060, you'd be stuck shooting movies
    > outdoors only.)
    >
    > I guess we'll have to wait and see some test results. I wouldn't hold off
    > buying the C5050, though, unless you really want the features the 5060 is
    > offering (and don't care about the slow zoom lens or proprietary

    batteries).
    >
    >
     
    George, Oct 4, 2003
    #9
  10. Tink

    Giorgis Guest

    Guys the way I see this camera is simple.
    Kind of like sideways development, you may not have interchangeable lenses
    but you can get from a range of similar cameras, depending on your needs.

    Considering the G3 -> G5
    Now the 5050 -> 5060 I believe if both stay on the market as a camera is a
    good thing.

    They are different cameras with most of the advantages common. If Olympus
    discontinues the 5050 that is a bad thing.

    It makes me think though that improving on these cameras gives you
    diminishing returns. Improving zoom on the 5050 without affecting the low
    light qualities would cost too much.

    Unless Olympus wants to make room for a higher end range.

    Giorgis

    PS: I own a 5050 and I am wrapped, I love it. I just show photos to my film
    friend without knocking his machine. I keep saying vaguely Oh yea film is
    better in some things and digital in others. As far as 4x3 prints goes I
    can't think of any.



    "Tink" <> wrote in message
    news:GFofb.5433291$...
    > Does anyone here who understands camera jargon better than I have a

    nutshell
    > comparison between the Olympus 5050 and the recently announced 5060?
    >
    > Thanks!
    >
    > --
    >
    > Tink
    >
    > www.blackswampglassworks.com
    > Sign Up Now For Fall Workshops!
    > Hollows, Vessels & Florals...
    >
    >
     
    Giorgis, Oct 4, 2003
    #10
  11. > The 5050 allows for the use of standard AA cells which would be great, and
    > it also has a 1.8-2.8 aperture for better low light capability.


    I haven't seen the info on the 5060 yet, but if they're using a new,
    lower-noise ccd, they might be able to get away with the slower lens and
    still have the same (or similar) capabilities for a given shutter speed
    (simply by boosting the effective ISO; as I understand it, f1.8@ 100 ISO
    would be the equivalent of f2.8@ 200 ISO).

    OK, just checked the Olympus website; the info is here-
    http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/cpg_product_lobbypage.asp?l=1&p=16
    &bc=2&product=936

    So here's what it looks like they're pushing-

    "Automatic Noise Reduction plus Advanced Noise Filter sharpens pictures from
    edge-to-edge "
    Who knows? Could be this camera delivers a cleaner, more noise-free image
    than the 5050. If it can do so without introducing artifacts or
    artificially smoothing out detail, that would be a definite plus.

    "Fully adjustable LCD monitor helps you frame hard to shots with the
    greatest of ease"
    The LCD definitely has more adjustability than the one found on the 5050.
    In general, I find the 5050 LCD to be something of a tease. Yes, it's a lot
    better than a fixed LCD, but it leaves you wanting for MORE!

    Some more cool things gleaned from the specs-

    3.0fps shooting in *raw* mode. That *is* impressive! Means that you can be
    shooting a sporting event at very high quality and be relatively certain of
    getting "the shot." Most cameras don't shoot raw (or tiff) very quickly,
    due to the resulting large file sizes (much larger for tiff than raw, with
    either one being much larger than a high-quality jpg).

    1/4000 shutter speed. Many high-end digital cameras max out between 1/650
    and 1/1000. How often this will be relevant is debatable.

    Still retains multiple storage formats (XD and CF) but drops smart media.
    Not a big deal; CF cards have such incredible capacity, low price and high
    speed that you don't really need anything else (but it is kinda handy to
    have that second card in there as an emergency spare!).

    27-110mm effective zoom lens. The high end is no big deal, but I have to
    admit there have been many times I would have loved to have something wider
    on my 5050!

    As for faster start-up and shutter delay, that remains to be tested. You
    can set up a 5050 to take very fast shots (prefocus or manual, and by all
    means disable the flash!!!). The new Li-Ion battery may have helped the new
    camera shave a bit of weight and size-

    5050 5060

    weight 498gr 430gr
    width 113.5mm 116mm
    height 79.5mm 87mm
    depth 69.5mm 65.5mm

    Well, the weight dropped a couple ounces, but the size is actually fairly
    similar.

    One thing I've had trouble finding is information on how many "my mode"
    settings the 5060 has. The 5050 has 10 of them, which can be quite handy
    (not that I've figured it all out and programmed them yet!).

    Personally, I really like the new 5060, 'cuz it makes me feel way-better
    about my 5050 (which I've already decided is one phenomenal camera).

    --
    --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
    http://www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
     
    Mike Jacoubowsky, Oct 4, 2003
    #11
  12. Tink

    Alfred Molon Guest

    Alfred Molon, Oct 4, 2003
    #12
  13. Tink

    Alfred Molon Guest

    The 5060 has indeed some interesting features, as you noted. But the
    major problem is that slow lens, F4.8 at the tele end, which makes it
    less suitable for low light photography.

    In article <Mhsfb.11441$>, mikej1
    @ix.netcom.com says...
    > > The 5050 allows for the use of standard AA cells which would be great, and
    > > it also has a 1.8-2.8 aperture for better low light capability.

    >
    > I haven't seen the info on the 5060 yet, but if they're using a new,
    > lower-noise ccd, they might be able to get away with the slower lens and
    > still have the same (or similar) capabilities for a given shutter speed
    > (simply by boosting the effective ISO; as I understand it, f1.8@ 100 ISO
    > would be the equivalent of f2.8@ 200 ISO).
    >
    > OK, just checked the Olympus website; the info is here-
    > http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/cpg_product_lobbypage.asp?l=1&p=16
    > &bc=2&product=936
    >
    > So here's what it looks like they're pushing-
    >
    > "Automatic Noise Reduction plus Advanced Noise Filter sharpens pictures from
    > edge-to-edge "
    > Who knows? Could be this camera delivers a cleaner, more noise-free image
    > than the 5050. If it can do so without introducing artifacts or
    > artificially smoothing out detail, that would be a definite plus.
    >
    > "Fully adjustable LCD monitor helps you frame hard to shots with the
    > greatest of ease"
    > The LCD definitely has more adjustability than the one found on the 5050.
    > In general, I find the 5050 LCD to be something of a tease. Yes, it's a lot
    > better than a fixed LCD, but it leaves you wanting for MORE!
    >
    > Some more cool things gleaned from the specs-
    >
    > 3.0fps shooting in *raw* mode. That *is* impressive! Means that you can be
    > shooting a sporting event at very high quality and be relatively certain of
    > getting "the shot." Most cameras don't shoot raw (or tiff) very quickly,
    > due to the resulting large file sizes (much larger for tiff than raw, with
    > either one being much larger than a high-quality jpg).
    >
    > 1/4000 shutter speed. Many high-end digital cameras max out between 1/650
    > and 1/1000. How often this will be relevant is debatable.
    >
    > Still retains multiple storage formats (XD and CF) but drops smart media.
    > Not a big deal; CF cards have such incredible capacity, low price and high
    > speed that you don't really need anything else (but it is kinda handy to
    > have that second card in there as an emergency spare!).
    >
    > 27-110mm effective zoom lens. The high end is no big deal, but I have to
    > admit there have been many times I would have loved to have something wider
    > on my 5050!
    >
    > As for faster start-up and shutter delay, that remains to be tested. You
    > can set up a 5050 to take very fast shots (prefocus or manual, and by all
    > means disable the flash!!!). The new Li-Ion battery may have helped the new
    > camera shave a bit of weight and size-
    >
    > 5050 5060
    >
    > weight 498gr 430gr
    > width 113.5mm 116mm
    > height 79.5mm 87mm
    > depth 69.5mm 65.5mm
    >
    > Well, the weight dropped a couple ounces, but the size is actually fairly
    > similar.
    >
    > One thing I've had trouble finding is information on how many "my mode"
    > settings the 5060 has. The 5050 has 10 of them, which can be quite handy
    > (not that I've figured it all out and programmed them yet!).
    >
    > Personally, I really like the new 5060, 'cuz it makes me feel way-better
    > about my 5050 (which I've already decided is one phenomenal camera).


    --

    Alfred Molon
    ------------------------------
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus4040_5050/
    Olympus 4040 resource - http://www.molon.de/4040.html
    Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html
     
    Alfred Molon, Oct 4, 2003
    #13
  14. > The 5060 has indeed some interesting features, as you noted. But the
    > major problem is that slow lens, F4.8 at the tele end, which makes it
    > less suitable for low light photography.


    Unless they've found a way to really bat down the noise and use higher ISO
    equivalents. I haven't used one of the high-end DSLRs, but from what I've
    read, they do a phenomenal job keeping noise levels down with higher ISOs.
    Most of the "trick" is accomplished using a larger CCD sensor, but if
    Olympus has figured out a way to get better performance out of a smaller
    sensor, then who knows, that new lens might not hold it back so much.

    But if they haven't pulled a rabbit out of a hat, then it really does appear
    that the 5060 isn't going to be as useful for either sports photography or
    low-light situations. Nor does it appear to offer as much control as the
    5050.

    There's absolutely, positively no way I could have gotten some of the great
    shots from the Tour de France this year without my 5050
    (www.ChainReaction.com/france03racephotos.htm#tourmalet)... and that was
    after having used it for only a week or so prior. I'm still learning, and
    it just gets better all the time.

    --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
    http://www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
     
    Mike Jacoubowsky, Oct 4, 2003
    #14
  15. Tink

    gr Guest

    "Mike Jacoubowsky" <> wrote
    >
    > I haven't seen the info on the 5060 yet, but if they're using a new,
    > lower-noise ccd, they might be able to get away with the slower lens and
    > still have the same (or similar) capabilities for a given shutter speed


    It's looks like the same chip that's in the 5050. It's the same physical
    size and number of sensors, anyway.

    > "Automatic Noise Reduction plus Advanced Noise Filter sharpens pictures

    from
    > edge-to-edge "


    Sounds just like the 5050.

    > "Fully adjustable LCD monitor helps you frame hard to shots with the
    > greatest of ease"


    I guess this could be useful for some. Personally, I find the tilt of the
    5050 enough for my use, which is for macro shots. For everything else, I
    never use the tilt feature.

    > 3.0fps shooting in *raw* mode. That *is* impressive! Means that you can

    be
    > shooting a sporting event at very high quality and be relatively certain

    of
    > getting "the shot."


    Again, that could be of use for some people. I seldom shoot in RAW, but that
    could be just because I'm too cheap to buy PS and the plugin.

    > 1/4000 shutter speed. Many high-end digital cameras max out between 1/650
    > and 1/1000. How often this will be relevant is debatable.


    Hmmm... the 5050 claims 1/2000 shutter speed, but it's only available at
    f/8.0. Not very useful! I wonder if the 5060 will have a "usable" 1/4000
    shutter speed?

    > Still retains multiple storage formats (XD and CF) but drops smart media.
    > Not a big deal; CF cards have such incredible capacity, low price and high
    > speed that you don't really need anything else (but it is kinda handy to
    > have that second card in there as an emergency spare!).


    I like the SM format of the 5050. It allowed me to use my old cards when I
    upgraded the camera. However, that's not really too important, so the 5060
    dropping SM isn't really a big deal.

    > 27-110mm effective zoom lens. The high end is no big deal, but I have to
    > admit there have been many times I would have loved to have something

    wider
    > on my 5050!


    That is definitely the big advantage over the 5050. I'd really like the
    wide-angle setting. It's just not worth sacrificing the fast lens of the
    5050, IMO.

    > As for faster start-up and shutter delay, that remains to be tested. You
    > can set up a 5050 to take very fast shots (prefocus or manual, and by all
    > means disable the flash!!!).


    Yeah, I don't really see much of an advantage in the slower shutter delay.
    Who cares if the autofocus delay is 0.4 seconds instead of 0.8 seconds? You
    still have to prefocus both cameras for an action shot.


    > One thing I've had trouble finding is information on how many "my mode"
    > settings the 5060 has. The 5050 has 10 of them, which can be quite handy
    > (not that I've figured it all out and programmed them yet!).


    10? You mean 8. I've programmed all of mine for various uses. They are very
    handy, especially since I don't set my camera to remember settings in other
    modes when I power it off.
     
    gr, Oct 4, 2003
    #15
  16. Tink

    George Guest

    Interesting point (even though I get different numbers...2Ah/0.25 x 4
    batteries = 32 A)...and I don't think switching ps technology would do
    anything (like it does for audio power amplifiers) because the load would be
    rather continuous. The output of the AC wall adapter is 4.5A. Does anyone
    who is into battery technology know the answer?
    (But it does work nicely.)

    "Alfred Molon" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>,
    > says...
    > > You cannot believe how nice it is to be
    > > able to get fully recharged batteries in 15 minutes at home or in the

    car...
    >
    > Just curious - how is it possible to get a 2000 mAh battery recharged in
    > 15 minutes ? You'd need a current of 12 Ampere.
    > --
    >
    > Alfred Molon
    > ------------------------------
    > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus4040_5050/
    > Olympus 4040 resource - http://www.molon.de/4040.html
    > Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html
     
    George, Oct 4, 2003
    #16
  17. Tink

    Alfred Molon Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > Interesting point (even though I get different numbers...2Ah/0.25 x 4
    > batteries = 32 A)...and I don't think switching ps technology would do
    > anything (like it does for audio power amplifiers) because the load would be
    > rather continuous. The output of the AC wall adapter is 4.5A. Does anyone
    > who is into battery technology know the answer?
    > (But it does work nicely.)


    I was assuming a serial current of 12A (50% higher than the 8A required,
    as there are losses in the recharging process).
    --

    Alfred Molon
    ------------------------------
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus4040_5050/
    Olympus 4040 resource - http://www.molon.de/4040.html
    Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html
     
    Alfred Molon, Oct 4, 2003
    #17
  18. Tink

    Basiltoo Guest

    Alfred Molon <> wrote in
    news::

    > I was assuming a serial current of 12A (50% higher than the 8A required,
    > as there are losses in the recharging process).
    >


    It would require 8A (or 12A as you suggest) if the charging voltage were
    around 1.5V and the heat generated would be horrendous. The same amount of
    energy could be transferred at a higher voltage and lower currrent. I
    would have thought that the maximum charging current could not be more than
    about 2A. How this is achieved is open to speculation.

    --
    Regards,
    Baz

    http://www.trevellan.co.uk
     
    Basiltoo, Oct 5, 2003
    #18
  19. Tink

    Frank H Guest

    I wonder if they made changes to the silly lens cap?
    The extension tube I use on my 5050 is great and protects the vitals,
    but perhaps they found a new way for the 5060?

    Cheers, Frank
     
    Frank H, Oct 23, 2003
    #19
  20. In article <>,
    Frank H <> wrote:

    > I wonder if they made changes to the silly lens cap?
    > The extension tube I use on my 5050 is great and protects the vitals,
    > but perhaps they found a new way for the 5060?
    >
    > Cheers, Frank


    I was dissapointed that they didn't do more. I really like Oly's size
    and bright lens but their shutter lag and sensor noise prevent it from
    being an option. The electronics inside is showing its age.

    I bought the Digital Rebel once I saw that Oly was still carying on with
    the same flaws as my aging 4040Z. I don't care for the Rebel's bulk and
    lack of features but, damn, it's awesome at taking pictures.
     
    Kevin McMurtrie, Oct 23, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Daniel

    Olympus C-750 or C-5050 or C-5060?

    Daniel, Sep 29, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    610
    G Winstanley
    Oct 6, 2003
  2. Alfred Molon

    Olympus 5060 online resource

    Alfred Molon, Oct 12, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    472
    Charlie Dilks
    Nov 28, 2003
  3. Opentoe

    Finepix S7000 or Olympus C-5060

    Opentoe, Oct 20, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    375
    Dave Oddie
    Nov 24, 2003
  4. Opentoe

    Olympus C-5060 question

    Opentoe, Oct 20, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    315
    Alfred Molon
    Oct 20, 2003
  5. Lionel
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    453
    Stacey
    Oct 3, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page