As the former store manager for a large camera chain and a digital
camera user let me give you some insight. If you intend to do a lot of
close up work then you need to be concerned with the "macro"
capabilities of the camera AND the ability to "manually focus" the
camera.The ability to use a "cable release" with the camera is
critical because it eliminates the hand shake factor.You also must put
the camera on a tripod when doing macro work. This being said my
camera of choice( and the one I own) is the Minolta Dimage 7i Ilove it
and it gives me all the features of a SLR camera (except changeable
lenses, has great zoom, and the ability to use macro with the lens set
to either wide angle or telephoto ( most cameras anly allow macro with
lens set to telephoto). It is 5 MP, allows you to add external flash,
take a cable release and allows manual focus. Hope this helps.

Larry

Ditto what Larry says about macro. and the ability to manually focus.

K Barrett

"larry flink" wrote in message
om...
As the former store manager for a large camera chain and a digital
camera user let me give you some insight. If you intend to do a lot of
close up work then you need to be concerned with the "macro"
capabilities of the camera AND the ability to "manually focus" the
camera.The ability to use a "cable release" with the camera is
critical because it eliminates the hand shake factor.You also must put
the camera on a tripod when doing macro work. This being said my
camera of choice( and the one I own) is the Minolta Dimage 7i Ilove it
and it gives me all the features of a SLR camera (except changeable
lenses, has great zoom, and the ability to use macro with the lens set
to either wide angle or telephoto ( most cameras anly allow macro with
lens set to telephoto). It is 5 MP, allows you to add external flash,
take a cable release and allows manual focus. Hope this helps.

Larry

Got it. This camera has both, plus the optical stabilizer, which
compensates for the "hand shakes". As for the tripod, we use that when
looking for closeups.

Thanks!

Diana

"K Barrett" wrote in message
news:94qyb.172532$Dw6.666403@attbi_s02...
Ditto what Larry says about macro. and the ability to manually focus.

K Barrett

"larry flink" wrote in message
om...
As the former store manager for a large camera chain and a digital
camera user let me give you some insight. If you intend to do a lot of
close up work then you need to be concerned with the "macro"
capabilities of the camera AND the ability to "manually focus" the
camera.The ability to use a "cable release" with the camera is
critical because it eliminates the hand shake factor.You also must put
the camera on a tripod when doing macro work. This being said my
camera of choice( and the one I own) is the Minolta Dimage 7i Ilove it
and it gives me all the features of a SLR camera (except changeable
lenses, has great zoom, and the ability to use macro with the lens set
to either wide angle or telephoto ( most cameras anly allow macro with
lens set to telephoto). It is 5 MP, allows you to add external flash,
take a cable release and allows manual focus. Hope this helps.

Larry

The price does sound reasonable but I think you can get the Olympus C-5050
for around that price.

It is a much better camera and the super macro function is awesome.


"Shell" wrote in message
m...
I'm not familiar with this cmera but it sounds like a good deal to me. If
you're looking to do extreme closeups check and see what the minimum
distance lens to object is. I have a Umax Power Cam 3660 that I got on
eBay
for right at $300. It will go up to 6mp and has all sorts of settings
that
I'm still learning. Regular pictures are set at 3.5mp I think and I can
get
within 4 inches of an object for extreme closeups.

The higher the mega pixel the better the quality should you ever want to
have really large prints made of your pictures.

Now if I coud just figure out a way keep my hands from shaking when I'm
trying to take a picture

I really like my digital camera but I still prefer my telephoto lenses and
35mm Pentax that's about 25 years old. I just wish film developing wasn't
so expensive.

Shell


"Diana Kulaga" wrote in message
hlink.net...
All,

Our digital Kodak 260 is now way behind the curve, and we're considering
a
new one. Frank did a bunch of research and found the Panasonic
DMC-FZ10K
Lumix. 4 mp, zoom up to 12x, and an optical image stabilizer, among
other
features. It's priced around $600, which makes puts it in reasonable
range
for us.

Anyone familiar with this camera? I'm sure that if we wanted to spend a
fortune there are better ones available, but we'd like to stay in this
range. I'm particularly interested in getting detail so I can
photograph
some of the smaller orchids.

Any thoughts welcome.

Diana

On 30 Nov 2003 03:44:24 -0800, (larry flink) wrote in
Message-Id: :

The ability to use a "cable release" with the camera is
critical because it eliminates the hand shake factor.

The use of a remote control in place of a cable release is acceptable
or even better at reducing shake blur.

On Mon, 1 Dec 2003 17:26:58 +1100, "Bolero"
wrote in Message-Id: :

super macro function is awesome

How close will the Olympus C-5050 focus in macro mode?

This Comparometer is fun! I entered the
Canon EOS-1Ds .......$7169.00
& the
Sony CyberShot DSC-F828 .......$980.00 (new)

Now with my old eyes, my monitor & very little photography knowledge,
I hardly see any difference?

I would rather have the cheaper camera & use the $$ on my orchids! *g*
--
Cheers Wendy
Remove PETERPAN for email reply


"K Barrett" wrote in message
news:ZoUxb.147124$Dw6.611358@attbi_s02...
Did you compare its pictures side by side with other cameras (and even
your
old one) on the 'Amazing Comparometer? Why anyone would consider a
purchase
and *not* look at actual images the camera produces is beyond me.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

You'll thank me later.

K Barrett

"Diana Kulaga" wrote in message
hlink.net...
All,

Our digital Kodak 260 is now way behind the curve, and we're considering
a
new one. Frank did a bunch of research and found the Panasonic
DMC-FZ10K
Lumix. 4 mp, zoom up to 12x, and an optical image stabilizer, among
other
features. It's priced around $600, which makes puts it in reasonable
range
for us.

Anyone familiar with this camera? I'm sure that if we wanted to spend a
fortune there are better ones available, but we'd like to stay in this
range. I'm particularly interested in getting detail so I can
photograph
some of the smaller orchids.

Any thoughts welcome.

Diana

It saved me from making a bad mistake.

K

"Wendy" wrote in message
news:YNJyb.43612$m24.18257@fed1read02...
This Comparometer is fun! I entered the
Canon EOS-1Ds .......$7169.00
& the
Sony CyberShot DSC-F828 .......$980.00 (new)

Now with my old eyes, my monitor & very little photography knowledge,
I hardly see any difference?

I would rather have the cheaper camera & use the $$ on my orchids! *g*
--
Cheers Wendy
Remove PETERPAN for email reply


"K Barrett" wrote in message
news:ZoUxb.147124$Dw6.611358@attbi_s02...
Did you compare its pictures side by side with other cameras (and even
your
old one) on the 'Amazing Comparometer? Why anyone would consider a
purchase
and *not* look at actual images the camera produces is beyond me.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

You'll thank me later.

K Barrett

"Diana Kulaga" wrote in message
hlink.net...
All,

Our digital Kodak 260 is now way behind the curve, and we're
considering
a
new one. Frank did a bunch of research and found the Panasonic
DMC-FZ10K
Lumix. 4 mp, zoom up to 12x, and an optical image stabilizer, among
other
features. It's priced around $600, which makes puts it in reasonable
range
for us.

Anyone familiar with this camera? I'm sure that if we wanted to spend
a
fortune there are better ones available, but we'd like to stay in this
range. I'm particularly interested in getting detail so I can
photograph
some of the smaller orchids.

Any thoughts welcome.

Diana

Good eyes or bad eyes, you're seeing the image on a computer monitor, which
drastically degrades the quality.

If you plan on only PC displays, don't waste your money. If you plan on
printing and/or enlarging, it's a whole different matter.

--

Ray Barkalow - First Rays Orchids - www.firstrays.com
Plants, Supplies, Books, Artwork, and Lots of Free Info!

.. . . . . . . . . . .
"Wendy" wrote in message
news:YNJyb.43612$m24.18257@fed1read02...
This Comparometer is fun! I entered the
Canon EOS-1Ds .......$7169.00
& the
Sony CyberShot DSC-F828 .......$980.00 (new)

Now with my old eyes, my monitor & very little photography knowledge,
I hardly see any difference?

I would rather have the cheaper camera & use the $$ on my orchids! *g*
--
Cheers Wendy
Remove PETERPAN for email reply


"K Barrett" wrote in message
news:ZoUxb.147124$Dw6.611358@attbi_s02...
Did you compare its pictures side by side with other cameras (and even
your
old one) on the 'Amazing Comparometer? Why anyone would consider a
purchase
and *not* look at actual images the camera produces is beyond me.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

You'll thank me later.

K Barrett

"Diana Kulaga" wrote in message
hlink.net...
All,

Our digital Kodak 260 is now way behind the curve, and we're
considering
a
new one. Frank did a bunch of research and found the Panasonic
DMC-FZ10K
Lumix. 4 mp, zoom up to 12x, and an optical image stabilizer, among
other
features. It's priced around $600, which makes puts it in reasonable
range
for us.

Anyone familiar with this camera? I'm sure that if we wanted to spend
a
fortune there are better ones available, but we'd like to stay in this
range. I'm particularly interested in getting detail so I can
photograph
some of the smaller orchids.

Any thoughts welcome.

Diana

All the digicams I have seen have far less *usable* stop range than
film. 160 Film has about 8 stops and CCDs have half that. On shots
with high contrast (sunlight & shadow), the distortion (what they call
"pixel blooming") is downright ugly. Also low light noise is ugly too
during long exposures. I use analog film for these shots. Something to
be aware of. If the picture is to be low contrast then digital is great.


George

Larry Dighera wrote in message . ..
On 30 Nov 2003 03:44:24 -0800, (larry flink) wrote in
Message-Id: :

The ability to use a "cable release" with the camera is
critical because it eliminates the hand shake factor.

The use of a remote control in place of a cable release is acceptable
or even better at reducing shake blur.

that is true except that most remote controls are "infrared" and must
be used from in front of the camera in order for the sensors to
communicate to each other. That is hard to do if you are working close
up.

Larry

It's considered to be "Super Macro" mode and the quality is better than a
lot of digital slr's.

The distance I don't exactly recall but I know someone who uses SLR's
professionally but uses the Olympus C-5050 when he needs to use a macro
function.

It has to be the best standard type macro on the market........if that's
important to you and let's face it......if you grow orchids then it is
important.

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 1 Dec 2003 17:26:58 +1100, "Bolero"
wrote in Message-Id: :

super macro function is awesome

How close will the Olympus C-5050 focus in macro mode?

The point that digital pictures display differently between computers or
over the web is a given, Ray. The reason for digital images is to be
transported and stored electronically. No one is saying digital images are
better than film.

Within Wendy's 'closed system' of her computer, her monitor and her eyes
(aged or not), she CAN see a difference amongst digital images produced by
various digital cameras.

That's the point.

Consumers can be taught digital quality and purchase the best quality they
can afford, and that's why I like the Amazing Comparometer. You learn what
constitutes a decent image within your closed system and apply that
knowledge to your next purchase. Sort of like wine tasting. If you think
screw tops is all that's out there then yes, a fine wine is wasted on your
palate. If you think one audio system sounds pretty much like another, then
yes, stick with your boom box. If you think one automobile is pretty much
like another then stay with your Toyota. You'll be happy.

K Barrett

"Ray" wrote in message
...
Good eyes or bad eyes, you're seeing the image on a computer monitor,
which
drastically degrades the quality.

If you plan on only PC displays, don't waste your money. If you plan on
printing and/or enlarging, it's a whole different matter.

--

Ray Barkalow - First Rays Orchids - www.firstrays.com
Plants, Supplies, Books, Artwork, and Lots of Free Info!

. . . . . . . . . . .
"Wendy" wrote in message
news:YNJyb.43612$m24.18257@fed1read02...
This Comparometer is fun! I entered the
Canon EOS-1Ds .......$7169.00
& the
Sony CyberShot DSC-F828 .......$980.00 (new)

Now with my old eyes, my monitor & very little photography knowledge,
I hardly see any difference?

I would rather have the cheaper camera & use the $$ on my orchids! *g*
--
Cheers Wendy
Remove PETERPAN for email reply


"K Barrett" wrote in message
news:ZoUxb.147124$Dw6.611358@attbi_s02...
Did you compare its pictures side by side with other cameras (and even
your
old one) on the 'Amazing Comparometer? Why anyone would consider a
purchase
and *not* look at actual images the camera produces is beyond me.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

You'll thank me later.

K Barrett

"Diana Kulaga" wrote in message
hlink.net...
All,

Our digital Kodak 260 is now way behind the curve, and we're
considering
a
new one. Frank did a bunch of research and found the Panasonic
DMC-FZ10K
Lumix. 4 mp, zoom up to 12x, and an optical image stabilizer, among
other
features. It's priced around $600, which makes puts it in
reasonable
range
for us.

Anyone familiar with this camera? I'm sure that if we wanted to
spend
a
fortune there are better ones available, but we'd like to stay in
this
range. I'm particularly interested in getting detail so I can
photograph
some of the smaller orchids.

Any thoughts welcome.

Diana