Cameras

Dan, please stop posting in this thread if you have nothing to add.

Those are pretty cool videos runtohell121, but I think I'm going with the Olympus.



[video=dailymotion;xd7n7i]http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xd7n7i_olympus-stylus-tough-8010-digital-c_tech"[/video]

 

I think that Olympus certainly stole the show with its advertising videos, as nothing on the Sony site even comes close to generating the same sort of visceral excitement that the Tough series clips offer. Olympus is certainly smart about this, not just showing you that the camera can be dunked in water, but dunked in water as an accepted given, while it also survives something brazenly rough that people are prone to do.

That said, there are two features of the Sony DSC-TX5 which, from a photography standpoint, clearly outshines anything in the Tough series. Namely, the TX5 can offer in camera, on the fly stitched panorama using up to 100 samples (the Tough 8010 uses only up to 10 samples); and rapid sequence photography up to 10 frames per second, at full 10.2 megapixel resolution (vs 1.2 FPS at 3MP for the Olympus). Both of these features are very compelling, especially if one is into stop action sequential shooting or wide views. The TX5 also has a slightly larger screen at 3" vs 2.7" for the 8010. But where the Olympus stands above the TX5, is in shutter speed range, from up to 4 seconds, down to 1/2000th (TX5 is 2 secs to 1/1600th) and overall resolution of 14 megapixel (vs 10.2MP for the TX5). I think Sony also made mistakes in not offering the same water resistance for its more upscale models (eg TX9) which come closer to Olympus' higher resolution. Also, rather oddly, I noted this chilling comment on the TX5 site, from a netizen user:

Despite the poor spelling and grammar, the above alone can speak volumes. I think I would go with the Olympus too.

One other feature consideration I would mention because it ultimately impacts on overall usage costs, is the total recognized memory capacity of a camera. My Canon Powershot SD 1400 can recognize up to 16 GB SD memory cards, which means I can shoot up to 4300 photographs at maximum 14 MP resolution. With such a large capacity, I would not have to carry any other memory cards. I've had other cameras which only recognized a maximum of one GB, and thereafter refused to record beyond that. I looked on both Olympus and Sony's sites, and neither seems to be very forthcoming about that specification.

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/digital_cameras/powershot_d10

[video=youtube;aN6zCX9bT5c]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aN6zCX9bT5c"[/video]

It's not a great camera per se, but it is water proof to the same degrees as those offered by Sony. IMHO, their swollen body design is a bit too odd for me. However, their treatment of a strap mount, with four separate choices of bayonet type mount points, is rather uniquely cool.

One final thought; as cameras have become smaller and more featured ladened, makers have to look for ways to make theirs seem better, and withstanding the elements is certainly one of the best ways to distinguish themselves. I think that eventually just about all cameras will have to offer water resistance as a basic feature. Thus, IMHO, within five years or less, no new cameras will be marketed unless they're "water proof" to some degree. Oh, and here's a website for a "real" underwater camera: http://www.sealife-cameras.com/

***Sidebar*** One of the unfortunate requirements about modern filmless cameras is the need for electrical power. As such batteries are a hot commodity; so hot in fact, that suppliers will easily try to rip you off. I remember buying an extra Canon NB-4L battery for $59 at the same time as the camera. Over the subsequent months, I purchased a few more batteries but at substantially less cost, as I found more and more third party sellers, who sold their version of the battery for much less. Then I read an article about battery manufacturers, and it seemed that the Canon and independent batteries generally come from the same manufacturing plant. The only difference is the marking that the maker puts on it, according to who their customers are. Final count, the same $59 canon battery I had purchased, was found listed on Amazon.com for about $0.79 each (plus $3 S/H). One seller even offered it for a penny each but with about $5 bucks S/H. The moral here is, don't buy your extra batteries from the original dealer, as they are probably marked up 74 times what you can get them for (using the original $59 cost versus the observed 79 cent cost). I also looked up the cost for the LI-50B battery (the one required for the Olympus 8010) on Amazon. There were also listings there for anywhere from a penny on up; the original Olympus site sells them for $45, so buyer beware

 

[HIDE=100]lol she's so angry.... makes me want to continue posting offtopic stuff lol[/HIDE]

 

I agree that sensor specs are the key to better images. The Olympus in this case, uses a CCD sensor (the better one), while the Sony uses the CMOS (the less expensive but quality is inferior one). Hence, in this case, not only does the Olympus have a higher MP count, but uses a superior sensor.

Sources: http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/cameras-photography/digital/question362.htm

http://snapsort.com/compare/Olympus_Stylus_Tough_8010-vs-Sony_Cyber-shot_DSC-TX5/specs

The interesting thing about the snapshot comparison, is that Sony beats Olympus mainly because it's a more popular brand; it's lens is slightly faster, it has a slightly wider angle view, and has a larger screen that is also touch. However, Olympus has a larger and better quality sensor, which translates into higher quality pictures. In terms of the water resistance (the primary focus of the OP's question), it also is better depth rated.

Hence, IMHO, the better choice would still be to go with the Olympus.

 

Thanks for the response. One of the more interesting things I've found about listening to technical arguments is noting the choice of what they compare themselves to; ie. we are better than... what? Granted, the article is a bit dated (2008) but the thrust remains germane, it's clear that Sony wants its audience to know that their version of the CMOS is a better version. However, I pointedly noted that they compared it to the old CMOS version, and not to CCD. My uneducated conclusion thus, is yes, Exmor R CMOS is certainly better than regular old CMOS, but still inferior to CCD. If it was better than CCD I doubt that they would have hesitated in saying so.

As for your claim that Sony beats Olympus is not a popularity contest? I respectfully disagree. Popularity does translate to market share and sales. While guys like you and me would look at things like CMOS v CCD, the majority of the world probably couldn't care less. Or as Mrs Ralph would say, "after all, it's a Sony, right? We can't go wrong with that..." LOL...

Popularity (word of mouth, public sentiment) remains very important, IMHO.

 

not entirely, if you CROP photos, u will know that the MP (higher the better) makes it a HUGE difference
try to crop photos with 8MP and 12MP

 

Hmm, it seems like it might just be best to ignore irrelevant posters.

For the rest of you, thank you for yours responses.

The heads up on the battery situation was particularly appreciated.
The first digital camera I had did not come with rechargeable batteries and it had a very short battery life. I remember continually purchasing special batteries for it.

I have decided to purchase my camera later in the year (perhaps a newer model will come out by then or the price may drop) because I don't need it for a while.

If you really do buy an Olympus, ralphrepo, then I'd love an update on how you find it.

 

Gonna have to agree with Ralph. Olympus > Sony

In my opinion, Sony has always been a company that puts aesthetics before performance and over charge you for it. That just doesn't sit well with me.

 

I was told that you were the PA expert on cameras. Thank you for weighing in.

 

noasian is.

It's just a hobby for me. However, I am really picky when it comes to quality products.

 

Nonetheless, I value your opinion.
I have been leaning towards an Olympus and I am fairly certain I'll be buying one.

 

Yeah, Olympus is definitely the better choice. They've been in the optics business long before (27 years to be exact) Sony even opened it's doors.

 

for the past couple of years, London Drugs in BC had sales on the Olympic ones for CHEAP...those are guaranteed to be older models thou

 

LOL, thanks Cailini, but I had just bought the Canon SD 1400, and already Mrs Ralph isn't too keen on me and my toys. I had a Canon SD 940, used it while I was on a trip and found it so easy and comfortable, I just had to get their best model in that line. I gave the 940 to one of my kids and got the 1400 about 2 months ago. So, it's probably going to be much later for me too. But look on the bright side, another few months and either prices will come down, or an even better model will come out, right?

Regarding your first digital camera, unless I miss my guess, they were probably just hard to find rechargeables. Here's a link for general battery supplies: http://www.batteryjunction.com/

Good luck.

BTW, if you don't mind us asking, but where exactly will you be going?

Well, their biggest negative connotation for me was the invention and distribution of the root kit. Their products are also way over priced by competitive comparison. People just buy because of the Sony name like people used to buy Toyotas, LOL... But, like any smart company, they will charge whatever the market will bear, so you can't blame them for that. One just has to look beyond the hype. -what?

True that, Olympus started as a medical optical instruments manufacturer in 1919. It remains one of the world's leading producers of specialized health care use optics. Its PEN and OM system also ran toe to toe with the world's leading Japanese cameras (Nikon and Canon). I actually had an Olympus OM1 way back in the day, and I had found the camera to be an equal then to my Nikon F (yes, I'm that old, thank you very much, LOL...) Sony Corporation got its 1946 start as a radio repair store right after WW2. Their primary focus was on consumer electronics and recording. They had been in the video camera business for years with modern still camera production becoming an outgrowth of the earlier industry as the needs of both milieus have clearly overlapped (video camera takes still photos, while still cameras can now take video). Given that Sony does have its roots in electronics, with the degree of modern camera function consigned to that realm, I wouldn't necessarily dismiss Sony either. Just that in this case, Olympus presents a better case according to the OP's needs. If say, the OP reframed the question and had stated that panorama was the more important, with water resistance as a secondary need, I would have gone with the Sony. Just a matter of getting the right tool for the job.

 

φ: 10° 35' 60 n
λ: 85° 16' 60 w

 

I envy you. I've wanted to go there for years, but life just sort of crept up on me (school, marriage, kids, etc) so I've kept putting it off and now I think I've missed my chance; too old, too little money... <sigh>

Enjoy your trip. I'm sure you'll love Costa Rica, and I'm personally gratified that there are people out there who can actually read a map. Kudos. -lol