Olympus C-700 10x optical zoom digital camera for $480 shipped + free Olympus 64MB Smartmedia card @OfficeDepot.com

[docinthebox]

OfficeDepot.com has the Olympus C-700 digital camera for:

$600
- $120 (20% off $50 coupon at OfficeDepot.com (expires 12/31))
----------------------------
= $480
and you get a free Olympus 64MB Smartmedia card with this mail-in offer from the manufacturer

Features:
- 10x optical zoom which I think can be very useful for outdoor photography. It claims to be the world's smallest 10x optical zoom digital camera.
- AutoConnect USB (the camera shows up as a hard drive on your PC which makes it easy for drag and drop.
- QuickTime movie mode (allows up to 4 seconds of sound recording with each picture).

The features make up for the relatively low resolution of 2.1 megapixels for its price.


If you don't care about optical zoom, get the HP PhotoSmart 318 digital camera instead. OfficeDepot.com has it for:

$199
- $40 (20% off $50 coupon at OfficeDepot.com (expires 12/31))
---------------------------------------------------------------
= $160

Not bad for a 2.31 megapixel camera. It has 2x digital zoom but no optical zoom.

 

[GTFan]

For even more fun with this deal, use your Amex Blue to PM here and save another $197, making your net $283 shipped. Then Ebay the thing and buy a Nikon...

<ducking>

 

[docinthebox]

LOL...

 

[StringAttached]

You'll only get the difference between this price and what you actually paid after coupon - $77, not $197. Still $403 is a good price considering free 64MB Smartmedia card.

 

[Siamskunk]

one catch, if the OD receipt shows that the camera comes with Free memory, then they might bug your claim saying it's not the same offer............don't assume this is 100%.

I just thought that you might get a problem.

But so far, Amex BVG has been nice to me. I got checks for all my claims.

 

[wluk]

that's a good price for the 10x optical zoom digital camera.

 

[Sepen]

Good camera and deal. I was in Comp Monday and they have the C-2100, the big and better brother to the 700 for $499.99 now. Was $599.99 prior tp the reduction. I was so tempted.

 

[aceshigh73]

The 700 model doesnt have image stabalization so you better have a steady hand if you want to use that 10x Zoom... I shake like Howard Cosel so im still debating whether to go with this camera (which is really nice and compact) or go with the C-3030 or 3040 models.... The 2100 does have image stabalization, but its ALOT bulkier....

 

[seniorguy]

"I shake like Howard Cosel" , this is not too bad,

I shake like Rodney Dangerfield...

As a rule of thumb, for 35mm cameras, you would use a shutter speed the inverse of the focal length. For example, if you have to go to the max for this camera, you have to go the 1/500 of a sec. The min shutter setting you have to use is about 5.6 for outdoor daylight with ASA setting of 100. In other words, this camera is best for doing Safari or ski competition. It would be cutting very close to use medium tele for day light suburb scene. However, for doing normal to 100mm equivalent of 35mm (or 7-12 mm in digital camera terms), this is great. The question is, if you are not going to take this to Safari, then it make sense to buy a camera with a 3X zoom instead of the 10X zoom. It is less weight, smaller, and cheaper. With that amount of money, you can also buy a 3.3 M pixel with a 5.5 - 13 mm digital camera.

You can always use a tripod. If I have to use the long lense setting, I definitely would go for the one with image stablizer. Or, if you are a champion sharpshooter, then you don't have to worry about shaking like Howard Cosel.

 

[Fritzo]

<< Good camera and deal. I was in Comp Monday and they have the C-2100, the big and better brother to the 700 for $499.99 now. Was $599.99 prior tp the reduction. I was so tempted. >>



I'd recommend spending the extra coin on the C-2100 anyway. It's the second generation version of the C-700 and has a lot of design improvements.

 

[Fritzo]

<< The 700 model doesnt have image stabalization so you better have a steady hand if you want to use that 10x Zoom... I shake like Howard Cosel so im still debating whether to go with this camera (which is really nice and compact) or go with the C-3030 or 3040 models.... The 2100 does have image stabalization, but its ALOT bulkier.... >>



You must have a pretty steady hand...Howard's hands have been absolutely still for about 20 years now heheheh.

 

[Fritzo]

<< "I shake like Howard Cosel" , this is not too bad,

I shake like Rodney Dangerfield...

As a rule of thumb, for 35mm cameras, you would use a shutter speed the inverse of the focal length. For example, if you have to go to the max for this camera, you have to go the 1/500 of a sec. The min shutter setting you have to use is about 5.6 for outdoor daylight with ASA setting of 100. In other words, this camera is best for doing Safari or ski competition. It would be cutting very close to use medium tele for day light suburb scene. However, for doing normal to 100mm equivalent of 35mm (or 7-12 mm in digital camera terms), this is great. The question is, if you are not going to take this to Safari, then it make sense to buy a camera with a 3X zoom instead of the 10X zoom. It is less weight, smaller, and cheaper. With that amount of money, you can also buy a 3.3 M pixel with a 5.5 - 13 mm digital camera.

You can always use a tripod. If I have to use the long lense setting, I definitely would go for the one with image stablizer. Or, if you are a champion sharpshooter, then you don't have to worry about shaking like Howard Cosel. >>



So you're saying, the higher the zoom, the faster you should set your shutter speed? I'll have to try that. BTW- I found the 3X zoom on my Oly 3000z more than adequate. 10x seem like overkill.

 

[SsZERO]

10x is far from overkill when you are used to at least 10x-20x optical zooming on 35mm SLRs.

Yeah, you need to set your shutter speed to a higher setting because when you zoom in on something, the picture is more susceptible to jitters and shakes. The way to get around this is simply to use a tripod, and if possible, a remote shutter actuation cord.

-= SsZERO =-

 

[davisdog]

SsZero,

your used to a 760mm Lens (equivalent to 20x)...hmmm...

I bet a 380mm Lens (10x equivalent on the 700UZ) is more than ~99% of the folks here have ever used in a 35mm camera

Here's the closest equivalent I could find for my Pentax 35mm SLR

PTX27910
FA 250-600 f5.6 Zoom
(with trunk case)
$8,150.00

 

[seniorguy]

So you're saying, the higher the zoom, the faster you should set your shutter speed? I'll have to try that. BTW- I found the 3X zoom on my Oly 3000z more than adequate. 10x seem like overkill.


YES.... For 35mm cameras, if you are using a 200mm lens, you should use at least a 1/200 speed, or 1/500 for a 500 lens which is usually a mirror lens.

For normal shooting, a 135mm (the max tele of an equiv 995 Nikon) is the most you would do. The range of 85mm-135mm lenses in 35mm camera are great for taking pic of people since the mild telephoto effect will make the nose smaller and background blur. For Nikon 995, set it to zoom 2x to 3x range.

Another problem with the telephoto is focusing. Since the depth of view is so shallow, you may find autofocus camera may not focus on your subject correctly very often. Worse for tele pictures than for wide angle pictures. For digital camera with a very small LCD viewfinder, you may not find the subject out of focus until you displayed this pic on the monitor later.

 

[aceshigh73]

seniorguy.... thanks for all that info....
I was originally leaning towards the Olympus brand, but i just found/created a great price on the Minolta S304 camera.
3.3 Megapix, 4x Optical, Compact Flash, regular AA (use Nimh) batteries, decent size and excellent reviews on the sites....

pricematched at 800.com with cameraworld.com "email me for better price" and got 2nd Day Air shipping.. $414.94
most places are $499 and up for this camera. and since i bought it from 800.com with my Amex blue, im going to try to
use the BVG to pricematch it down to other sites..... I dont know if i can do this, but im better off doing it from 800.com then Cameraworld... Even if it doesnt work, 414.94 is a great price on a real nice camera....

Anybody need a Canon s110??? Gonna go up on ebay real soon...

 

[whizbang]

<< I shake like Rodney Dangerfield... >>

Ummm, he's dead. I don't imagine he shakes too much. In fact, he's probably completely still...

 

[SsZERO]

Sure, I enjoy taking pictures from far away...and my lens is actually a spotting scope with a 200-4000mm zoom...that is 20x, for the mathematically challenged among us. I was speaking for myself, not 99% of the people here.

The 250-600mm lens you mentioned only offers a 2.4x zoom factor. How is that close to 20x? I am guessing you have a basic understanding of photography. The lens below is a very high quality zoom, but nowhere close to 20x or even 10x.

Anyhow, back to digital cameras...digicams generally have smaller lenses than a 35mm SLR, so increasing the optical zoom is not difficult at all. A 8-80mm zoom (10x), is still fairly small, and not difficult to implement on digicams and camcorders. As is usually the case, the greater the optical zoom factor, the lower image quality you get from the lens. Even so, my camcorder has 8-160mm zoom (20x) and the image quality is superb. There's no reason not to have decent optical zoom levels on digicams, such as 10x, 15x or 20x...especially since the reduced quality would not be very noticeable, and 99% of the people here wouldn't even perceive a loss of image quality anyway.

-= SsZERO =-



<< SsZero,

your used to a 760mm Lens (equivalent to 20x)...hmmm...

I bet a 380mm Lens (10x equivalent on the 700UZ) is more than ~99% of the folks here have ever used in a 35mm camera

Here's the closest equivalent I could find for my Pentax 35mm SLR

PTX27910
FA 250-600 f5.6 Zoom
(with trunk case)
$8,150.00

>>

 

[hconnorjr]

the fancy zoom aside, this is an expensive camera for that many pixels. go for it if you like, but i prefer more pixels at that price point.

 

[skriefal]

<< I'd recommend spending the extra coin on the C-2100 anyway. It's the second generation version of the C-700 and has a lot of design improvements >>



Actually, the C-700 is the newer version. The 2100 is an older model, but it does have one nice additional feature that the 700 lacks: image stabilization. But it's also larger than the 700.

 

[dimwit]

<< I shake like Rodney Dangerfield... >>

Ummm, he's dead.

I think the rumors of his death are greatly exaggerated.

 

[azkiwi]

<< Actually, the C-700 is the newer version. The 2100 is an older model, but it does have one nice additional feature that the 700 lacks: image stabilization. But it's also larger than the 700. >>



This is an essential point. Both cameras share the same CCD I think and there isn't much difference in the image production system aside from the image stabilization. The 700 is a great camera - unsurpassed for zoom and pocket sized dimensions. FOr a take anywhere camera for candids - nothing else comes close. The 2100 is an around your neck camera, the 700 will fit in a jacket pocket. The 10X zoom doesn't just mean big images of far away objects, it means a terrific ability to frame your shot. Its also (somewhat) easier to control shake on a pocket camera than a pro 35mm with a 15lb lens.

Finally, 2MPs is quite sufficient for most applications short of high quality 8X10s and commercial needs.

 

[seniorguy]

I read an article published not long ago recommended 2M pixel cameras as the choice for replacing most point and shoot cameras. The rational is that 99% of the time, pictures are printed on up to 4x6 papers. Not many people can tell if a 4x6 printed picture is printed from a 2M or 3M pixel cameras. Having used digital cameras for a number of years and many before that on high end SLR cameras including large format, I tend to agree with this assessment.

If you read the spec of the camera carefully, you would find a 3M pixel camera yield max pic size of 2048 x 1536 on average, a 4M is approx 2272 x 1536, or a 5M is 2560 x 1920. Most 2M pixel cameras are having a resolution of 1800 x 1200. If you are going to print it on a 4x6 paper, you don't have to crop a 1800x1200 pixel picture. For a 3M camera, the max usable pic size is 2048 x 1365 pixel. You are gaining only 248 x 165 pixel or 13% more pixel horizontally and vertically from a 3M pixel camera than a 2M pixel camera. A 3M pixel sounds much better than a 2M but in reality you are gaining only 13% more each side.

You can improve the quality by using the 'FINE' or "BEST" compression setting, and print pictures using a higher dpi setting, as well as using software to made adjustment to pictures. You will be surprised that you may end up with a better looking picture than those with a higher pixel pictures. Camera is a tool, as long as you know the limitation, you will always take great pictures.

Prices for a 2M pixel camera is very reasonable. I would say the best value per pixel for those interested in meaningful numbers.

 

[greg]

>>that's a good price for the 10x optical zoom digital camera.

I owned this last year - if you are into zooms, try the Fujifilm 2800. It has a 6x zoom, the oly pics are nice, but not worth the extra bills over the 2800.

 

[greg]

Don't forget to add ther $40-50 tax