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

Discussion in 'Olympus' started by Daniel, Sep 29, 2003.

  1. Daniel

    Daniel Guest

    Which one should I buy?
    I will be doing some underwater photographing,
    so I guess the 1.8 optics of the C-5050 could be
    useful, so could the 5.7 (27mm) optics of the C-5060.
    And the 10x zoom of the C-750 would be good for a
    future safari. The C-750 is also the smallest one.
    What do you think, any experience?

    Thanks!

    /Daniel
     
    Daniel, Sep 29, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Daniel

    Ms. Jaime Guest

    I would say get a camera that is capable of underwater photography.

    As far as I know there is *no* underwater housing for the 750
    but it would be good for a land safari I suppose.

    You doing the *Survivor* thing? LOL

    Ms.Jaime
     
    Ms. Jaime, Sep 29, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Daniel

    Tore Lund Guest

    Tore Lund, Sep 29, 2003
    #3
  4. Daniel

    Daniel Guest

    Which one should I buy?
    Actually Olympus makes their own uw-housings for this
    and many other models, for the C-750 it's called PT-018,
    and costs less than $200.

    /Daniel
     
    Daniel, Sep 29, 2003
    #4
  5. Daniel

    gr Guest

    Between the 2 cameras, I think the C-5050 is still by far the better camera.
    It has a f/1.8 zoom, while the C-5060 zoom will only be f/2.8 (and much
    slower on the long end). Also, the C-5060 will use proprietary LiIon
    batteries. (Why is Olympus doing that?!?)

    The C-5060 isn't worth it, unless you really need that 27mm wide angle. It
    seems like a step backwards from the C-5050, but maybe they plan to sell it
    for less.
     
    gr, Sep 29, 2003
    #5
  6. Daniel

    G Winstanley Guest

    I've got the C-5050Z and the PT-015 housing and it seems like a great combo.
    To get really good lighting you would need a separate digital slave strobe,
    but it depends if your serious or want to play around. Anyway, I'm very
    content with my purchase. The photos below were taken with the built-in
    flash, not a slave.

    http://www.snaq.net/PhotoAlbum/CA2003/P4270382.jpg
    http://www.snaq.net/PhotoAlbum/CA2003/P5020405.jpg
    http://www.snaq.net/PhotoAlbum/CA2003/P5020407.jpg

    Stan
     
    G Winstanley, Sep 29, 2003
    #6
  7. Daniel

    Ms. Jaime Guest

    Ms. Jaime, Sep 30, 2003
    #7
  8. Daniel

    Folklore Guest

    I've had the 750 for about 3 months, packed all over Europe with it as
    well as some other stuff. I've shot about 12,000 images so far and
    really love it. Image quality (res & colour) is excellent up to 8x10
    and decent at 11x14. Manual control is good though I wouldn't mind
    changing a few things on the menus. Zoom has been extremely
    beneficial and macro mode works well. Biggest drawback is the time
    delay from pressing shutter until pic is recorded which has caused me
    to miss a few quick moving animals (and one Lambourgini).
     
    Folklore, Sep 30, 2003
    #8
  9. Daniel

    Ms. Jaime Guest

    Good to know and the price is right. Thanks. :)

    Ms.Jaime
     
    Ms. Jaime, Sep 30, 2003
    #9
  10. Daniel

    G Winstanley Guest

    It seems fairly tough as housings go. It's clear polycarbonate which is good
    for seeing things on the camera itself, and whether it might have flooded
    (hope not!). Only slightly awkward thing is really the adjustment dial which
    definitely requires two-handed use to make the adjustments. Once they are
    made you can shoot with one hand, but to achieve the stability you are
    likely to want underwater I would recommend two hands on camera. You will
    need very accurate weighting to achieve stability underwater when
    snorkelling though. As for gloves...not tried it myself, but I'm sure you
    could.

    Once other thing...it's very susceptible to lens fogging due to temperature
    change, so make sure you pack lots of silica gel to put inside the housing,
    but this is usual for underwater housings.

    Stan
     
    G Winstanley, Sep 30, 2003
    #10
  11. Daniel

    Alfred Molon Guest

    The shots are nice, but you need to adjust the colours - either change
    the white balance or increase saturation.
     
    Alfred Molon, Sep 30, 2003
    #11
  12. Daniel

    G Winstanley Guest

    OK, technically it's called the "jog dial" and it's on the rear-right of the
    C5050 underneath the "mode dial" and the on/off lever. Normally you would
    use your right thumb to simply "jog" the dial, but in the PT-015 housing
    it's transferred on a stalk to a knob which needs turning with a
    thumb/finger combo, meaning that another hand is required to stabilise the
    unit while doing this.

    Pictures are *so* much easier sometimes!

    Stan
     
    G Winstanley, Oct 1, 2003
    #12
  13. Daniel

    G Winstanley Guest

    Could you be a bit more explicit? I have made some adjustments already, but
    I was trying to make them as close to what I actually saw as possible,
    rather than to draw out as much colour information as possible. I'd be
    interested in knowing your viewpoint.

    Stan
     
    G Winstanley, Oct 1, 2003
    #13
  14. Daniel

    Alfred Molon Guest

    Trying to be more specific. Here is your original shot:
    http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~slink/PhotoAlbum/CA2003/P5020407.jpg

    and here is how I modified it:
    http://www.pics1.de/P5020407a.jpg

    I did the following:
    - WB adjustment (more red)
    - less contrast
    - WB adjustment (more yellow)
    - strong saturation boost
    - unsharp mask to increase sharpness
    - in levels push dark point more to the right

    Let me know what you think.
     
    Alfred Molon, Oct 6, 2003
    #14
  15. Daniel

    G Winstanley Guest

    Yes, I like it. I was originally trying to get a feel similar to that which
    you get underwater which inevitably has more blue, but I like the result
    you've achieved, even if it's a rare site when underwater! I agree that I
    overdid the contrast a little, and by using the original I could regain some
    lost info there. Saturation boost definitely needed. I think I forgot it
    with that one. I was doing them late at night, so perhaps my eyesite wasn't
    all it could have been.

    I deliberately avoided sharpening as there is a significant amount of
    scatterback which gets "sharpened" too and thereby diminishes the image. As
    for "in levels push dark point more to the right", do you mean to set the
    dark point to a lighter shade? Surely that would eliminate more information?
    I guess it could slightly increase the tonal range when done from the
    original, but that is simply allowing greater contrast again, when you've
    already lowered that.

    Stan
     
    G Winstanley, Oct 6, 2003
    #15
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.