Waterproof digital Cameras:

[chipmaster]

This ? comes up a lot, about what are the options if one needs a digital camera for beach, water, or mountains. There are now a few more models to choose from and like DSLR and P&S every manufacture brings something different.

 

Here is a link reviewing the current offerings:

 

http://www.popphoto.com/Features/The-5-Best-Waterproof-Compact-Cameras

[michelle1836]

Glad you posted this. But I didnt really want to spend that much since I am getting a new Panasonic. Are there any good options out there that are less expensive?

[chipmaster]

Glad you posted this. But I didnt really want to spend that much since I am getting a new Panasonic. Are there any good options out there that are less expensive?

 

Search Olympus Stylus 850SW on Amazon, its last years Olympus offering for $162, a very good deal, even in blue :p

[michelle1836]

but the pink one is only $152 and the yellow $199? didnt know that the color made such a difference. I cant see the pictures of the cameras at work so I will have to check it out at home. Guess anything less expensive (under $100) is not really worth it?

[chipmaster]

Here is a review I found for the 850.

http://www.cnet.com.au/olympus-tough-lite-850sw-339285354.htm

 

Overall at the time of its release it was a middle of the road camera. They charged a premium at the time for its rugged features. The pictures are likely to be more then adequate for web pictures and 4x6 as well in good light. One thing it does NOT have is any type of image stabilization, but for under 200 bucks you can't find both water/shock and stabilization yet, maybe next year ;)

[MamaParrotHead]

Here is a review I found for the 850.

http://www.cnet.com.au/olympus-tough-lite-850sw-339285354.htm

 

Overall at the time of its release it was a middle of the road camera. They charged a premium at the time for its rugged features. The pictures are likely to be more then adequate for web pictures and 4x6 as well in good light. One thing it does NOT have is any type of image stabilization, but for under 200 bucks you can't find both water/shock and stabilization yet, maybe next year ;)

 

The 850 SW does have image stabilization, just FYI.

[chipmaster]

The 850 SW does have image stabilization, just FYI.

 

Techically it does NOT have stabilization. What it has is ISO boost, this is often marketed as image stabilization. All this does is boost the sensor senstivity, shorten the shutter speed to attempt to reduce motion ( user and subject ). This results in usually higher noise for these small sensor P&S. Its a cheap and dirt marketing trick, but does help your pictures if subject motion is the issue. For the best true image stabilization you need the camera to either have sensor or lense based image stabilizaton. Any camera that in the fine print says "digital" image stabilization is playing an ISO game.

 

Cheers

 

http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/product.asp?product=1365

[pierces]

Techically it does NOT have stabilization. What it has is ISO boost, this is often marketed as image stabilization. All this does is boost the sensor senstivity, shorten the shutter speed to attempt to reduce motion ( user and subject ). This results in usually higher noise for these small sensor P&S. Its a cheap and dirt marketing trick, but does help your pictures if subject motion is the issue. For the best true image stabilization you need the camera to either have sensor or lense based image stabilizaton. Any camera that in the fine print says "digital" image stabilization is playing an ISO game.

 

Cheers

 

http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/product.asp?product=1365

 

Good post chipmaster! That is an important distinction between stabilization and compensation. ISO Boost as you described will indeed result in higher ISO shots that can get pretty noisy on the small-chipped cameras.

 

I will add my personal note that the photo you take will always be better than the one you didn't, and a high-ISO shot may capture an important image where a camera with no form of "stabilization" whould have missed it.

 

That said, it's good to let people know about the potential loss of image quality.

 

Cheers yourself, sir!

 

Dave

[sunshine 229]

of the five cameras mentioned in that link in the first post, has anyone here used any of them and if so, what did you think?

 

I'd like a camera that can be taken in wet or rough conditions but don't want to sacrifice too much in quality.

 

My local camera store guy recommended the Olympus 8000 because of its toughness but a coupls of reviews I've read have been uncomplimentary about the image quality at high ISO..too much noise, it seems.

 

Any opinions?

[back to the islands]

I am wanting to buy an underwater camera because the ones I took around St. John last year with a disposable were a joke! However, I am not a "camera" person. I'll have to learn any gadgets because I am only good at point and shoot. My husband is a much better photographer. I've been looking at the olympus offerings, pentax, and now there is the new canon. For a novice like myself, any suggestions? There are a lot of bells and whistles I wouldn't understand, but have a beach trip and a cruise coming up.

[chipmaster]

Here is a review for the Canon: http://www.steves-digicams.com/2009_reviews/canon_d10_conclusion.html

 

With digital P&S you can generally be safe to assume that the Canon's for the most part reside in the top 1/3 of pack.

 

You might google the "modelname review" and see what comes up. Most reviews will highlight some design/image tradeoff as these cameras have small sensors, small buttons, small lense and are trying to cram a lot of feature into s very small space and still make a proft. None of these cameras can take pictures as fast, nor of the same high quality of a DSLR, nor focus as fast etc. etc. But they are about 10x smaller and in general all of these models will yield acceptible pictures for the web and 4x6 for your scrap book.

 

If you are looking for 8x10 you need to be careful as your composition and settings will likely matter more then the camera you use, but again a DSLR for difficult shooting will ALWAYS yield a higher quality image in difficult conditions ( low light, fast action etc.. That said, one of my best 8x10 came from a not very highly reviewed Pentax. It was taken in good light on top of a snowy mountain right after a snow storm in auto mode.

 

The difference between the cameras is more about feature/price/ergo. They will all likey yield descent results. Go to the store and check the buttons and usage to make sure they will work for you with gloves on, in the water, etc. I'm actually very close to going to Amazon and getting the old Olympus model for 160 bucks, even without image stabilization :o

 

 

Features that I'd suggest they have:

1) Zoom lense that is 28mm equavalent on wide. You really want this versus 35mm

2) Image stabilization, it helps with poorer lighting. DO NOT fall for gimicking marketing that say "DIGITAL" stabilization or ISO BOOST as these aren't camera/shooter motion reduction technology.

3) Worry less about depth, unless you are scuba 10ft is likely deep enough for most of us. How many of you have every tried going to the bottom dive area of your local pool know that 10ft is pretty deep already!

 

 

Happy shopping!

[chipmaster]

of the five cameras mentioned in that link in the first post, has anyone here used any of them and if so, what did you think?

 

I'd like a camera that can be taken in wet or rough conditions but don't want to sacrifice too much in quality.

 

My local camera store guy recommended the Olympus 8000 because of its toughness but a coupls of reviews I've read have been uncomplimentary about the image quality at high ISO..too much noise, it seems.

 

Any opinions?

 

No point and shoot does well at much more then 2x above base ISO. The physics of cramming soo many pixels in such a small area results in this.

 

The FUJI P&S had a reputation a few years back of being very good low noise performers. I've not read much of their newer offerings. Lets face it P&S are become like commodity products. Soon we'll likely take most of our pictures with our phones :eek:

 

It would be neat if a camera company would junk the megapixel race and offer us a 4 meg camera that has real ISO 3200 performance. I'd by it in a snap as that will yield far better pictures for us most of the times then the current crop of 12 Meg that tout high ISO but actually are very bad at anythign above ISO 400. But people are sold in pixels and less ISO.

[sunshine 229]

Thanks for your input. I agree that, for me at least, the 10 foot depth should be enough, I'm not taking it scuba diving - maybe a little snorkeling, but mostly wanted something that could go out on a boat in choppy waters, white water rafting, or on a rainy day, with out me having to worry about keeping the camera dry.

 

I'm leaning towards the panasonic because it seems to have the best zoom range as well as the image stabilizer - it is also the pricey-ist too though, where I live about $100 more than the Canon.

 

I also prefer the way it feels in my hand, although all of them have mini-buttons which I find it hard to imagine working with gloves.

 

I really wish it was possible to take both out for a test run but I don't think that is going to happen.

[mmr923]

I have owned the Pentax for about 2 1/2 years now - it has been under water in San Juan and in St. Thomas, and in natural springs in Florida where I live. It has also taken photos in the pouring rain in Florida and in the rain forest in Puerto Rico. It has also taken very nice photos (during rain and not!) on land. I have received many compliments on some of the photos I took in Spain with it last April. I do have a DSLR now (was a Christmas present), which is also a Pentax, and is "weather proof" but not waterproof - I plan on taking both on my mediterranean cruise this August. The DSLR photos are superior, there is no question - but I can't dunk the DSLR under water and go swimming with it! It's fun and much better than a disposable water camera. I highly recommend it! :) I'm happy to answer questions directed to my e-mail address if anyone has any.