 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / General Photo Topics / UK Photography / March 2006Aldi camera
Super-compact 5 Mega Pixel Digital Camera http://uk.aldi.com/ 5 mega pixels Digital zoom 4.0 1.7" TFT CCD display Movie/sound capture Webcam with tripod CCD technology 24-bit colour depth 320 x 240 24 fps 32MB internal memory SD cards up to 512MB 10-second self-timer USB 2.0 connection Software: Photo Explorer, Photo Express I haven't a digital camera. This one is fifty quid. Is it worth it at that price? Main use would be to easily and quickly pass images around the 'net, or print on ordinary paper for "ideas". > Super-compact 5 Mega Pixel Digital Camera > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > at that price? Main use would be to easily and quickly pass images > around the 'net, or print on ordinary paper for "ideas". Provided you aren't too bothered about lens quality it should be OK. However if you look around you will find Olympus cameras at little more that a ton and there is no comparison in terms of build or optical quality. If you buy cheap you get cheap, and poor results down to the camera could put you off digital photography for life. -- Woody harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com > "Chris Bacon" wrote... >>Super-compact 5 Mega Pixel Digital Camera [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > more that a ton and there is no comparison in terms of build or > optical quality. What have you in mind, remembering that I have extremely limited knowledge of photography, in the Olympus line, at £100? > If you buy cheap you get cheap, and poor results down to the camera > could put you off digital photography for life. Is a £100 Olympus going to be that much better for the extra £50? Any advice will be much appreciated. > > "Chris Bacon" wrote... > >>Super-compact 5 Mega Pixel Digital Camera [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > more that a ton and there is no comparison in terms of build or > > optical quality. > What have you in mind, remembering that I have extremely limited > knowledge of photography, in the Olympus line, at £100? > > If you buy cheap you get cheap, and poor results down to the camera > > could put you off digital photography for life. > Is a £100 Olympus going to be that much better for the extra £50? > Any advice will be much appreciated. If you're going close to 100 GBP there are plenty of far better choices - not just Olympus (actually not my choice but here it gets personal preference!). Look at www.steves-digicams.com for reviews and http://www.equipmentexpress.co.uk/shop/acatalog/info.html and http://www.jessops.com/shop.cfm for prices. Jessops had the Canon A410 at under 100 and that I can recommend.  SignatureJohn Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com 0845 006 8822 Qercus magazine FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 www.finnybank.com Qercus - the best guide to RISC OS computing >Jessops had the Canon A410 at under 100 and that I can recommend. They did, then literally the next day after I recommended it to someone they took it off the site. Frink SignatureDoctor J. Frink : 'Rampant Ribald Ringtail' See his mind here : http://www.cmp.liv.ac.uk/frink/ Annoy his mind here : pjf at cmp dot liv dot ack dot ook "No sir, I didn't like it!" - Mr Horse > > > "Chris Bacon" wrote... > > >>Super-compact 5 Mega Pixel Digital Camera [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > -- Beat me to it - but exactly what I would have replied. Any of the known brands from film days - Minolta, Canon, Nikon, Pentax, or Olympus - will have a far better lens and build quality than anything from Aldi. Having said that in this realm Pentax don't seem quite so good as the others. Some - but not all - use AA batteries so you will never be without power if you get one of that kind (and use lithium cells.) One thing that is annoying with a digi is shutter lag - how long between pressing the shutter and the picture being taken. The Olympus is not one of the fastest, nor is Nikon; on the other hand Canon and Ricoh (who had a good name in 35mm compacts) are like lightning by comparison. As the response above says, go web digging and then come back here if you want more help or advice. Steves-digicams is a particularly good site. -- Woody harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com >Any of the known brands from film days - Minolta, Canon, Nikon, >Pentax, or Olympus - will have a far better lens and build quality >than anything from Aldi. Previously, Aldi offered an own brand 5 MP digicam with an optical zoom lens, costing about £179 when anything comparable cost at least 50% more and usually more than double. The camera was made by Toshiba and was of excellent quality. The lens was particularly good, giving excellent sharpness and very low distortion. My point? That you should not condemn a camera simply because it is sold by Aldi. £49 is not a lot to pay and the vast majority of buyers will no doubt be delighted with their purchase. The point is well made that you are likely to have to pay at least £100 to get something significantly better. So for basic use, it's likely to be just fine. > >Any of the known brands from film days - Minolta, Canon, Nikon, > >Pentax, or Olympus - will have a far better lens and build quality > >than anything from Aldi. > Previously, Aldi offered an own brand 5 MP digicam with an optical > zoom lens, costing about £179 when anything comparable cost at least > 50% more and usually more than double. > The camera was made by Toshiba and was of excellent quality. The lens > was particularly good, giving excellent sharpness and very low > distortion. > My point? That you should not condemn a camera simply because it is > sold by Aldi. £49 is not a lot to pay and the vast majority of buyers > will no doubt be delighted with their purchase. > The point is well made that you are likely to have to pay at least > £100 to get something significantly better. So for basic use, it's > likely to be just fine. From the spec no optical zoom is poor - and it could very well be a battery eater being a cheap camera with internal memory. Either could make you want to chuck the camera before you got your money's worth. Of course if you can check its (equivalent) model number and look for reviews then it's another matter. SignatureJohn Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com 0845 006 8822 Qercus magazine FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 www.finnybank.com Qercus - the best guide to RISC OS computing > From the spec no optical zoom is poor - and it could very well be a battery > eater being a cheap camera with internal memory. Either could make you want to > chuck the camera before you got your money's worth. Of course if you can check > its (equivalent) model number and look for reviews then it's another matter. It looks very much like the camera at: http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?ModuleNo=48729&criteria=digital%20CAMERA&doy=10m3 which has "DS-5080" written on it, except that the Aldi thing has twice the "internal memory", whatever that is, and comes with odds and ends including a "usb cable". What's "1x optical zoop"? No zoom? > > From the spec no optical zoom is poor - and it could very well be a battery > > eater being a cheap camera with internal memory. Either could make you want to > > chuck the camera before you got your money's worth. Of course if you can check > > its (equivalent) model number and look for reviews then it's another matter. > > It looks very much like the camera at: http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?ModuleNo=48729&criteria=digital%20 CAMERA&doy=10m3 > which has "DS-5080" written on it, except that the Aldi thing has twice > the "internal memory", whatever that is, and comes with odds and ends > including a "usb cable". > > What's "1x optical zoop"? No zoom? Internal memory is simply that - memory residing inside the camera, rather than the memory card. It's usually enough to take about four shots at best quality. 1x zoom is just what you say - no zoom. Trade Descriptions Act anyone? -- Woody harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com > >Any of the known brands from film days - Minolta, Canon, Nikon, > >Pentax, or Olympus - will have a far better lens and build quality [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > £100 to get something significantly better. So for basic use, it's > likely to be just fine. Indeed I would be the last to condemn anything from Aldi - try getting decent pickled (red) cabbage anywhere else at 69p/jar! In terms of the camera, my f-in-l is an Aldi adict and bought a 5Mp with zoom from them for (IMSMC) 129.95 about two years ago. The only time it takes good pictures is in bright sunlight focussed at infinity - anything else is sheer wishful thinking! -- Woody harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com > Indeed I would be the last to condemn anything from Aldi - try getting > decent pickled (red) cabbage anywhere else at 69p/jar! I make my own starting with a packet of seeds for £1.49 and perhaps the same again for muck, fertilizer and some spices in vinegar and the cabbages keep for months. The taste is wonderful, in fact I think a cheese sandwich is called for now :-) yum yum Jem ------------------------------------- Birmingham Independent Photographers http://bip.wikispaces.com/ '1x zoom' indeed. Cheek! > > Indeed I would be the last to condemn anything from Aldi - try getting > > decent pickled (red) cabbage anywhere else at 69p/jar! [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Birmingham Independent Photographers > http://bip.wikispaces.com/ > Is a £100 Olympus going to be that much better for the extra £50? > Any advice will be much appreciated. I have always been happy with the quality of pictures (apart from my lack of photo ability) and the build quality of Olympus cameras. Last year I changed my Olympus for a Fujifilm s5500 and really not as happy as I was with Olympus. If I buy another camera I will go back to Olympus. The pictures just seem so much clearer. > > Is a £100 Olympus going to be that much better for the extra £50? > > Any advice will be much appreciated. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > If I buy another camera I will go back to Olympus. The pictures just seem > so much clearer. Strange, as I have recently got a Fuji S5500, and find it an absolutely excellent digi camera.I have never owned a high end digi camera (and have no desire to), but this little Fuji gives excellent results for the use I put it to. Alan. SignatureTo reply by e-mail, change the ' + ' to 'plus'. > Strange, as I have recently got a Fuji S5500, and find it an > absolutely excellent digi camera.I have never owned a high end digi > camera (and have no desire to), but this little Fuji gives excellent > results for the use I put it to. > Alan. It is an excellent camera. There are some features where it is better than my Olympus, like shutter response time and things like that. There are also some features where I think it falls down against my Olympus - the zoom lens being one of them. On the old Olympus 720 I could combine the optical and digital to get a 24x zoom (8x3 respectively). But on this Fuji if I want to combine the zooms, I have to have the pictures at a lower quality setting (1mp) and its like it tacks on an extra bit of digital on the end, its really weird. Its this zoom bit which lets it down a bit for me. My comment on the pictures being not as clear should be retracted. That is an unfair comment from me as I have not run off enough prints in the past year to make a good enough comparison. Beck <beck@photoscene.coo.ukk> observed >> Strange, as I have recently got a Fuji S5500, and find it an >> absolutely excellent digi camera.I have never owned a high end digi [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >really weird. >Its this zoom bit which lets it down a bit for me. You clearly don't understand what digital zoom is. In effect, it takes the centre of your picture and enlarges it to the whole frame size. You gain nothing that was not already there on the 'non-digizoomed' picture. If you do anything with the picture on your computer you can carry it out there, and possibly do it better. The only advantage of digizoom is when you send your photos direct from the chip to the printer (whether at home of commercially). - Possibly there's another advantage if you are running out of card memory. That, in effect, is why the Fuji does what it does. (Actually it's more complex, because the Fuji has a different sensor configuration.) But my point is that you are not losing any detail because of the apparently lack of digizoom. >My comment on the pictures being not as clear should be retracted. That is >an unfair comment from me as I have not run off enough prints in the past >year to make a good enough comparison. Compare a picture with and without digizoom, enlarged to the same size (of image). HIH Mike [The reply-to address is valid for 30 days from this posting] SignatureMichael J Davis <>< Some newsgroup contributors appear to have confused the meaning of "discussion" with "digression". <>< > You clearly don't understand what digital zoom is. > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > But my point is that you are not losing any detail because of the > apparently lack of digizoom. I do understand how it works. The Olympus did it better. It did not require the resolution to be lowered to take a combined optical/digital zoomed shot. I could do it at any resolution with a combined zoom ox 24x. The fuji only allows the combined zoom at 2mp and 1mp. >> You clearly don't understand what digital zoom is. >> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > combined zoom ox 24x. The fuji only allows the combined zoom at 2mp > and 1mp. The way this Fuji works is the only way digital zoom can ever make sense. When the resolution is lowered, and digital zoom is not used, the full-resolution image from the sensor is scaled down to the selected size. If digital zoom is enabled, only the central portion of the image is used. If your sensor is 5MP, and you select a 3MP image size, it is possible to cut out a 3MP image from the center of the sensor, and get an image of the desired size without scaling. This is available on many Sony cameras, where it is called "smart zoom". If you really want to upscale the image, it is better to do this on a computer with a proper scaling algorithm. SignatureMåns Rullgård mru@inprovide.com > The only advantage of digizoom is when you send your photos direct from > the chip to the printer (whether at home of commercially). - Possibly > there's another advantage if you are running out of card memory. It can also help you find your subject. SignatureJohn Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com 0845 006 8822 Qercus magazine FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 www.finnybank.com Qercus - the best guide to RISC OS computing > Super-compact 5 Mega Pixel Digital Camera > http://uk.aldi.com/ > 5 mega pixels > Digital zoom 4.0 [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > USB 2.0 connection > Software: Photo Explorer, Photo Express > I haven't a digital camera. This one is fifty quid. Is it worth it > at that price? Main use would be to easily and quickly pass images > around the 'net, or print on ordinary paper for "ideas". If they don't give the name - no. It's not very good (no zoom as far as I can see - digital doesn't count) and the critical bits - lens quality & battery life - are probably bad. But find the name and check for a review on the 'net - there are excellent review sites for all cameras of any worth. SignatureJohn Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com 0845 006 8822 Qercus magazine FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 www.finnybank.com Qercus - the best guide to RISC OS computing About 18 months ago I bought a Casio QV3000 on eBay for £45, I use it every day in my job. It can be used point and shoot or manually, I get a good 9 x 7 print from it and it's never let me down. Jem ------------------------------------- Birmingham Independent Photographers http://bip.wikispaces.com/ > Super-compact 5 Mega Pixel Digital Camera > I haven't a digital camera. This one is fifty quid. Is it worth it > at that price? Main use would be to easily and quickly pass images > around the 'net, or print on ordinary paper for "ideas". A colleague got a camera for himself and one for me for £20 (half-price offer!) at Tesco last week: it's only 3Mp and has only a digital zoom, but the pix would be fine for your purposes. I've seen his printouts at A5 size, and while I wouldn't enter them into a competition, they would be fine for 'most people'. I'll just keep it in the glove compartment all the time, on the basis that if you see the Loch Ness Monster, it doesn't matter if your pix were taken with a pinhole camera! Slainte Liz SignatureVirtual Liz: http://www.v-liz.com Kenya; Tanzania; Namibia; India; Seychelles; Galapagos Photo blog of Make Povery History rally in Edinburgh 2 July 2005: http://www.v-liz.com/g8rally/protest.htm > I haven't a digital camera. This one is fifty quid. Is it worth it > at that price? Main use would be to easily and quickly pass images > around the 'net, or print on ordinary paper for "ideas". Boots (in Brighton at least) have a Canon Powershot A400 at 50 quid. I'd buy that instead. Simon Yep, my daughter's got an A400 and the results look pretty repectable up to A4 print at least. A few sources of cheap cameras from 'real' camera manufacturers:- http://www.fujifilm.co.uk/shop/refurb/ http://stores.ebay.co.uk/Canon-Outlet http://www.morgancomputers.co.uk/shop/products2.asp?CategoryID=16 |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.