OT: Olympus C4000

"Brian" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Hi

I have just ordered myself an Olympus C4000 digital camera, for taking wildlife / landscape
photographs when I am out and about.

Big snip

Quoted message said:

Now, apparantly my father will be willing to buy me some accesories for the camera for xmas, what
do you recommend for a decent camera case and any must have accessorys for outdoor photography?
Mini tripod? Waterproof case? I already have 8 x 1300mAh NiMH batteries + two chargers. so these
will do meantime until I can order some higher capacity cells, any recommendations?

This will be my first proper digital camera (excluding my Agfa CL18 0.3mp jobby), any recommended
reading / websites on using digital cameras effectively for landscape photography?

cheers

--
Brian

I found that now I've gone digital (Olympus 5050z) I take a *lot* more photographs and always use
the highest resolution. You may find a 64MB memory card limiting. Cheers Graham

On 10 Dec 2003 16:45:25 GMT, Brian <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Hi

I have just ordered myself an Olympus C4000 digital camera, for taking wildlife / landscape
photographs when I am out and about.

From steves-digicams.com C-4000 ZOOM features:

<snip spec>

32mm should be OK :-)

Quoted message said:

Ordered the camera + an extra 64MB CF card for £231 from digital- cameras.com

Can't wait to get it in the post, pity I won't have a day off until next week, so I won't be able
to field test it.... I may sneak it into work though and take some pictures during my lunch hour or
something...

Take the week off YKIMS ;-)

Quoted message said:

Now, apparantly my father will be willing to buy me some accesories for the camera for xmas, what
do you recommend for a decent camera case and any must have accessorys for outdoor photography?
Mini tripod? Waterproof case? I already have 8 x 1300mAh NiMH batteries + two chargers. so these
will do meantime until I can order some higher capacity cells, any recommendations?

Depends on how much he wants to spend.... My choice would be in this order :

1. A camera bag. There can be nothing worse than finding your pride and joy is damaged ! Take a look
at lowepro.comlowepro.comOpen ↗ I have never been disappointed, and they do all sorts of price ranges.

2. A decent tripod. Camera shake will ruin any amount of effort you put into making the perfect
shot. Even if it looks good in the viewfinder/monitor, if you enlarge the picture it will show.
Personally I use Benbo tripods patersonphotographic.combenbo.htmlOpen ↗ as they are
great for macro and general use, although maybe a bit heavy. Other good tripods are made by
Manfrotto and Gitzo. If you are climbing any height then maybe a monopod would be more suited,
although I still lug around my Benbo MkI.

3. You will probably need a => 128 Mb card. Why manufacturers don't include them in camera packages
I don't understand ;-)

4. You can now get 2300Mah rechargeable batteries. The cheapest I've found are on Ebay
stores.ebay.co.ukid=42555379&ssPageName=L2Open ↗ I have no connection with them, just great
service :-)

5. Remeber, a good camera won't capture a good picture, it's all by effort and experience. The best
bit is that digital is a great/cheap way to gain that experience.

Quoted message said:

This will be my first proper digital camera (excluding my Agfa CL18 0.3mp jobby), any recommended
reading / websites on using digital cameras effectively for landscape photography?

I find websites don't go deep enough. Take a look at amazon.co.uk202 7478518Open ↗
4482244 Also some people on here have great landscape photo's on their own websites, for example ...
Pauls at wilderness-wales.co.ukwilderness-wales.co.ukOpen ↗

Above all, show us your work ! I've just got a 5060 and, when I get some time off, will be posting
some links here myself.

Tata, Mike.

--

'02 GSF1200 in silver
Email address spamtrapped.
Remove "your clothes" to reply.

In message <[email hidden]>, Mike Hill
<[email hidden]> writes <snip>

Quoted message said:

5. Remeber, a good camera won't capture a good picture, it's all by effort and experience. The best
bit is that digital is a great/cheap way to gain that experience.

I grant you that the running costs are very low, but the initial purchase price is a lot higher than
a comparable film camera - one could get a reasonable SLR with zoom lens plus a decent scanner for
the price of many digital cameras.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

This will be my first proper digital camera (excluding my Agfa CL18 0.3mp jobby), any recommended
reading / websites on using digital cameras effectively for landscape photography?

I find websites don't go deep enough. Take a look at
amazon.co.ukref=sr aps books 1 1Open ↗ /202-7478518-4482244 Also
some people on here have great landscape photo's on their own websites, for example ... Pauls at
wilderness-wales.co.ukwilderness-wales.co.ukOpen ↗

Above all, show us your work ! I've just got a 5060 and, when I get some time off, will be posting
some links here myself.

Yes please. Also keep taking the shots - I have some lovely ones which I took as an afterthought.
The most surprising was when I did the Snowdon Horseshoe, and took a shot across the Corrie before
starting the steep climb up to Crib Goch. When it came back to my astonishment the surface of the
lake had wonderful reflections of the skies, and the balance of dark and light (and since it was
taken into the light there wasn't much mid-tones) had come out very well. I expected a nothing shot!

--
Five Cats Email to: cats_spam at uk2 dot net

"Graham Bowers" <[email hidden]> wrote in
:"]news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

I found that now I've gone digital (Olympus 5050z) I take a *lot* more photographs and always use
the highest resolution. You may find a 64MB memory card limiting. Cheers Graham

Well, the camera I ordered supports uncompressed TIFF format - which apparantly is about 8MB(!) per
image....... I thought it best to order the 64MB card as it was a good price with the camera (an
extra £16). I'll probably order a bigger card or two later on in the new year.

cheers

--
Brian

In message <[email hidden]>, Brian
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

"Paul Saunders" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:br8g1v$lkg$1 @news7.svr.pol.co.uk:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Mine takes 4 meg shots and I find that 512 meg is just enough for a weekend or one very good day.
You'd probably need at least one gig if you take as many shots as me.

One gig eh? I remember the days when hard drives were in the one gig size.....

*that* big? I remember when we had exchangeable 40k hard drives the size of dinner plates -
large ones!

--
Five Cats Email to: cats_spam at uk2 dot net

In message <[email hidden]>, Paul Saunders <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Five Cats said:

*that* big? I remember when we had exchangeable 40k hard drives the size of dinner plates -
large ones!

I remember being amazed when floppy disks were first invented.

They came along after the disks I was remembering.

Quoted message said:

Paul
--
The October Project 2003 - Updated wildwales.fsnet.co.ukoctober.htmlOpen ↗ wilderness-wilderness-Open ↗
wales.co.uk photosig.comuserphotosOpen ↗

--
Five Cats Email to: cats_spam at uk2 dot net

In message <[email hidden]>, Paul Saunders <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Five Cats said:

Quoted message said:

> *that* big? I remember when we had exchangeable 40k hard drives the size of dinner plates -
> large ones!

I remember being amazed when floppy disks were first invented.

They came along after the disks I was remembering.

I guessed as much. I haven't been into computers for very long. ;-)

We all started somewhere - I just happened to start back in the mists of time when we wrote programs
on coding sheets, got them punched and so on.

There was also a chap in the office who collected sacks of the bits punched out of the cards as
apparently there were perfect for modelling bricks (for those who could stand sticking them onto a
large sheet of card individually!) in some model railway gauge.

--
Five Cats Email to: cats_spam at uk2 dot net

Mike Hill said:

2. A decent tripod.

Personally I recommend a [censored] tripod, decent tripods are too heavy. Don't laugh, I'm serious!

The problem with heavy tripods is that you end up leaving them at home because you can't be bothered
to lug them around all day, so you convince yourself you won't need it. Then when you see a
fantastic shot in low light, you're knackered! On the other hand, a small crappy tripod is so light
that you hardly even realise you're carrying it, so there's no excuse not to take it everywhere with
you, and when you need it, you've got it.

Heavy tripods are only really necessary for big heavy cameras, especially those with lots of mirror
slap, which you don't get with a compact. Even though light tripods are flimsy and wobble a lot, the
camera only needs to be stationary at the moment the photo is taken, so provided you use the self
timer and don't touch the tripod, it should be fine (the exception is when taking photos in a strong
wind, where I recommend a bean back on a rock instead).

To lend support (if you'll excuse the pun) to my position, let me just point out that the late great
Galen Rowell also had a philosophy of carrying a flimsy lightweight tripod with him wherever he
went. He needed to travel ultra-light and found that a light tripod was quite capable of doing the
job, provided you take care to ensure that it doesn't wobble just as you're taking the picture.

A good tip is to add some weight to the tripod to make it more solid. One way of doing this is to
hang your rucksack underneath the tripod using a hook of some sort. Another is to tie a length of
cord from the tripod to a tent peg that you bang into the ground underneath. If it's breezy, use
your body to shield the tripod while the photo is being taken.

Of course, if you plan to use a tripod a lot and you don't need to travel ultra-light, then a decent
sturdy tripod is obviously a better choice.

Quoted message said:

3. You will probably need a => 128 Mb card. Why manufacturers don't include them in camera
packages I don't understand ;-)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

This will be my first proper digital camera (excluding my Agfa CL18 .3mp jobby), any recommended
reading / websites on using digital cameras effectively for landscape photography?

There's very little difference between film and digital where landscapes are concerned, the basic
principles are the same. From an artistic point of view what applies to film also applies to
digital. Two things you might want to be aware of though are these;

1. Greater dynamic range. I can't be certain if this applies to all digital cameras, but if my G3
is anything to go by, digital cameras have a much wider dynamic range than film, so they capture
a greater range of brightness levels. This results in digital images looking quite flat, which
novices often assume is a bad thing. It isn't. Contrast can easily be increased on the computer
later, but the big advantage is that far more detail is recorded in the shadows, so dark parts
of the picture can be brightened to surprising levels. Post processing of digital images on a
computer is much easier than with film images because so much more shadow detail is captured,
however, post processing is an art form in itself, so I won't go into that here.

2. Greater depth of field. F-stops on digital cameras give much more depth of field than their film
equivalents, so you get more in focus than you would with a corresponding f-stop on a 35mm
camera. I won't go into the details, but it makes things easier for general photography. It does
make it harder if you specifically want a narrow depth of field though.

Quoted message said:

Also some people on here have great landscape photo's on their own websites, for example ... Pauls
at wilderness-wales.co.ukwilderness-wales.co.ukOpen ↗

Thanks for the plug.

Paul
--
wildwales.fsnet.co.ukoctober.htmlOpen ↗
wilderness-wales.co.ukwilderness-wales.co.ukOpen ↗
photosig.comuserphotosOpen ↗

Brian said:

Well, the camera I ordered supports uncompressed TIFF format - which apparantly is about 8MB(!)
per image....... I thought it best to order the 64MB card as it was a good price with the camera
(an extra £16). I'll probably order a bigger card or two later on in the new year.

I think you'll find that uncompressed 4MP TIFFs are 12 meg per shot. I'd recommend at least 256
meg, preferably 512 meg, as soon as possible. They don't cost much these days if you shop around
on the net.

Mine takes 4 meg shots and I find that 512 meg is just enough for a weekend or one very good day.
You'd probably need at least one gig if you take as many shots as me.

Paul
--
The October Project 2003 - Updated
wildwales.fsnet.co.ukoctober.htmlOpen ↗
wilderness-wales.co.ukwilderness-wales.co.ukOpen ↗
photosig.comuserphotosOpen ↗

"Paul Saunders" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:brne65$m2v$1
@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk:

Quoted message said:

Mike Hill said:

2. A decent tripod.

Personally I recommend a [censored] tripod, decent tripods are too heavy. Don't laugh, I'm serious!

When I was in Asda buying a camera bag (I ended up with a HAMA DFV60 bag), I spotted a cheap and
cheerful plastic tripod, HAMA Digi-Pod Compact I - £7.99. Not sure that it was a good buy, but it
does support the camera, and it fits in the bag.

Here is a picture of one:

images-eu.amazon.comB00006JDVU.03.LZZZZZZZ.jpgOpen ↗

cheers

--
Brian

"Paul Saunders" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:br8g1v$lkg$1
@news7.svr.pol.co.uk:

Quoted message said:

Brian said:

Well, the camera I ordered supports uncompressed TIFF format - which apparantly is about 8MB(!)
per image....... I thought it best to order the 64MB card as it was a good price with the camera
(an extra £16). I'll probably order a bigger card or two later on in the new year.

I think you'll find that uncompressed 4MP TIFFs are 12 meg per shot.

12MB per shot!!!!!

/me faints.

Quoted message said:

I'd recommend at least 256 meg, preferably 512 meg, as soon as possible. They don't cost much
these days if you shop around on the net.

Any particular brands to avoid? I've had my fingers burnt with cheapo game console memory cards
losing hours worth of gameplay..

Quoted message said:

Mine takes 4 meg shots and I find that 512 meg is just enough for a weekend or one very good day.
You'd probably need at least one gig if you take as many shots as me.

One gig eh? I remember the days when hard drives were in the one gig size.....

cheers

---
Brian

Brian said:

When I was in Asda buying a camera bag (I ended up with a HAMA DFV60 bag), I spotted a cheap and
cheerful plastic tripod, HAMA Digi-Pod Compact I - £7.99. Not sure that it was a good buy, but it
does support the camera, and it fits in the bag.

Here is a picture of one:

images-eu.amazon.comB00006JDVU.03.LZZZZZZZ.jpgOpen ↗

That'll do the job in emergencies. Not very easy to get it level on a rock or whatever though. I've
got a similar diddy tripod, a minipod, from Jessops which has bendy legs and a ball and socket head.
It's the second one on this page. jessops.aucklandcamera.comcompacttripods.htmlOpen ↗

The bendy legs enable me to place it on awkward shaped rocks and the ball and socket head enable me
to point the camera in any direction. Recommended as a take everywhere emergency tripod.

Here's the lightweight tripod that I suggested, the ATLANTIC TRIPOD ALFA 3QR ;
makeashorterlink.commakeashorterlink.comOpen ↗

It's cheap, nasty and terribly flimsy, but at only 0.6kg it's ideal for lightweight backpacking,
or even a sunny day walk when you don't expect to need a tripod or simply want to travel as light
as possible.

But aside from backpacking, if you really do intend to use a tripod a lot I'd recommend something
sturdier, although I don't feel it's necessary to carry very heavy tripods like some people insist
on, unless you're taking photos in strong winds (in which case I prefer a bean bag on a rock - I've
taken shots with a 300mm telephoto at 1 sec in strong gale force winds with no problems).

Paul
--
wildwales.fsnet.co.ukoctober.htmlOpen ↗
wilderness-wales.co.ukwilderness-wales.co.ukOpen ↗
photosig.comuserphotosOpen ↗

Brian said:

"Paul Saunders" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:br8g1v$lkg$1 @news7.svr.pol.co.uk:

Quoted message said:

I'd recommend at least 256 meg, preferably 512 meg, as soon as possible. They don't cost much
these days if you shop around on the net.

Any particular brands to avoid? I've had my fingers burnt with cheapo game console memory cards
losing hours worth of gameplay..

This (C4000Z) being a SmartMedia camera, you can only go to 128Mb. I bought my last ones from Amazon
with a pile of other stuff, mostly because there were a couple of recommendations from people saying
they'd worked fine with their Olys. On the whole, computer suppliers can better most other retailers
on price, apart from the odd camera specialist. For 128Mb you should be looking at £25-30. I have
had one 64Mb card go bad. I keep the original 16Mb card (1 whole TIFF, wowee) for occasional video
clips. Only Olympus cards let my camera use its own panoramic facility (annoyingly) - it's over to
manual if you wish to take a series of shots with the same focus and exposure (drive mode is not the
same thing).

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Mine takes 4 meg shots and I find that 512 meg is just enough for a weekend or one very good day.
You'd probably need at least one gig if you take as many shots as me.

One gig eh? I remember the days when hard drives were in the one gig size.....

I can remember having a disk allowance of a couple of megabytes at most. Word would be hard-pressed
to squeeze "hello world" into that now.

--
Name me one nation that taxed itself into prosperity.

Mail john rather than nospam...

Brian said:

Quoted message said:

I think you'll find that uncompressed 4MP TIFFs are 12 meg per shot.

12MB per shot!!!!!

/me faints.

Canon have a better system, they save RAW files direct from the sensor which can be converted to
jpegs or tiffs later, with no loss of quality, but they're only a third of the size of a tiff.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I'd recommend at least 256 meg, preferably 512 meg, as soon as possible. They don't cost much
these days if you shop around on the net.

Any particular brands to avoid?

Not to my knowledge. I've bought random brands and had no problems yet.

Paul
--
wildwales.fsnet.co.ukoctober.htmlOpen ↗
wilderness-wales.co.ukwilderness-wales.co.ukOpen ↗
photosig.comuserphotosOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

I can remember having a disk allowance of a couple of megabytes at most. Word would be hard-pressed
to squeeze "hello world" into that now.

Let alone Micro$oft HelloWorld 2003(TM)

I remember thinking that 30 meg interchangable hard disks were amazing!

Richard Webb

Five Cats said:

*that* big? I remember when we had exchangeable 40k hard drives the size of dinner plates -
large ones!

I remember being amazed when floppy disks were first invented.

Paul
--
The October Project 2003 - Updated
wildwales.fsnet.co.ukoctober.htmlOpen ↗
wilderness-wales.co.ukwilderness-wales.co.ukOpen ↗
photosig.comuserphotosOpen ↗

One website that might be of interest is Jeremy McCreary's:
cliffshade.comindex.htmOpen ↗

He is an Olympus digital compact user, so some of his articles mention specific models. The other
pages are pretty useful too. You'd better be quick though, as he's threatening to take it offline.

DP Review have an Olympus forum - search there for c-4000 or c4000 (they won't bring up the same
posts): forums.dpreview.comforum.aspOpen ↗

There's a Yahoo group: groups.yahoo.comc4000Open ↗

Simon.

--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - mailgate.orgmailgate.orgOpen ↗

"Paul Saunders" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

<snip>

| I've got a similar diddy tripod, a minipod, from Jessops which has bendy legs and a ball and
| socket head. It's the second one on this page.
| jessops.aucklandcamera.comcompacttripods.htmlOpen ↗
|
| The bendy legs enable me to place it on awkward shaped rocks and the ball and socket head enable
| me to point the camera in any direction. Recommended as a take everywhere emergency tripod.

My mini tripod is identical to the one at the top. Do you think the ball and socket head is useful?

| Here's the lightweight tripod that I suggested, the ATLANTIC TRIPOD ALFA 3QR ;
| makeashorterlink.commakeashorterlink.comOpen ↗
|
| It's cheap, nasty and terribly flimsy, but at only 0.6kg it's ideal for lightweight backpacking,
| or even a sunny day walk when you don't expect to need a tripod or simply want to travel as light
| as possible.

My tripod is probably just like that, and it's very light - I can fit it in an ASDA carrier bag no
problems, and is how I sometimes carry it (especially in the cold, where the metal is very cold on
the hands).

I recently subscribed to Practical Photography magazine and I got a new tripod for £5 with the
special offer they had at the time: makeashorterlink.commakeashorterlink.comOpen ↗

It's noticably heavier than my other one (though still light in tripod terms), and it's a lot more
fiddly to connect it to the camera, as you have to take of the plastic piece from the head first,
attach this to the camera, then clip it back on the tripod with the camera attached. The only good
thing about it is that it opens can open out much higher, so is useful for certain situations.

| But aside from backpacking, if you really do intend to use a tripod a lot I'd recommend something
| sturdier, although I don't feel it's necessary to carry very heavy tripods like some people insist
| on, unless you're taking photos in strong winds (in which case I prefer a bean bag on a rock -
| I've taken shots with a 300mm telephoto at 1 sec in strong gale force winds with no problems).
|
| Paul

Ste

In article <[email hidden]>, Paul Saunders

url=''URL:/url said:

Five Cats said:

*that* big? I remember when we had exchangeable 40k hard drives the size of dinner plates -
large ones!

I remember being amazed when floppy disks were first invented.

It used to take me several days to get the programme onto puched cards and fed into the computer,
only to find that one or more of the the cards was incorrect. The concept of storing the programme
on magnetic media wasn't available.

Mike Clark, <URL:http://www.path.cam.ac.uk/~mrc7/>
--
o/ \\ // |\ ,_ o Mike Clark <\__,\\ // __o | \ / /\, "A mountain climbing, cycling, skiing, "> ||
_`\<,_ |__\ \> | immunology lecturer, antibody engineer and ` || (_)/ (_) | \corn computer user"