Prev: B&H pricing scam outed
Next: Rado Coupole Steel Platinum Ceramic Ladies Watch R22594102
From: Andrew Brydon on 4 May 2010 01:25
Following a good pointer from places such as this group I used the
Compare features page at DP Review to check out waterproof P&S models.
Some good looking specs... with one exception: their user reviews ALL
suggested poor image quality. Does adding that waterproof seal
automatically mean manufacturers stop caring about the image?
Or can someone point me in the right direction? Thanks.
--
Andrew Brydon
Life is just the beta-version of death
From: Martin Brown on 4 May 2010 03:11
Andrew Brydon wrote:
> Following a good pointer from places such as this group I used the
> Compare features page at DP Review to check out waterproof P&S models.

If you mean waterproof as in to be operated under water then there may
well be some compromises in the optical design to allow it to work with
an external refractive index of water ~1.33. Autofocus takes care of
most of it but there have to be compromises in colour aberrations.

> Some good looking specs... with one exception: their user reviews ALL
> suggested poor image quality. Does adding that waterproof seal
> automatically mean manufacturers stop caring about the image?
> Or can someone point me in the right direction? Thanks.

If you mean more aggressively weatherproof then there are suitable
models. And the ones that are not do OK locked inside a ziplok bag.

Regards,
Martin Brown
From: bugbear on 4 May 2010 06:12
Andrew Brydon wrote:
> Following a good pointer from places such as this group I used the
> Compare features page at DP Review to check out waterproof P&S models.
> Some good looking specs... with one exception: their user reviews ALL
> suggested poor image quality. Does adding that waterproof seal
> automatically mean manufacturers stop caring about the image?

Well, at any given price point, any money
spent on water proofing must come out of
the overall cost, this reducing available
money for other features of the camera.

BugBear
From: me on 4 May 2010 17:17
On Tue, 4 May 2010 06:25:56 +0100, Andrew Brydon
<andrew(a)isbjorn.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>Following a good pointer from places such as this group I used the
>Compare features page at DP Review to check out waterproof P&S models.
>Some good looking specs... with one exception: their user reviews ALL
>suggested poor image quality. Does adding that waterproof seal
>automatically mean manufacturers stop caring about the image?
>Or can someone point me in the right direction? Thanks.

I think it has to do with small sensor size and the need to do folded
optics. FWIW, I just bought a Pentax W80 in the last couple of weeks
to replace a Casio Z-750 which died a very premature and untimely
death supplementing my Nikon dslrs. As the W90 is now out the W80 can
be had for under $200, which made it easier to swallow the
limitations.

From: ransley on 4 May 2010 19:58
On May 4, 12:25 am, Andrew Brydon <and...(a)isbjorn.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Following a good pointer from places such as this group I used the
> Compare features page at DP Review to check out waterproof P&S models.
> Some good looking specs... with one exception: their user reviews ALL
> suggested poor image quality. Does adding that waterproof seal
> automatically mean manufacturers stop caring about the image?
> Or can someone point me in the right direction? Thanks.
> --
> Andrew Brydon
> Life is just the beta-version of death

I read the review not user reviews, the Canon was best if I remember,
does the Canon have poor user reviews and I wonder if they are really
correct. Best would be try one.
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: B&H pricing scam outed
Next: Rado Coupole Steel Platinum Ceramic Ladies Watch R22594102