Olympus Stylus 720 SW Digital

[dorado]

Hi
I planning to get a waterproof camera any comment of this olympus stylus 720 waterproof camera.. this one is better or the Pentax W10

[sunfish]

Originally Posted by dorado Hi I planning to get a waterproof camera any comment of this olympus stylus 720 waterproof camera.. this one is better or the Pentax W10

This is splash proof only, according to the sales guy, it can only go down to 3m depth.
If you really want it water proof, you will have to buy the underwater housing too

[tao]

What I have gathered is that this is pretty much the "G-shock" of the digicam world. Very tough body.

[Johnny4213]

Originally Posted by sunfish This is splash proof only, according to the sales guy, it can only go down to 3m depth. If you really want it water proof, you will have to buy the underwater housing too

??? when you can completely submerge the camera it will be consider waterproof..if it is splash proof you wouldn't be able to sink the camera even for half a meter. Splash proof is only good for protection like rainy days....
The underwater housing purpose is to allow 720sw to sink deeper only...

Mju720SW

S = Shockproof
W = Waterproof

[deepblue]

Hi Guys,

The 720 is not splashproof. My friend brought it from the IT show. It is really waterproof. I saw his clip using this camera in the swimming pool, its quite fun & amazing.The mju series of olympus is all weatherproof or splashproof, meaning in rain or even when you pour water over it, no problem. I own a mju 800, I can testify to it. In the IT show they also demo the 720 in a watertank. Sometime I have feel that those saleman over the counter they are just twisting the fact so that you will buy something that they want you to buy.

[wrx_sti_22b]

The Pentax like so lousy & dated. The Olympus is better...

[ykkok]

The Oly 720SW is not only Waterproof up to 3m but also Shockproof. It can withstand drop from about 1.5m.

This is a little rugged camera that's good for adventurous and family people where you have kids that would like to learn photography in early years.

Visit Oly JPN website, and there's some flash demo that illustrate its capabilitie and it's definately waterproof, not just splashproof.

[sunfish]

Originally Posted by Johnny4213 ??? when you can completely submerge the camera it will be consider waterproof..if it is splash proof you wouldn't be able to sink the camera even for half a meter. Splash proof is only good for protection like rainy days.... The underwater housing purpose is to allow 720sw to sink deeper only... Mju720SW S = Shockproof W = Waterproof

ok...ok...to be specific, it is water proof upto 3m. Calling it water proof will be misleading still...
But I got this 3m info from a sales guy, I am not sure how many percent of it is sales talk
But judging from the amount of maintenance and care needed for my underwater housing and strobes, I personally wouldn't take the salesman too seriously when he tells me it goes into water, which is why I still consider it 'splash-proof'.

[mega32]

Originally Posted by dorado Hi I planning to get a waterproof camera any comment of this olympus stylus 720 waterproof camera.. this one is better or the Pentax W10

You can consider this forum with sample pictures and people from both camps
(pentax)
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1028
(olympus)
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...hread=18289601

I have both these cameras

If you want one that can give you good videos go for the pentax.

If you want one with "G-Shock" protection go for the Olympus.

It really comes down to what you want to use it for.

[metalgear]

waterproof = can submerge in water

3m = depth limit. everything waterproof has a limit as water pressure builds up with depth.

[VR Man]

Waterproof up to 3.0 meters.

Look at some of your watches, it does indicate that the waterproofing is up to XX meters or millibars (Pressure). Same thing with the camera.

[Nik-enduser]

tested out the olympus, pretty nifty, only complaint is the not so nice and balanced handling (as compared to Pentax Optio series), and the really tiny start button (for people with large fingers, it is a challenge).

[Michael68]

Does this include the new natural light mode that allows you to go to ISO 3200? Tried the 810 (I think) at a fair and at 1600, the pics still looks pretty usable.
How is this compared to the leader F11 in low light photography?
Thanks.

[Hacker]

Originally Posted by Michael68 Does this include the new natural light mode that allows you to go to ISO 3200? Tried the 810 (I think) at a fair and at 1600, the pics still looks pretty usable. How is this compared to the leader F11 in low light photography? Thanks.

OFF TOPIC!!

F11 is a non-waterproof camera. I had the same choice of deciding between the F11, the T30 and the P3 as a backup worthy to the Olympus DSLR . Hands down to the P3, even in low-light conditions. These 3 pixs were taken with the P3 without a tripod. For normal lighting conditions, very sharp!

[cookiez]

1st pic is simply gorgeous !
btw, P3 is from Pentax ?

[Michael68]

Care to share what are the setting for these shots? Would it still be sharp at 1 sec handheld? In other words, at ISO 100, would the VR be better than Panasonic OIS (eg FX9 etc) under the same shooting conditions? Thanks.

[Stanly]

Originally Posted by cookiez 1st pic is simply gorgeous ! btw, P3 is from Pentax ?

P3 from Nikon.....

[Hacker]

Originally Posted by Michael68 Care to share what are the setting for these shots? Would it still be sharp at 1 sec handheld? In other words, at ISO 100, would the VR be better than Panasonic OIS (eg FX9 etc) under the same shooting conditions? Thanks.

I must have missed this post. More info here:

http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=195633

To answer your question, I believe that the P3 and the FX9 are just as good. I considered the LX-1, but did not like the noise when shooting in higher ISO. I therefore presented samples of shots which the Panasonic will not equal.

[Hacker]

[tomcat]

Originally Posted by Hacker

The EXIF info of this photo is quite strange - 1/470s, f/2.7, ISO 50, Auto-exposure
The photo gave the impression that it was taken at twilight but the EXIF info would seem to indicate that it should be in quite bright daylight. So either it was deliberately exposed for the sky and recomposed to underexpose the foreground or the image has been post-processed to give that effect.