Just bought my Epson 3100Z

[dbchoong]

Just got my Epson 3100Z today. Still learning the camera's functions.

I'll post some pics once I take some worth posting...

My little review (after an hour of hands on):

The 3100Z is quite well built with quite good quality finish. One dislike is the piece of rubber that's used to cover the IO ports (like the Canons). Wonder why they do that?

The fast 2.0 lens makes a difference compared to my previous A40 2.8 lens. I took some indoor shots (with flourescent light) without flash and I think the results are better than that of the A40.

Taking night shots is pretty simple. Simply set it to AutoExposure, and that's it. Or you can set it to aperture or shutter priority or full manual.

The auto-focus is pretty fast. My 6 yr old son always had trouble getting focused pictures with the A40 because he never half-press for focusing. But with the 3100Z, the few pics he shot were focused.

The 3100Z is indeed bigger and heavier, but it's more of a pro rather than a con, well at least for me.

But one dislike about the 3100Z is its speed. It takes a bit of time to process (eg. when you want to view a pic). This slowness is very apparent on video clips.

By the way, you can take about 25 secs of video (320x240) with audio. There's a built-in speaker in the camera so you can hear audio when you play back the video clip.

Macro shots are also pretty good. It can be as close as 6 cm.

I'll play more with it and post some pics once I have some.

 

[renaissance_myth]

enjoy your new toy!

by the way, how much was the damage?

 

[dbchoong]

$699 from the Epson printer promo + $60 for the printer receipt - cause I didn't buy printer.

Sold my A40 for $500 (with lens adapter and some filters), so needed to top up $260.

Kept the 64Mb CF, quick charger and tripod when I sold my A40. So no need to buy those stuff. 64Mb is enough for about 60 pics at 3.3mp. Good enough for the time being.

Originally posted by renaissance_myth
enjoy your new toy!

by the way, how much was the damage?

 

[dbchoong]

First few test shots today. Looks like Epson's colours are less bright and less vivid compared to my old A40.

There is also very mild chromatic aberrations on the edges of white objects.

Here's some pics (just resized):

Here's the above pic with PS colour adjust (increased yellow a bit):

 

[Ling]

Originally posted by dbchoong
$699 from the Epson printer promo + $60 for the printer receipt - cause I didn't buy printer.

Sold my A40 for $500 (with lens adapter and some filters), so needed to top up $260.

Kept the 64Mb CF, quick charger and tripod when I sold my A40. So no need to buy those stuff. 64Mb is enough for about 60 pics at 3.3mp. Good enough for the time being.

Wow, u so fast sell yr A40. I have not really use my A40 yet, a little regretted din buy 3.3MP

 

[dbchoong]

Don't regret. The A40 produces very good pics. Like I said above, the A40's colours are brighter, richer and more vivid than my new Epson. Also, A40 does not suffer from chromatic aberrations. It's not really necessary for 3.3mp (I think) if you don't print.

Only shortcomings of the A40 are the lack of aperture and shutter priority and poor macro capability. Otherwise, I feel it's one of the best in its price range.

Originally posted by Ling


Wow, u so fast sell yr A40. I have not really use my A40 yet, a little regretted din buy 3.3MP

 

[mpenza]

the washed out colors could be a white balance problem. try different modes and see if the colors are better. if there's a "color saturation setting", you could also set it to high.

 

[dbchoong]

Thx for the tip. Will try when I get the chance...

Originally posted by mpenza
the washed out colors could be a white balance problem. try different modes and see if the colors are better. if there's a "color saturation setting", you could also set it to high.

 

[sabre]

Heard from friend the current PC show at Singapore Expo is having the $699 promo with printer again.



I'm thinking of getting the 3100z. Is it worth it as compared to A40? Taking into account epson is exiting the digital cam business, so further firmware update may not be possible.

The deal is valid only till 9th June which is this sunday, so will appreciate a lot if anyone feedback on the deal quick.

Thanks thanks a lot!!!



dbchoong: I have been eyeing this DC for a week or 2, read somewhere from other forums that the auto white balance is not very good under certain lighting. Will have to do manual custom setting like what mpenza has mentioned.

 

[dbchoong]

I'm still going through the manual, finding out how to do manual white balance, etc. This camera has much more manual controls than the A40.

Most pics came out alright, but in extreme colour contrasting pics, like the above pic, might have to set to manual white balance.

I've not had a chance to play with this yet.

For $699, I think this is a pretty good digicam. There are some minor hiccups - like the camera froze when the battery was weak. Got me puzzled for a while why it froze. Then saw the battery sign on the LCD. Wish it was a bit smarter than that.

The standard 16Mb CF is hardly enough, so a larger CF is necessary. Lucky for me, I still have my 64Mb which is just enough for most normal uses.

 

[zan]

Been eyeing on this and A40.
so its $699 at the PC show? and why +66 if no printer is purchased? is that a condition?
Any one saw any sony ones at the PC show?

 

[dbchoong]

The $60 extra was something I paid someone bought the printer so that I can take his receipt to purchase the camera at $699. So, effectively, I paid $759 for the camera.

Originally posted by zan
Been eyeing on this and A40.
so its $699 at the PC show? and why +66 if no printer is purchased? is that a condition?
Any one saw any sony ones at the PC show?

 

[zan]

thanx for the reply... hmm.. $759 price tag seems a little over my budget... So besides the A40.. any other cameras that are worth looking out for given under the $600 budget? Anyone tried the ones from kodak yet?

 

[sabre]

Thanks alot for the prompt reply dbchoong. Think I'll stick to buying an A40, given that A40 still offers some manual exposure, and has a underwater housing for diving trips. As for A40's poor focusing, hopefully it will be addressed soon by Canon through a firmware upgrade.

Thanks again.

 

[lufu]

Originally posted by dbchoong
The $60 extra was something I paid someone bought the printer so that I can take his receipt to purchase the camera at $699. So, effectively, I paid $759 for the camera.

the picture don't look that good for the extra $$$

Anyway, its a 3.1megapixel, higher than A40

 

[dbchoong]

The pic quality is quite good actually. But need some experimentation on the settings. The A40 is quite limited in its manual controls which was why I changed to the Epson.

I've tested a few cameras before such as Canon S40, Olympus C700UZ, Nikon 775, A40, Kodak DC3400 and now the Epson.

Actually, among all of them, personally I think the Kodak produces the best pictures in the daytime. But its inability to take night shots is a major drawback.

The worst I've tried is the Nikon. The Olympus also did not impress.

The A40 pic quality is very good. But has poor manual controls.

For the money, the A40 is still the best buy.

Originally posted by lufu


the picture don't look that good for the extra $$$

Anyway, its a 3.1megapixel, higher than A40

 

[zan]

seems like it all narrows to A40 for its value for money quality despite the lack in apperture adjusment and some zoom error...
but seems like its such a hot product that its snapped up everywhere, even in the pc show. guess i'll have to wait until they have stock in AP.

 

[dbchoong]

Got one dead pixel out of 3.3 million of them.... so brought it back to Epson but they got no stock, so no 1-to-1 exchange. Have to wait 3 days for replacement/repair....

;p

 

[chomechome]

How do you find out the dead pixels?

 

[dbchoong]

Noticed a tiny little green dot (almost unnoticable) in a couple of night shots. Not noticable in daytime/bright shots.

Zoomed in and found that in all photos, that little green dot is there.

Originally posted by chomechome
How do you find out the dead pixels?