Why is there a kid with a lightsaber in his underwear??
Does this camera have one of those automatic anti-shaky-picture features?
It has a ‘digital’ anti-shake, but is less effective than optical anti-shake (and really is a marketing gimmick on a camera with 3X zoom). Only mega zoom (5-20X) would really benefit from optical stabilization IMHO.
RE: AA batteries - if you use NiMH rechargeable at 2500MaH, you can get excellent battery life. If you’re using Alkalines, ANY digital camera will eat those in seconds.
RE: Pentax and Pinnacle (to avoid) - pure ignorance - Pentax is a good brand (I own Canon, Olympus, Panasonic, Pentax, Sony, etc.). I bought the Pentax M50 a few months back on Woot - fantastic camera at $89 - this E60 looks to be better (except a little larger).
Now, I have to admit my Pinnacle products are hit/miss, but that’s off-topic.
…great idea. I’m sure it might work on every one else’s computer - but it always locks up my IE when I push the buttons on the front. Lame.
It will make a decent backup camera for FeeBay pictures.
10mp and SD and Pentax? Might sound like today’s generic digital camera, but I’ve taken some really great pictures on a 4mp xD Fujifilm, this can’t be worse than that old brick.
Yay, I gave WI some color. I’ve been in desperate need of a new camera for months, but had no money to get the nice one I was looking at. This little guy seems to be the perfect cheap yet effective alternative until I graduate and get a real job and can earn some real money.
Sweet I’m in for one!
If I didn’t love the camera I have so much (it is PLATONIC, I assure you!) and if I didn’t have about five or so more that I’ve bought impulsively on woot, I’d probably buy this one.
But really, I really wish I were a grammarian atomic physicist so that I could split atoms without splitting infinitives.
Remember - less than a dozen weeks until Income Tax Time so you should buy this camera now because you are going to get such a big refund. Presuming they actually send out the refunds this year to anyone who deserves one.
Or, if you have the buckarinos now, and you find that you get busted at Income Tax Time and have to file Chapter 11, at least you won’t have to give up the bucks you’ve got burning in your pocket and they aren’t very likely to yank a camera from you as part of their attempt to squeeze blood from a stone.
So it says it has more than ten million pixels in the imaging chip. Has anyone REALLY ever taken the time to count them? Are we TRULY sure they aren’t snarfing some of them like warm Pr*ngles with their teeny, teeny teeth?
Beside which, what are you going to DO with that many pixels, anyone? If you take too many pictures, it’ll just overflow the bathtub, you know.
I want a tera-pixel camera, that’s what I want.
Yeah this is an entry level cheapie. New users would like the AA batts. (Once you get past the point and shoot you’ll realize the AA batts suck)
If you just need a point and shoot, this is great. Pentax is an old and solid name in the photog biz.
And if you get into real dgital cameras, (DSLR) you’ll find the higher end ($1k+) Pentax’s have a lot of features not found on any other camera at any price, Including nikon and canon. For some reason they just don’t advertise like the rest of them.
I love the 25 Things writeup. Clever woot staff, very clever.
We once had a Pentax before, we used it for years. Pentax is a good brand name.
(If you are religious, PLEASE stop reading this note at this point. I really truly wish to keep things copacetic with you. you might consider it blasphemous and just plain nasty.)
“Hey, God is a great ruler-of-the-universe name, but that doesn’t mean that he/she/it/whatever exists or actually DOES that function”.
(boy, I hope I don’t torque off some perfectly pleasant religious types. but that’s the end of the nasty bit.)
I mean, “woot” is an absolute FABULOUS brand name (except it isn’t really a ‘brand name’ as such) but occasionally they sell some absolutely turkey merchandise. Does that make them a universally good company or a bad company?
Point: “the name doesn’t same anything about the product. the performance of the product says something about the product.”
Absolutely! Positively! Do I ever agree with you on this point. These camera manufacturers have to come up with SOME kind of rear screen technology that actually has enough contrast and brightness so that it is useful. Even with one of those semi-nifty aluminum shades helping with the rear screen far too often I just can’t SEE what I’m trying to take a picture of. And more cameras are lacking optical viewfinders and those that do have them are getting to be more pathetic all of the time.
Definitely, a technological breakthrough in this area has to come about to make a difference in the quality of photographs taken with these cameras.
Just 3 reviews…very mixed, but the price is right on this one
Honestly:
“6. After years of feeling inadequate, I’ve finally come to terms with my 3X optical zoom.”
is SO close to being salacious that perhaps it ought not to have been included. The difficulty is that “what object” has optical zoom is ambiguous. The only thing that saves it at all is that the narrator appears to be female.
I’m also not certain what the point is (yes, I know that this fictional stuff isn’t necessarily supposed to make sense). Does the author prefer 5x zoom? 7x zoom? To put it another way, WHAT are they feeling inadequate about?
I’ve got to admit back in the “good old days of film” when an SLR didn’t cost an arm and a leg, having a 90 to 150 mm telephoto with a hefty zoom was just SO great at helping make a photo compositionally pleasant. And lenses of that sort DID have amazingly large zoom ranges.
Sigh. I haven’t had enough oxygen today (literally, long story) and so I’m being over-affected by the fictional bit and rather bizarre besides (if not just plain stupid). Still, I like it when the fictional stuff reveals an aspect of the sales item that otherwise might not be apparent.
[quote postid="
Definitely, a technological breakthrough in this area has to come about to make a difference in the quality of photographs taken with these cameras.[/quote]
Either that, or serious photographers are going to have to go back to those quaint black cloths that covered the camera, their head and shoulders. Not what I’d call convenient, but at least it would be an interim solution.
AA batteries in a camera are a catch 22. I agree with you that the Li-Ion batteries are much better, but for casual users, or for work, the AA Batteries offer convienence, and when using rechargables, when right out of the charger and into the camera, you have lots of power, and with the Eneloop type of rechargable batteries, you also have long shelf life. Also, it is easier for people to understand a rechargable AA battery system, than some priporitory Li-Ion system, and there is always extra AA batteries lying around somewhere.