The Optio I-10
Posted 28/12/2010 - 14:50
Link
I almost wonder if the low prices are due to it having picked up a few unfavourable reviews (which mostly seem to be on sites where the colour of the camera is considered as important as its ability to take pictures...)? Nobody here seems to have any trouble with their I-10, I've seriously considered buying one as a pocket-cam but tend to use an ME Super and 40mm f2.8 for that.
Matt
Shooting the Welsh Wilderness with K-m, KX, MX, ME Super and assorted lenses.
Shooting the Welsh Wilderness with K-m, KX, MX, ME Super and assorted lenses.
Posted 29/12/2010 - 22:42
Link
I've been looking for a nice compact for my wife saw the I-10 for sale in various stores for about £99 was'nt too sure about it then checked out the Optio section and read this topic, and i must say after reading all of your points about it i'm sold. Couldnt get it from currys for £69.99 out of stock but was able to get it from Co Op Electrical for 89.99 free postage in white which she prefers arrives friday.
Posted 29/12/2010 - 23:20
Link
Richard, the 1-10 is a great camera,looks good, feels good and it takes exceptionaly good images,the SR really works well.
Regards
Chris
Regards
Chris
Posted 31/12/2010 - 17:02
Link
I have waited in all day for delivery, called CO Op Electrical only to be told that it's been lost it in the post. Went down to local Westgate store having one delivered Wednesday.
Posted 03/02/2011 - 14:03
Link
I generally use DSLRs or more advanced cameras, but, as I found it for €99, I confess I made a compulsive buying
The alleged reasons were that the tiny Samsung NV3 I always carry in my pocket was getting old and lacked a true anti-shake feature.
Here is a small rather pessimistic review of my first tries:
Pros:
- Eye-catching design.
Cons:
- The camera definitely lacks a mode selector knob, so you must always navigate through menus with those annoying beeps.
- The zoom command, as I had read in some reviews is ill placed, for you have to release your thumb from the camera body when you want to reach it.
- The automatic color balance is often wrong. The noise removing algorithm is far too strong and I didn't find a way to deactivate it. The "medium" sharpening is much too strong and the camera needs to be set to "soft". If you look to pictures in real pixels size, the grain aspect is rather ugly.
- The camera in "P" mode cannot set itself to a speed that is considered likely to produce a motion blur. So if you disabled the flash, you must (through the menus... beep beep beep and so on) select the night shot option.
- The macro feature is really deceiving compared to my old NV3 (which also got bad reviews when it was released).
I first thought I should bring my model back to the reseller, for it had an enormous dead pixel near the center, visible even on medium size previews. As I noticed there was a pixel mapping feature, and I didn't want to bother with commercial negotiations, I kept this one, but the pixel is not completely masked after several pixel mappings. (Sensor pixel mapping should be considered as a pro.
Despite all the foregoing, I hope I'll take good photos (and videos) with this one, as it generally happens with all my cameras. I always hate my new cameras at first...
The alleged reasons were that the tiny Samsung NV3 I always carry in my pocket was getting old and lacked a true anti-shake feature.
Here is a small rather pessimistic review of my first tries:
Pros:
- Eye-catching design.
Cons:
- The camera definitely lacks a mode selector knob, so you must always navigate through menus with those annoying beeps.
- The zoom command, as I had read in some reviews is ill placed, for you have to release your thumb from the camera body when you want to reach it.
- The automatic color balance is often wrong. The noise removing algorithm is far too strong and I didn't find a way to deactivate it. The "medium" sharpening is much too strong and the camera needs to be set to "soft". If you look to pictures in real pixels size, the grain aspect is rather ugly.
- The camera in "P" mode cannot set itself to a speed that is considered likely to produce a motion blur. So if you disabled the flash, you must (through the menus... beep beep beep and so on) select the night shot option.
- The macro feature is really deceiving compared to my old NV3 (which also got bad reviews when it was released).
I first thought I should bring my model back to the reseller, for it had an enormous dead pixel near the center, visible even on medium size previews. As I noticed there was a pixel mapping feature, and I didn't want to bother with commercial negotiations, I kept this one, but the pixel is not completely masked after several pixel mappings. (Sensor pixel mapping should be considered as a pro.
Despite all the foregoing, I hope I'll take good photos (and videos) with this one, as it generally happens with all my cameras. I always hate my new cameras at first...
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man. (G.-B. Shaw)
Posted 03/02/2011 - 16:24
Link
Don wrote:
looks more and more like pentax's first entry into the mirror less evil class will be an interchangeable lens i-10 called the nc-1.
link
interesting rumor if true...
looks more and more like pentax's first entry into the mirror less evil class will be an interchangeable lens i-10 called the nc-1.
link
interesting rumor if true...
Who would buy a camera with such a tiny sensor (noise, no bokeh, etc), and a new lens mount?
Maybe Leica could make such an aberration, and count on the snobbery to sell few copies for 20 times the price they are worth. But this is not the niche market of Pentax.
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man. (G.-B. Shaw)
Posted 03/02/2011 - 16:32
Link
Francois_C wrote:
Who would buy a camera with such a tiny sensor (noise, no bokeh, etc), and a new lens mount?
Maybe Leica could make such an aberration, and count on the snobbery to sell few copies for 20 times the price they are worth. But this is not the niche market of Pentax.
Don wrote:
looks more and more like pentax's first entry into the mirror less evil class will be an interchangeable lens i-10 called the nc-1.
link
interesting rumor if true...
looks more and more like pentax's first entry into the mirror less evil class will be an interchangeable lens i-10 called the nc-1.
link
interesting rumor if true...
Who would buy a camera with such a tiny sensor (noise, no bokeh, etc), and a new lens mount?
Maybe Leica could make such an aberration, and count on the snobbery to sell few copies for 20 times the price they are worth. But this is not the niche market of Pentax.
1) pentax makes more cctv lenses than d-slr lens by about a 10x margin.... even if they took the cctv lenses (search for them on pentax's site to get an idea what we're talking about) used better glass and coatings (and even a possible auto 110 mount) the lenses are already designed!
2) kenko (also owned by Hoya) just released a camera with the same sized sensor and c-mount. (Hoya wins if it takes off and using standard Pentax cctv lenses again)..
3) if pentax can get a sony sensor to outperform both Sony and Nikon cameras using the same aps-c sensor, then maybe they can get this little sensor to match micro 4/3's quality or even beat them.. it is possible look up fuji xmr sensor...
this is not a d-slr beater, just a 4/3's competitor that doesn't bolster Oly and Panny's 4/3's market position... it also wouldn't gut entry level d-slr sales...
Fired many shots. Didn't kill anything.
Posted 03/02/2011 - 16:37
Link
Don wrote:
looks more and more like pentax's first entry into the mirror less evil class will be an interchangeable lens i-10 called the nc-1.
link
interesting rumor if true...
looks more and more like pentax's first entry into the mirror less evil class will be an interchangeable lens i-10 called the nc-1.
link
interesting rumor if true...
So let me get this straight, Pentax doesn't make long telephoto lenses for its established DSLR range (except for George's positively Unicorn-like DA* 250-600) because there isn't a sufficient market for them / would require too much investment / isn't what people really want.
But Pentax is (seemingly) going to throw a huge amount of money behind an interchangeable lens camera system with a sensor smaller than enthusiast compacts, and in a body that will no doubt be larger than them.
I don't think in future conversation people should be able to use the argument that "if it was worth doing Pentax would already have done it". They clearly just make it up as they go along.
I can here the Jessops salespeople already:
"Yes sir, you could spend £350 on the Canon S95 with it's compact body, fast lens which covers a really useful range, intuitive control system and class leading low-light performance. Alternatively, let me show you the latest offering from Pentax. It costs more, requires you to change lenses and is larger. Don't worry though, it more than makes up for it with its sensor which...oh wait, its sensor is actually smaller. Yes sir, I'll put an S95 to one side for you."
DISCLAIMER: I have made some assumptions in the above statements, in the absence of more details. If Pentax releases this camera and it truns out to be an absolute world beater I will post an apology thread. What's more, I'll buy one of the cameras.
If you can't say something nice about Pentax, you won't say anything at all.
Apparently.
Apparently.
Posted 03/02/2011 - 16:50
Link
Assuming the Kenko camera pictures I've seen are representative of the final product (in terms of functionality rather than form), I do see one massive stumbling block.
Such a spartan design would clearly aim the camera at either the enthusiast market, or the pro looking for a smaller body (i.e. it's unlikely to attract the gadget fiends as it looks like it was made in the Eastern Bloc, from wood).
The problem is that it seems to lack manual controls! You know, actual dials that control settings (rather than having to delve into menus just to find exposure compensation or a tungsten WB setting).
I realise that makes me sound a little like Ken Rockwell, but a proper little focussed camera like this, with real manual controls would at least give it a chance to overcome the piddling-sized sensor in a reasonably large body problem.
Such a spartan design would clearly aim the camera at either the enthusiast market, or the pro looking for a smaller body (i.e. it's unlikely to attract the gadget fiends as it looks like it was made in the Eastern Bloc, from wood).
The problem is that it seems to lack manual controls! You know, actual dials that control settings (rather than having to delve into menus just to find exposure compensation or a tungsten WB setting).
I realise that makes me sound a little like Ken Rockwell, but a proper little focussed camera like this, with real manual controls would at least give it a chance to overcome the piddling-sized sensor in a reasonably large body problem.
If you can't say something nice about Pentax, you won't say anything at all.
Apparently.
Apparently.
Posted 03/02/2011 - 17:03
Link
robbie_d wrote:
So let me get this straight, Pentax doesn't make long telephoto lenses for its established DSLR range (except for George's positively Unicorn-like DA* 250-600) because there isn't a sufficient market for them / would require too much investment / isn't what people really want.
But Pentax is (seemingly) going to throw a huge amount of money behind an interchangeable lens camera system with a sensor smaller than enthusiast compacts, and in a body that will no doubt be larger than them.
I don't think in future conversation people should be able to use the argument that "if it was worth doing Pentax would already have done it". They clearly just make it up as they go along.
I can here the Jessops salespeople already:
"Yes sir, you could spend £350 on the Canon S95 with it's compact body, fast lens which covers a really useful range, intuitive control system and class leading low-light performance. Alternatively, let me show you the latest offering from Pentax. It costs more, requires you to change lenses and is larger. Don't worry though, it more than makes up for it with its sensor which...oh wait, its sensor is actually smaller. Yes sir, I'll put an S95 to one side for you."
DISCLAIMER: I have made some assumptions in the above statements, in the absence of more details. If Pentax releases this camera and it truns out to be an absolute world beater I will post an apology thread. What's more, I'll buy one of the cameras.
Don wrote:
looks more and more like pentax's first entry into the mirror less evil class will be an interchangeable lens i-10 called the nc-1.
link
interesting rumor if true...
looks more and more like pentax's first entry into the mirror less evil class will be an interchangeable lens i-10 called the nc-1.
link
interesting rumor if true...
So let me get this straight, Pentax doesn't make long telephoto lenses for its established DSLR range (except for George's positively Unicorn-like DA* 250-600) because there isn't a sufficient market for them / would require too much investment / isn't what people really want.
But Pentax is (seemingly) going to throw a huge amount of money behind an interchangeable lens camera system with a sensor smaller than enthusiast compacts, and in a body that will no doubt be larger than them.
I don't think in future conversation people should be able to use the argument that "if it was worth doing Pentax would already have done it". They clearly just make it up as they go along.
I can here the Jessops salespeople already:
"Yes sir, you could spend £350 on the Canon S95 with it's compact body, fast lens which covers a really useful range, intuitive control system and class leading low-light performance. Alternatively, let me show you the latest offering from Pentax. It costs more, requires you to change lenses and is larger. Don't worry though, it more than makes up for it with its sensor which...oh wait, its sensor is actually smaller. Yes sir, I'll put an S95 to one side for you."
DISCLAIMER: I have made some assumptions in the above statements, in the absence of more details. If Pentax releases this camera and it truns out to be an absolute world beater I will post an apology thread. What's more, I'll buy one of the cameras.
If the lenses are already designed, and the electronics are borrowed from say the optio line, therefore already designed, where is all this money you assume to be going?
let me give a real world example... we do high end weddings. I have a tradeshow booth (already spent the money) I have an older d-slr (ds2 already spent the money) people are tightening thier belts and high end wedding sales are down... Why not take my old ds2, my tradeshow booth my older mac and a printer and rent out a portable photo booth for a third the price of our wedding service? hint I'm getting lots of sales on the photo kiosk rentals compared to wedding sales.
Quote:
Assuming the Kenko camera pictures I've seen are representative of the final product (in terms of functionality rather than form), I do see one massive stumbling block.
Such a spartan design would clearly aim the camera at either the enthusiast market, or the pro looking for a smaller body (i.e. it's unlikely to attract the gadget fiends as it looks like it was made in the Eastern Bloc, from wood).
The problem is that it seems to lack manual controls! You know, actual dials that control settings (rather than having to delve into menus just to find exposure compensation or a tungsten WB setting).
I realise that makes me sound a little like Ken Rockwell, but a proper little focussed camera like this, with real manual controls would at least give it a chance to overcome the piddling-sized sensor in a reasonably large body problem.
Assuming the Kenko camera pictures I've seen are representative of the final product (in terms of functionality rather than form), I do see one massive stumbling block.
Such a spartan design would clearly aim the camera at either the enthusiast market, or the pro looking for a smaller body (i.e. it's unlikely to attract the gadget fiends as it looks like it was made in the Eastern Bloc, from wood).
The problem is that it seems to lack manual controls! You know, actual dials that control settings (rather than having to delve into menus just to find exposure compensation or a tungsten WB setting).
I realise that makes me sound a little like Ken Rockwell, but a proper little focussed camera like this, with real manual controls would at least give it a chance to overcome the piddling-sized sensor in a reasonably large body problem.
the kenko would appear to be designed for the "Art/toy" camera enthusiast looking for a rock solid brick of a camera to play with.
the pentax version would appear to be a shot at the serious compact & micro 4/3s crowd.
Who would want an aps-c camera when there are ff sensors out there? oops Pentax k-5 beats some ff sensors over at dxo labs so maybe there is hope for a smaller sensor to compete with 4/3s?
Fired many shots. Didn't kill anything.
Posted 03/02/2011 - 17:15
Link
Well, Robbie, let's have a look at your assertions.
The first paragraph contains another dig at me. Fair enough. After all, when his master stumbles, the jackass will bray.
It also makes the entirely erroneous assertion that people are saying that Pentax doesn't make a very long lens because it "isn't what people really want". Nobody has said that. It's the number of people who would be prepared to pay the necessarily high price that is the issue. Not a hard concept to grasp, surely.
The second paragraph is largely conjectural, but compares an item with a tiny potential market with a mass-market device, and pretends there is some sort of inconsistency. These are two utterly different things, and have nothing remotely to do with each other. And, contrary to your apparent view, Pentax's understanding of the mass market is not entirely flawed. Coloured cameras have been a big hit. Having said that, I concede that Canon has always been better at selling to the ignorant.
The third paragraph seems a little bitter. Perhaps you are miffed that you jumped ship just before the K5 came out. Can we look forward to you re-embarking, and giving us the pleasure of your company more often?
And the fourth and fifth paragraphs are hugely conjectural, especially as regards pricing.
The only paragraph I can't argue with is the last, where you have trodden new ground by being factual, at least in the first sentence.
G
The first paragraph contains another dig at me. Fair enough. After all, when his master stumbles, the jackass will bray.
It also makes the entirely erroneous assertion that people are saying that Pentax doesn't make a very long lens because it "isn't what people really want". Nobody has said that. It's the number of people who would be prepared to pay the necessarily high price that is the issue. Not a hard concept to grasp, surely.
The second paragraph is largely conjectural, but compares an item with a tiny potential market with a mass-market device, and pretends there is some sort of inconsistency. These are two utterly different things, and have nothing remotely to do with each other. And, contrary to your apparent view, Pentax's understanding of the mass market is not entirely flawed. Coloured cameras have been a big hit. Having said that, I concede that Canon has always been better at selling to the ignorant.
The third paragraph seems a little bitter. Perhaps you are miffed that you jumped ship just before the K5 came out. Can we look forward to you re-embarking, and giving us the pleasure of your company more often?
And the fourth and fifth paragraphs are hugely conjectural, especially as regards pricing.
The only paragraph I can't argue with is the last, where you have trodden new ground by being factual, at least in the first sentence.
G
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
24339 posts
22 years
Tyldesley,
Manchester
I wonder who bought one at £336.99?