Very nice, particularly the backlit leaves.

Thanks, yes that's my thinking too - but I'm a little concerned about the seals going on such an old model now!

If money was no object I'd be getting the Panasonic Ft2 which seems very good in and out of the water, and has a good video mode.

Hmm not too bad. I'd probably rather go for one of these than one of those Kodak fixed lens jobbies, which are about the same price new.

A shame about the 38mm wide angle though.

Here we have two decent 'practice shots', a little oversaturated but otherwise OK. The subject matter and shooting angles don't really do it for me but shots like this help you get used to a lens.

I presume the selective focus on the end of the log was deliberate though Chris?

I do agree that the lens sometimes does take a little coaxing to focus on distant objects though.

Trickletreat- funny, that viewpoint and the three choirs fireworks display was EXACTLY what I was thinking when I wrote my post! I've never captured it, but always thought what a fabulous shot it would make.

Naim - that's a spectacular shot! The London Eye and lights on the embankment really make the shot.

To be honest I think trying to photograph the fireworks at your local display is a bit of a waste of time and spoils your (and perhaps your family's) enjoyment of the display!

I would wait for one of the big urban displays, and go out on my own to find a vantage point which includes a beautiful stretch of urban night scenery - a lit-up bridge, castle, skyscrapers etc - to provide a setting for the 'works. Set up on a tripod as normal for night shooting and take a lot of long exposures during the display.

With a sharp and steady setting for the fireworks, the streaks of colour and light will look more interesting and dynamic.

These camera are now very cheap and I am tempted to get one as a cheap underwater camera and a tough camera for just general purpose record shots.

Can anyone recommend / comment on the camera? Is it much worse image quality than the latest W90 / WG-1 cameras, or does the lower pixel count actually work in its favour?

I could spend a bit more and get a used Sony TX5 or W90, but there's quite a jump in price and even the comparitively well reviewed TX5 isn't 'amazing' IQ wise - all these cams are a bit ropey if you're used to DSLR quality!

Clearly the obvious answer, and the one quite literally staring us in the face -

Get them to take their flippin' glasses off!



But seriously I don't see why members are getting so exercised about the clip... nice bit of basic lighting advice but of course you've got to bear in mind Adorama don't do clips like that just for fun... they obviously hope they can sell a bits of lighting gear

In the scheme of things a bogey was the least of his concerns, aesthetically. He gleefully showed me a very raw looking weal on his back, which he told me was where he had been 'whipped'. I didn't press him as to how this had come about

Whatever, it must be a tough existence for people such as Mark, god knows what his life is really like.

Just stick it on your camera and take some photos surely? You can do controlled tests with the camera on a tripod using the same settings but what's the point! 'The better lens' depends on a lot of different criteria, and what you want to use it for.

You'll soon work out which is more worthwhile to *you*! These lenses are quite cheap and you can always sell them if you end up not using them.