Olympus C3020 versus C4040 + PT010 UW housing

Hi,

I want to buy my 1st digital camera soon which I will use on the occasional dive trip and during my travels.

I am still a novice in photography & UW photography as I only used a point & shoot APS camera in the past.

I am interested in learning something more about photography though but most of pictures will be viewed on my computer only. The occasional prints should not be bigger then 10x15.

Is it really worth spending 300 euros extra on the C4040 in my case?

Thierry-Belgium

I'd spend the extra money. The 30X0 series have more problems with chromatic aberrations (see explanation in Dpreview Article ) than the 4040.

As the new C5050 should be available soon here in Europe, prices should drop for the C4040, might be worth waiting a bit longer.

Sabine

Why don't you consider the C-4000Z and the PT-010?

For u/w use the 4000 should be almost as good as the 4040, major disadvantage being F2.8 v F1.8, which doesn't matter if you use a strobe, and no sound on the video, but it is much cheaper.

The C-4000Z has received very good ratings. Sometimes better than the C-4040Z.

I have played with a 3020, it is not a bad camera either, but today you need 4 Mp or higher. 3Mp is now entry-level. And for good reason, I don't think that print quality is good enough with 2 Mp. 3Mp is OK, but 4Mp is just that little bit better which gives you the flexibility on cropping, etc.

Guess what snoack!!!! The 4040 is actually still being sold more expensive then the new 5050 :freak:

Why don't you consider the C-4000Z and the PT-010?

 

The C-4000Z has received very good ratings.  Sometimes better than the C-4040Z.

I have used the Olympus 3040, 4040 and 4000 for underwater shots and I feel I must kindly disagree with you regarding the quality of the 4000. Without getting into the technicalities of the differences in the lenses, the quality of the image produced by the 4000 was unacceptable in comparison with that of the 3040/4040. The 4000 produces a lot more chromatic aberration and noise than the 3040/4040.

Granted, the 4000 has some superb new features (Super Macro and Live Histogram to name a few) but I feel that Olympus, in the process of making it affordable, cut corners and used the lens of the 30x0 cameras to make it so.

This is where the 5050 comes into play. Sporting all the features of the 4000 with the quality of optics of the 3040/4040, I think this is a much better choice. Of course, I remain to testify completely to this as I have not had the chance to use the 5050 yet and have not seen any test shots.

Guess what snoack!!!! The 4040 is actually still being sold more expensive then the new 5050  :freak:    

In that case, i'd go for the 5050

Sabine

in the UK the 5050 is £30 more than the 4040... well worth the extra money I felt. I'd go for the 5050 and the PT015 housing