Konica Minolta Dimage G500

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

Hi,

I have seen a lot of reviews on sites and have settled on the G500 as
my camera of choice. I will be buying it soon but before that, can
anyone let me know any comments they have about the camera?
Any good/bad points? Anything I should keep in mind?
Please! I would really appreciate it if someone could tell me this
stuff. Any comments you have are appreciated.

Thanks and eagerly waiting for replies


***
....the Phoenix shall rise...

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

On Tue, 18 May 2004 18:01:37 +0000, Phoenix AG wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I have seen a lot of reviews on sites and have settled on the G500 as
> my camera of choice. I will be buying it soon but before that, can
> anyone let me know any comments they have about the camera?
> Any good/bad points? Anything I should keep in mind?
> Please! I would really appreciate it if someone could tell me this
> stuff. Any comments you have are appreciated.
>
> Thanks and eagerly waiting for replies
>
>
> ***
> ...the Phoenix shall rise...

I'm rather pleased with mine. Takes excellent photos for such a small
camera, (about the size of a pack of cigarettes) good battery life, and
excellent build quality. The menus are a bit confusing at first, and it
does tend to accumulate fingerprints. Be sure to get a bigger SD card, it
comes with a 16 meg card and that just ain't enough...I recommend at least
a 256 meg card, bigger if you can afford it. Batteries are proprietary,
it's a good idea to get a backup if you're shooting a lot or going on a
long vacation.

Enjoy!

feroce

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

On Thu, 20 May 2004 17:38:00 GMT, feroce <shimrod@newsfeeds.com>
wrote:

>On Tue, 18 May 2004 18:01:37 +0000, Phoenix AG wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have seen a lot of reviews on sites and have settled on the G500 as
>> my camera of choice. I will be buying it soon but before that, can
>> anyone let me know any comments they have about the camera?
>> Any good/bad points? Anything I should keep in mind?
>> Please! I would really appreciate it if someone could tell me this
>> stuff. Any comments you have are appreciated.
>>
>> Thanks and eagerly waiting for replies
>>
>>
>> ***
>> ...the Phoenix shall rise...
>
>I'm rather pleased with mine. Takes excellent photos for such a small
>camera, (about the size of a pack of cigarettes) good battery life, and
>excellent build quality. The menus are a bit confusing at first, and it
>does tend to accumulate fingerprints. Be sure to get a bigger SD card, it
>comes with a 16 meg card and that just ain't enough...I recommend at least
>a 256 meg card, bigger if you can afford it. Batteries are proprietary,
>it's a good idea to get a backup if you're shooting a lot or going on a
>long vacation.
>
>Enjoy!
>
>feroce
>

Hi, thanks
I just spoke with my dad and he seems to have picked it up....along
with 2 256 MB Panasonic SD cards (I needed another for my Palm) and an
extra battery. I would have preferred if this used AA sized batteries
as proprietory batteries need to be charged...while AA sized can be
found anywhere. But I guess its ok because of its small size

Thanks for the reply. It helped my decision.
Btw, I've read on a few websites that it doesn't take photos too well
in low light. but then again, people say that they've taken pics in
darkness and they came out very well.
What is your opinion?


***
....the Phoenix shall rise...

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

On Thu, 20 May 2004 22:13:27 +0000, Phoenix AG wrote:

>
> Thanks for the reply. It helped my decision.
> Btw, I've read on a few websites that it doesn't take photos too well
> in low light. but then again, people say that they've taken pics in
> darkness and they came out very well.
> What is your opinion?
>
>
I haven't done a lot of low light shooting, so I really haven't formed an
opinion on the matter. Realistically, asking a low priced camera to
<everything> perfectly is a little unreasonable in my book...

feroce

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

On Fri, 21 May 2004 02:37:26 GMT, feroce <shimrod@newsfeeds.com>
wrote:

>On Thu, 20 May 2004 22:13:27 +0000, Phoenix AG wrote:
>
>>
>> Thanks for the reply. It helped my decision.
>> Btw, I've read on a few websites that it doesn't take photos too well
>> in low light. but then again, people say that they've taken pics in
>> darkness and they came out very well.
>> What is your opinion?
>>
>>
>I haven't done a lot of low light shooting, so I really haven't formed an
>opinion on the matter. Realistically, asking a low priced camera to
><everything> perfectly is a little unreasonable in my book...
>
>feroce

Yes, of course. It is unreasonable
But its not as cheap here in Asia as its in the US, as Konica and
Minolta are quite well known here. I've got it for around 400 US and I
believe you can get it for as much as 310 there.

Btw, how would you say the battery life is? I really don't have it in
my hands right now (will get it tomorrow) and I am curious.

Thanks.


***
....the Phoenix shall rise...

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

Some photos from g500
on my site:

republika.pl/puchan/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

On Fri, 21 May 2004 15:17:49 +0000, Phoenix AG wrote:

> Btw, how would you say the battery life is? I really don't have it in
> my hands right now (will get it tomorrow) and I am curious.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> ***
> ...the Phoenix shall rise...

Battery life seems to be good, leaving it plugged into my computer seems
to drain relatively quickly however. I'm going to do a little
experimenting now that you've piqued my curiosity. I'll charge it up and
then turn the camera on and leave it until it's completely discharged,
with the odd random pictures of my house cats, etc.

BTW, I got my camera from Newegg for $425 US including extra battery and a
256M SD card...

feroce

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

On 21 May 2004 16:05:06 -0700, puchan@op.pl (puchan@op.pl) wrote:

>Some photos from g500
>on my site:
>
>republika.pl/puchan/

Oh wow! Thank you. Those photos look unbelievable Really
professional.
The quality on this camera looks really really good. Hopefully, I will
know how to use it properly and set controls for the right shot and
all. Hehe...I am a digi cam newbie.


***
....the Phoenix shall rise...

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

On Sat, 22 May 2004 03:56:33 GMT, feroce <shimrod@newsfeeds.com>
wrote:

>Battery life seems to be good, leaving it plugged into my computer seems
>to drain relatively quickly however. I'm going to do a little
>experimenting now that you've piqued my curiosity. I'll charge it up and
>then turn the camera on and leave it until it's completely discharged,
>with the odd random pictures of my house cats, etc.

Hehe..thanks I'll be getting it today, so I'll do some tests too.

A good test to do is take pictures continuously (as you would
normally, not in continuous mode) with the LCD on, half with flash and
half without. That way, we can know the exact amount of pictures taken
before the battery gets exhausted.

I've seen a lot of sites do this kind of test.
But I am VERY confused. Example:

CNET says they took 419 shots on a single charge, the battery is
pretty good.

Steve's digicams reviews says he took 100 shots with LCD on and max
200 shots with LCD off.

You can see the variation in their reviews. It truly is mind boggling.
I don't know who to believe now. I have always trusted CNET but
Steve's site looks to be a well respected site among the digi camera
people.


***
....the Phoenix shall rise...

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

On Sat, 22 May 2004 20:22:32 +0000, Phoenix AG wrote:

> CNET says they took 419 shots on a single charge, the battery is
> pretty good.
>
> Steve's digicams reviews says he took 100 shots with LCD on and max
> 200 shots with LCD off.

Could be something as simple as a good battery vs. a mediocre battery.
That's why it's a good idea to get at least two of them...

feroce

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

On Sun, 23 May 2004 01:55:30 GMT, feroce <shimrod@newsfeeds.com>
wrote:

>On Sat, 22 May 2004 20:22:32 +0000, Phoenix AG wrote:
>
>> CNET says they took 419 shots on a single charge, the battery is
>> pretty good.
>>
>> Steve's digicams reviews says he took 100 shots with LCD on and max
>> 200 shots with LCD off.
>
>Could be something as simple as a good battery vs. a mediocre battery.
>That's why it's a good idea to get at least two of them...
>
>feroce

Yeah, well I have it in my hands right now. I read the manual and it
says the same thing as Steve's review (100 shots with LCD). So I guess
he just copied the info from the manual. CNET, afaik, always like to
test the cameras themselves and then post exactly what they found.
But its quite a discrepancy. If the manual says 100 shots (max 200)
and CNET managed 419, its quite a lot.

Anyway, I have 2 batteries. One is the original, 820 mAh. And the
other is 900mAh. I am using the 820 one right now (for the simple
reason that I charged it) and am on my first charge with about 50
shots and lots of uploading to the computer and viewing around and
changing settings on the camera, with zoom and flash.
Let me see how long it goes.

I have kept the 900 mAh one alone right now, as I really don't need to
swap batteries. If I know I need the camera, one battery should be
enough. However, I think I'll charge it up when I am going for a trip
or something.


***
....the Phoenix shall rise...