Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Megxon cameras

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
June 2, 2005 6:26:51 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hi all,
Has anyone had any experience of using the Megxon C480 digital camera.
I'm tempted to buy one on e-Bay as the price is OK but are there any major
snags involved.
Particularly interested in whether the lens is good or poor.
Any help would be appreciated.
Cheers.
Jim.

More about : megxon cameras

Anonymous
June 2, 2005 6:26:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Jim" <oap@home.vet> wrote in message news:3g8forFb5i3bU1@individual.net...
> Hi all,
> Has anyone had any experience of using the Megxon C480 digital camera.
> I'm tempted to buy one on e-Bay as the price is OK but are there any major
> snags involved.
> Particularly interested in whether the lens is good or poor.
> Any help would be appreciated.
> Cheers.
> Jim.
>
Low cost no name digicams = JUNK

better stay with name brands such as Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Fuji and such.
-S
Anonymous
June 2, 2005 6:44:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Jim <oap@home.vet> wrote:
> Hi all,
> Has anyone had any experience of using the Megxon C480 digital camera.
> I'm tempted to buy one on e-Bay as the price is OK but are there any major
> snags involved.
> Particularly interested in whether the lens is good or poor.
> Any help would be appreciated.

We discussed the Megxons on the .zlr group a while back.

http://www.megxon.com/products/C480/C480.htm

has example images.


They look uniformly awful. The "8 megapixel" mode seems to be the crudest
interpolation possible, and the "real" 4 megapixel images look to have
appalling focus, terrible colour, JPEG artefacts, purple fringing, and
indeed everything in the A-Z of Awful Digital Cameras.

It looks like it's goot a poor lens and poor firmware.

pete
--
pete@fenelon.com "There's no room for enigmas in built-up areas" - HMHB
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
Anonymous
June 2, 2005 6:44:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Pete Fenelon" <pete@fenelon.com> wrote in message
news:cg2n7d.p86.ln@fenelon.com...
> Jim <oap@home.vet> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> Has anyone had any experience of using the Megxon C480 digital camera.
>> I'm tempted to buy one on e-Bay as the price is OK but are there any
>> major
>> snags involved.
>> Particularly interested in whether the lens is good or poor.
>> Any help would be appreciated.
>
> We discussed the Megxons on the .zlr group a while back.
>
> http://www.megxon.com/products/C480/C480.htm
>
> has example images.
>
>
> They look uniformly awful. The "8 megapixel" mode seems to be the crudest
> interpolation possible, and the "real" 4 megapixel images look to have
> appalling focus, terrible colour, JPEG artefacts, purple fringing, and
> indeed everything in the A-Z of Awful Digital Cameras.
>
> It looks like it's goot a poor lens and poor firmware.

So you don't like it?

;-)

>
> pete
> --
> pete@fenelon.com "There's no room for enigmas in built-up areas" - HMHB
June 2, 2005 7:24:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Pete Fenelon" <pete@fenelon.com> wrote in message
news:cg2n7d.p86.ln@fenelon.com...
> Jim <oap@home.vet> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> Has anyone had any experience of using the Megxon C480 digital camera.
>> I'm tempted to buy one on e-Bay as the price is OK but are there any
>> major
>> snags involved.
>> Particularly interested in whether the lens is good or poor.
>> Any help would be appreciated.
>
> We discussed the Megxons on the .zlr group a while back.
>
> http://www.megxon.com/products/C480/C480.htm
>
> has example images.
>
>
> They look uniformly awful. The "8 megapixel" mode seems to be the crudest
> interpolation possible, and the "real" 4 megapixel images look to have
> appalling focus, terrible colour, JPEG artefacts, purple fringing, and
> indeed everything in the A-Z of Awful Digital Cameras.
>
> It looks like it's goot a poor lens and poor firmware.
>
> pete
> --
> pete@fenelon.com "There's no room for enigmas in built-up areas" - HMHB


That sounds like a pretty conclusive no to me Pete.
Actually I am quite happy with my little Kodak DX6340 but I wanted a longer
optical zoom than its 4x. Been trying to buy the 2x converter for it, but
they seem hard to find.
Thanks again for that information.
Regards.
Jim.
June 2, 2005 8:23:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"SimonLW" <anon@anon.com> wrote in message
news:429f2432_4@newsfeed.slurp.net...
> "Jim" <oap@home.vet> wrote in message
> news:3g8forFb5i3bU1@individual.net...
>> Hi all,
>> Has anyone had any experience of using the Megxon C480 digital camera.
>> I'm tempted to buy one on e-Bay as the price is OK but are there any
>> major
>> snags involved.
>> Particularly interested in whether the lens is good or poor.
>> Any help would be appreciated.
>> Cheers.
>> Jim.
>>
> Low cost no name digicams = JUNK
>
> better stay with name brands such as Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Fuji and such
> -S


Cheers, I think I have decided to scrap the idea.
Jim
>
>
Anonymous
June 2, 2005 8:59:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Jim <oap@home.vet> wrote:
>
> That sounds like a pretty conclusive no to me Pete.
> Actually I am quite happy with my little Kodak DX6340 but I wanted a longer
> optical zoom than its 4x. Been trying to buy the 2x converter for it, but
> they seem hard to find.

For good budget cameras with long zoom I'd recommend you look at the
Konica-Minolta Z range, they aren't quite up with the A series, but you
get a decent piece of kit for your money. You might also look at the
Panasonic FZ4 or FZ5, but they're slightly more expensive.

pete
--
pete@fenelon.com "There's no room for enigmas in built-up areas" - HMHB
Anonymous
June 4, 2005 5:04:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Jim" <oap@home.vet> wrote in message news:3g8forFb5i3bU1@individual.net...
> Hi all,
> Has anyone had any experience of using the Megxon C480 digital camera.
> I'm tempted to buy one on e-Bay as the price is OK but are there any major
> snags involved.
> Particularly interested in whether the lens is good or poor.
> Any help would be appreciated.
> Cheers.
> Jim.

Hi Jim.
I find the camera and lens excellent, very good value for the money.
I sent this below earlier.
John.
PS. Mine is the Luxmedia version, same camera.
------------

> Does anyone know if the Praktica 4008-MegxonC480 is a good camera to start
> off with.
>
> Thanks
Hi,
It all depends on what you want. If you want one that fits in your pocket, it won't,
it's more or less 4 inches x 3" and solid.
If that's not so important then it's a great fun camera.To point and shoot is pretty
easy but if you want to use it to it's full potential there are a lot of settings so you
will have to have patience in order to learn them all. AND 8 Ni-MH batteries! as a
lot of time will be spent with it *on* while you try all the different combinations.

I have had the Luxmedia version for about 6 months, it came with alkaline batteries
that lasted about half an hour! The 2500 mAh Ni-MH 's I bought on Ebay will last
all week. I like to have 4 spare ones handy. To charge them, I picked up a 250 vac
to 12 volt dc 750ma power pack on the market for a £1 and use a bundle of 300
ohm resisitors to drop the volts and set the current to 250 ma. There are hundreds
of these DC power packs about, X Christmas trees and things, I think a 9 volt
would also do but you need one with the Milliamps, at least 500.

I was amazed at how low the lighting need be to get good pictures, and set on
'tungston'. to get colour right. When it's very dark I do squeeze the shutter.

At first I thought there was some shutter lag as there is a click a second or so
after pressing the shutter but after some testing, i.e. moving the camera quickly
after shooting and taking shots of cars passing I find it very quick, always
depressing the shutter half way first

Its a 4 mp sensor interpolarized to 8 which doesn't seem worth the extra memory
needed, but I do use 6mp which makes a difference. The photos are very clear
and sharp after being used to a pentax K 1000 (spotmatic) with Takumar lenses.

The straight through viewfinder isn't very clear but a least you can see what your
aimed at, keep still and look over the top for the smiles.

One thing I find very handy is the 9 steps of magnifying in the LCD screen, you
can quickly check to see just how sharp the picture is and delete if not up to spec.
The extra couple of exposure stops each way is also very useful.

I find the zoom only good to about 3/4 full. But with a simple crop programme
and the pictures being so clear I get similar to a closer shot.

I hope this helps you, after 6 months I'm still finding new things to do.

Best wishes. John.
Anonymous
June 5, 2005 2:32:17 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

John Bates wrote:
>
> I have had the Luxmedia version for about 6 months, it came with alkaline batteries
> that lasted about half an hour! The 2500 mAh Ni-MH 's I bought on Ebay will last
> all week. I like to have 4 spare ones handy. To charge them, I picked up a 250 vac
> to 12 volt dc 750ma power pack on the market for a £1 and use a bundle of 300
> ohm resisitors to drop the volts and set the current to 250 ma. There are hundreds
> of these DC power packs about, X Christmas trees and things, I think a 9 volt
> would also do but you need one with the Milliamps, at least 500.

or you could buy a Maha intelligent charger, and charge them correctly.


>
> I hope this helps you, after 6 months I'm still finding new things to do.
>
> Best wishes. John.
!