which one to get?

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

FujiFilm
FinePix A340 - 4.1mp - 3x opt, 35mm Zoom Lens 38 - 114 mm
OLYMPUS D-590 4mp 3x opt, 35-105mm

the 35mm equivalent on the fuji is bigger than on the Oly.
both use xD cards.
both cost the same.
13 answers Last reply
More about which
  1. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    In article <1125072032.998685.254200@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
    Mr.Happy <bolshoyhuy@hotmail.com> wrote:

    > FujiFilm
    > FinePix A340 - 4.1mp - 3x opt, 35mm Zoom Lens 38 - 114 mm
    > OLYMPUS D-590 4mp 3x opt, 35-105mm

    Uh...none of the above?
  2. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    Mr.Happy wrote:
    > FujiFilm
    > FinePix A340 - 4.1mp - 3x opt, 35mm Zoom Lens 38 - 114 mm
    > OLYMPUS D-590 4mp 3x opt, 35-105mm
    >
    > the 35mm equivalent on the fuji is bigger than on the Oly.
    > both use xD cards.
    > both cost the same.
    >
    Check out more detailed information on the cameras at dpreview.com. Then decide which
    camera best fits your own needs.
  3. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    "Mr.Happy" <bolshoyhuy@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:1125072032.998685.254200@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
    > FujiFilm
    > FinePix A340 - 4.1mp - 3x opt, 35mm Zoom Lens 38 - 114 mm
    > OLYMPUS D-590 4mp 3x opt, 35-105mm
    >
    > the 35mm equivalent on the fuji is bigger than on the Oly.
    > both use xD cards.
    > both cost the same.
    >

    I would not consider an XD card as a selling feature.
  4. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    "Mr.Happy" <bolshoyhuy@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:1125072032.998685.254200@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
    > FujiFilm
    > FinePix A340 - 4.1mp - 3x opt, 35mm Zoom Lens 38 - 114 mm
    > OLYMPUS D-590 4mp 3x opt, 35-105mm
    >
    > the 35mm equivalent on the fuji is bigger than on the Oly.
    > both use xD cards.
    > both cost the same.
    >
    I have the A330 - same camera except it is 3mp. Good color, no color
    fringing, sharp lens even in the corners, 120 shots on AA alkaline
    batteries. Limited manual control and no sound with the video. We have the
    3mp version of the Olympus. Also a good camera, but I find the images from
    the Fuji are sharper and the Olympus drains the batteries faster (better to
    use Ni-mh with it). Of course, the 4mp ver could be better, I don't know.

    Don't know about the Olympus, but the A330/A340 are long discontinued. Last
    I've seen, the A340 was around $100, but is sold out at that store now.
    -S
  5. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 12:21:29 -0400, Rudy Benner wrote:

    >> the 35mm equivalent on the fuji is bigger than on the Oly.
    >> both use xD cards.
    >> both cost the same.
    >
    > I would not consider an XD card as a selling feature.

    Several years ago I would have preferred CF cards. Today, I'd
    rather get a camera using SD or xD cards. When they were first
    introduced, xD cards were priced much higher than other types, but
    that's no longer true. There won't be any risk of getting an xD card
    whose speed will limit the performance of the cameras, but that's
    not true with other types, especially CF, which manufacturers are
    rapidly abandoning for their new cameras.
  6. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 09:09:48 -0700, Randall Ainsworth wrote:

    >> FinePix A340 - 4.1mp - 3x opt, 35mm Zoom Lens 38 - 114 mm
    >> OLYMPUS D-590 4mp 3x opt, 35-105mm
    >
    > Uh...none of the above?

    Why the fixation playing the obnoxious twit?
  7. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    In article <ktkug1dbr4ljkcvdiqhe230v2ppjtegliv@4ax.com>, ASAAR
    <caught@22.com> wrote:

    > On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 09:09:48 -0700, Randall Ainsworth wrote:
    >
    > >> FinePix A340 - 4.1mp - 3x opt, 35mm Zoom Lens 38 - 114 mm
    > >> OLYMPUS D-590 4mp 3x opt, 35-105mm
    > >
    > > Uh...none of the above?
    >
    > Why the fixation playing the obnoxious twit?

    I've yet to see anything decent with the Fuji name stamped on it...have
    never been a fan of things Olympus either.
  8. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 12:02:21 -0700, Randall Ainsworth wrote:

    >>>> FinePix A340 - 4.1mp - 3x opt, 35mm Zoom Lens 38 - 114 mm
    >>>> OLYMPUS D-590 4mp 3x opt, 35-105mm
    >>>
    >>> Uh...none of the above?
    >>
    >> Why the fixation playing the obnoxious twit?
    >
    > I've yet to see anything decent with the Fuji name stamped on it...have
    > never been a fan of things Olympus either.

    But you simply don't know how to respond constructively, and take
    cheap shots that demonstrate nothing more than ignorance. Had the
    OP indicated that they were more than amateur, and were considering
    an Olympus E-1 or a Fuji S2 Pro, then your reply might be
    worthwhile, if you went into more detail explaining why another
    brand might be preferable.

    But for the OP's needs, those two cameras are both likely to be
    excellent choices. I'm less familiar with the Olympus, but the Fuji
    is a known good performer for it's type, has gotten good reviews,
    and, for instance, doesn't have the cheap, easily breakable pieces
    of plastic that some other brands sometimes use. It's small, light,
    takes good, sharp pictures, gets good battery life, and is
    relatively inexpensive. What would you suggest as an alternative,
    assuming you know anything at all about this market segment?
  9. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    "ASAAR" <caught@22.com> wrote in message
    news:ktkug1dbr4ljkcvdiqhe230v2ppjtegliv@4ax.com...
    > On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 09:09:48 -0700, Randall Ainsworth wrote:
    >
    >>> FinePix A340 - 4.1mp - 3x opt, 35mm Zoom Lens 38 - 114 mm
    >>> OLYMPUS D-590 4mp 3x opt, 35-105mm
    >>
    >> Uh...none of the above?
    >
    > Why the fixation playing the obnoxious twit?

    Once an obnoxious twit always an obnoxious twit. He can't help it, he's
    only being himself.
  10. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    In article <hMLPe.2520$vu5.919@fe11.lga>, Peter A. Stavrakoglou
    <ntotrr@optonline.net> wrote:

    > Once an obnoxious twit always an obnoxious twit. He can't help it, he's
    > only being himself.

    Go play with your 3.42MP kiddie toy.
  11. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    In article <1usug1t2os2upkmj10oku22vrv3issj7be@4ax.com>,
    ASAAR <caught@22.com> wrote:

    > On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 12:02:21 -0700, Randall Ainsworth wrote:
    >
    > >>>> FinePix A340 - 4.1mp - 3x opt, 35mm Zoom Lens 38 - 114 mm
    > >>>> OLYMPUS D-590 4mp 3x opt, 35-105mm
    > >>>
    > >>> Uh...none of the above?
    > >>
    > >> Why the fixation playing the obnoxious twit?
    > >
    > > I've yet to see anything decent with the Fuji name stamped on it...have
    > > never been a fan of things Olympus either.
    >
    > But you simply don't know how to respond constructively,

    There is an old story of a man, Kwuanjo, who went to see a monk because
    he was having great distress in the world. The monk welcomed him to the
    monastery and let him stay in a hut just at the border of the monastery.
    After a few months of meditation and contemplation Kwuanjo felt much
    better and was happy.

    Later that year the monk told Kwuanjo that he that he was going on a
    trip to india and would not be back for many years. They hugged and they
    parted.

    Three years later the monk came back to the monastery. As he walked down
    a path he saw Kwuanjo. Kwuanjo was very happy and excited to see the
    monk. Kwuanjo thanked the monk repeatedly saying he was so glad to find
    this place and he loved the land and most of all his simple hut.

    Later that night, while Kwuanjo was in the temple meditating, the monk
    walked to Kwuanjo's hut and burnt it to the ground. Seeing the flames,
    all the monks came running. When Kwuanjo arrived he looked at the
    burning hut, then he looked at the monk with the flaming torch in his
    hand.

    Tears came to Kwuanjo's eye as he smiled at the monk. The next day
    Kwuanjo left, happier then he ever was.


    You see, sometimes we don't see what we need and sometimes what we need
    it given to us in unpleasant ways.

    If one just say "neither" it is only your assumption that it did not
    help.

    You give your advise, others will give theirs.

    > and take
    > cheap shots that demonstrate nothing more than ignorance. Had the
    > OP indicated that they were more than amateur, and were considering
    > an Olympus E-1 or a Fuji S2 Pro, then your reply might be
    > worthwhile, if you went into more detail explaining why another
    > brand might be preferable.
    >
    > But for the OP's needs, those two cameras are both likely to be
    > excellent choices. I'm less familiar with the Olympus, but the Fuji
    > is a known good performer for it's type, has gotten good reviews,
    > and, for instance, doesn't have the cheap, easily breakable pieces
    > of plastic that some other brands sometimes use. It's small, light,
    > takes good, sharp pictures, gets good battery life, and is
    > relatively inexpensive. What would you suggest as an alternative,
    > assuming you know anything at all about this market segment?
  12. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    In article <hMLPe.2520$vu5.919@fe11.lga>,
    "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr@optonline.net> wrote:

    > "ASAAR" <caught@22.com> wrote in message
    > news:ktkug1dbr4ljkcvdiqhe230v2ppjtegliv@4ax.com...
    > > On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 09:09:48 -0700, Randall Ainsworth wrote:
    > >
    > >>> FinePix A340 - 4.1mp - 3x opt, 35mm Zoom Lens 38 - 114 mm
    > >>> OLYMPUS D-590 4mp 3x opt, 35-105mm
    > >>
    > >> Uh...none of the above?
    > >
    > > Why the fixation playing the obnoxious twit?
    >
    > Once an obnoxious twit always an obnoxious twit. He can't help it, he's
    > only being himself.

    Well then there are two of us.
  13. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

    Randall Ainsworth wrote:
    > In article <ktkug1dbr4ljkcvdiqhe230v2ppjtegliv@4ax.com>, ASAAR
    > <caught@22.com> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 09:09:48 -0700, Randall Ainsworth wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>>FinePix A340 - 4.1mp - 3x opt, 35mm Zoom Lens 38 - 114 mm
    >>>>OLYMPUS D-590 4mp 3x opt, 35-105mm
    >>>
    >>>Uh...none of the above?
    >>
    >> Why the fixation playing the obnoxious twit?
    >
    >
    > I've yet to see anything decent with the Fuji name stamped on it...have
    > never been a fan of things Olympus either.

    My previous camera, the Finepix 6900, was pretty decent for an
    SLR-lookin' P&S. It had a screw-in barrel attachment that let you put
    52mm filters on it. Of course, now that I have the D70 I can do things
    like control depth of field.
Ask a new question

Read More

Photo Finepix Cameras