Tag Archives: ricoh

Photography: Which Camera? And Does It Matter?

I always seem to have at least one camera about my person; usually more. Today I picked up four compacts to take with me on my daily ‘keep fit’ walk around the village. By sheer random chance I selected a 7.2 megapixel Casio EX-Z11 with a X3 zoom: a 14.2 megapixel Samsung ES74 with a X5 zoom; a whopping 16 megapixel Fujifilm T400 with a X10 zoom; and one of my favourites – a 9.3 megapixel Ricoh CX-2 with a X10.7 zoom. There wasn’t a whole bunch of interesting stuff to snap, so all four remained unsullied inside my jacket pockets for most of the rural sojourn – until I passed through the church car park, in which I discovered a car that had been aesthetically parked. When I say ‘aesthetically parked’, I actually mean that the driver had simply stopped and got out. It was the colour and the shape of the car that was truely aesthetic to my ageing eyes. It looked so gorgeous in the afternoon sun that I decided to take its photograph… four times – once with each camera. I knew, assuming that the autofocus worked properly, that it would result in four excellent pictures, irrespective of camera quality. But it would also be vaguely interesting to discover which camera captured the vehicle’s scrumptiousness best.  Which would prove most beneficial – aesthetically: megapixel count or zoom length? Or a combination? Let’s see, eh?

Casio EX-Z11 – x3 zoom
Samsung ES74 – x5 zoom
Fujifilm T400 – zoomed out to roughly x8-ish

As you can see, the Beemer looks great no matter what camera I used. It is just fabulous. But I saved the best til last. With the Ricoh CX-2 also zoomed out to about x8-ish, it wasn’t the megapixel count that mattered, and obviously not the zoom either because I didn’t want to go in any closer than I did with the Fijifilm. It was the quality of the camera lens. Regardez vous…

Nice car: nice camera: nice wallpaper. Now I know why it’s my favourite compact.

P.S Almost unheard of, but every camera had a memory card inside it, and no drained batteries. Sheer luck: I hadn’t stopped to check any of them. Wonders will never cease.

Photography: How Mauve is Mauve?

From my experience, there are certain colours that digital cameras seem to struggle with. The worst is yellow in bright sunlight. Particularly when shooting shiny flowers. Of the 50+ cameras that I currently keep in the bottom of my wardrobe, only three or four of them can cope at all. Most just flare out. The other problem colour is mauve/purple. I have a Primula in the back garden that not one of my cameras can capture accurately. But that’s another story. We don’t want to talk abject failure here on HamsterBritainDotCom, do we? No, we don’t. I also have a pleasant mauve plant, the name of which eludes me, which comes up every year in a terracotta pot on the patio. And it was to this plant I went when I decided upon  another of my famous comparison tests. Here are the guilty subjects this time…

A 4.0 megapixel Kyocera Finecam 410R. A 9.3 megapixel Ricoh CX2. and a 12 megapixel Kodak EasyShare M550. None of them are even remotely new, but I have been known to snap some quite nice pictures with all three – but never before at the same time. Here are the results of the Mauve Test…

The least mauve camera here is the Kyocera. The medium mauve, you might assume would be the 9.3 mg Ricoh. But you would be wrong. Not unusually it’s the Kodak that lets us down with a half-way-decent effort. And the winner – displaying a picture with remarkable similarity to the actual shade of mauve as seen with these aging eyes, was the Ricoh. And here’s the complete picture in all its glory…

RICOH CX2: Good camera!

In conclusion, it seems that if you want a vibrant, true-to-life shot get a Ricoh. If it’s quick snaps whilst on holiday, the Kodak will do just fine. And if you insist on an ancient Kyocera, do as I do. Just keep it as a curiosity, and maybe bring it out for a walk around the garden once in a while.