[zerolimit]

Originally Posted by Jackster

Is the lens on that Olympus motor driven and does it protrude when you turn it on?

No, the lense is all internal and fixed. There is a little servo powered lense cover that actuates like a shutter when you power off.

[Fly2Fish]

[quote]

Originally Posted by Jackster

Well, yes, but that's a false comparison between the Olympus and the Pentax (among a pretty small universe of waterproof - not just water resistant) compact cameras. As I mentioned, the Olympus rated in the Top Five Compact Cameras in at least one review I read, with "good" image production, although anecdotal comments in this thread seem to indicate that the Pentax may have the edge on macros and certain other features (not borne out by the reviews), which extra features may or may not matter to the photographer.

As someone who has more - and far more expensive - cameras than fly rods from my days as a professional photographer longer ago than I care to admit, I've learned over the years that the bigger the camera's "footprint", the less likely I am to carry it along if it's an adjunct to another activity like fly-fishing. While I've carried expensive non-waterproof cameras along with me on the river, I was so nervous about dropping them in the water that it detracted a good deal from the fun of the trip. And there are plenty of other Posters on this thread who will attest to the ease in dropping a camera in the water, with always-fatal results.

Bottom line: There's no area more obviously subject to trade-offs than cameras - we all know this: fast lenses with wide apertures = large heavy lenses, etc. With digital, however, even though electronics cannot overcome the deficiency of inferior glass lenses, smaller can be better (but usually at a higher price).

Just my two cents . . .

[Jackster]

[quote=Fly2Fish;17232]

Well, yes, but that's a false comparison between the Olympus and the Pentax (among a pretty small universe of waterproof - not just water resistant)

The Pentax W30 is waterproof for up to 2 hours at 10' depth. That should be plenty for all but the hardiest or clumsiest fly fishers.

As I mentioned, the Olympus rated in the Top Five Compact Cameras in at least one review I read, with "good" image production

Were all 5 camera's waterproof and was the waterproof Pentax in that test? Apples-for-apples means much more

As someone who has more - and far more expensive - cameras than fly rods from my days as a professional photographer longer ago than I care to admit

What was your film camera brand of choice and did you use Olympus then too?

I've learned over the years that the bigger the camera's "footprint", the less likely I am to carry it along if it's an adjunct to another activity like fly-fishing.

That's why it's so great both the Pentax and the late-comer to the waterproof/water resistant digital camera scene, Olympus, are so small. Both are really quite comparable to each other in side, especially when compared to dragging an SLR on the water.

[Fly2Fish]

[quote=Jackster;17238]

Originally Posted by Fly2Fish

Absolutely right.

No, the only waterproof camera in that comparison was the Olympus. But all that tells you is that the Olympus rated well in the Compact Camera segment, even among non-waterproof cameras.

Nope - Nikon was my preference. Never used Olympus.

I couldn't agree more. It's a great time to be picking cameras in the tough world of waterproof/shockproof/etc.

Jackster, didn't mean to raise your hackles . . . just my opinion, FWIW.