The ocuk range of BenQ cameras, anygood?

pieman109 · 7 Feb 2006 at 19:49

As title. I noticed this range of cameras on ocuk today and they look perfect for the missus as b/d pressie. Good lens size and look simple to use. Does anyone here have any opinions, etc on these cameras?
Thanks.

glitch · 7 Feb 2006 at 19:53

Really depends on which model you are talking about and what you're looking for in the camera. Overall you might say that they are OK, but you could certainly do better for the money - at least for the top-end of the scale.

pieman109 · 7 Feb 2006 at 20:52

glitch said:
Really depends on which model you are talking about and what you're looking for in the camera. Overall you might say that they are OK, but you could certainly do better for the money - at least for the top-end of the scale.

The ones I'm looking at are the bottom range, below £100. We're used to using an Olympus C-100, 1.3 megapixel camera, so any of these cameras, even the lower end ones, have got to be better than that. The one that caught my eye, and I reckon the wife would like is the C-500, 5 megapixel jobbie, She would deffo like the looks, its cheap, small and easy to use (very important that last one) and has got be better than our olympus.
Wad'ya think?

Joe T · 7 Feb 2006 at 21:07

Should do you ok I reckon. For £100, you cant expect a lot, and these should do ok I reckon.

glitch · 7 Feb 2006 at 21:15

There are better cameras for £100. Now, they don't look as nice as that BenQ, but your money is going on the look and not the internals. What worries me most is the lack of a zoom - digital zoom is cheating and really doesn't cut it in this day and age.

You could either spend the extra money on the BenQ E520, or if you wanted to spend £50 more you could pick up something like the Olympus Mju Mini Digital S. It's got better features than the BenQ, will probably last longer and should look equally as attractive to the missus.

Hell, they even come in pink for the girls:

pieman109 · 8 Feb 2006 at 00:15

glitch said:
There are better cameras for £100. Now, they don't look as nice as that BenQ, but your money is going on the look and not the internals. What worries me most is the lack of a zoom - digital zoom is cheating and really doesn't cut it in this day and age.

You could either spend the extra money on the BenQ E520, or if you wanted to spend £50 more you could pick up something like the Olympus Mju Mini Digital S. It's got better features than the BenQ, will probably last longer and should look equally as attractive to the missus.

Hell, they even come in pink for the girls:

Well with regards to features, I'm not too fussed really, all I really want (as pressie for she who must be obeyed) is a point and click camera with auto focus, and reasonable quality lens. Most of the features available will not be used so its a bit pointless paying for summat you're never likely to use, hence I was attracted to the £69 benQ due to its cost and basic features. saying that, the one you pointed out, the E520 looks about right and has some useful options, stabilisation during movie, etc. Thanks for the info mate.

Matt Van Dam · 9 Feb 2006 at 14:47

I'm looking at getting the BenQ C500 on deals of the week with a 512mb SD card. I'm not into serious photography, just want something for holiday snaps etc etc, can anyone tell me from experience if this will cut the mustard?

Carrot · 9 Feb 2006 at 15:19

TBH I'd avoid any camera that wasn't made by a proper camera manufacturer. Even if they have less megapixels (3 megapixels is plenty for any reasonably sized print), I'd expect a cheap model from Canon/Nikon/Fuji/Oly to produce better results than a comparably priced BenQ.

glitch · 9 Feb 2006 at 15:54

Matt Van Dam said:
I'm looking at getting the BenQ C500 on deals of the week with a 512mb SD card. I'm not into serious photography, just want something for holiday snaps etc etc, can anyone tell me from experience if this will cut the mustard?

Seeing as the C500 is lacking an optical zoom, no - it's more fancy-pants webcam than actual camera.

Personally I'd suggest picking something up second-hand. Like this for example. That's probably out of your price range, but it's a sensible first-timers camera with plenty of potential for later.

Matt Van Dam · 9 Feb 2006 at 16:45

Carrot said:
TBH I'd avoid any camera that wasn't made by a proper camera manufacturer. Even if they have less megapixels (3 megapixels is plenty for any reasonably sized print), I'd expect a cheap model from Canon/Nikon/Fuji/Oly to produce better results than a comparably priced BenQ.

Can you inform me as to why? Sorry I'm new to Camera technology and such, it's 5 Mega Pixel so surely it can't be that bad? It's only BenQ branded afterall, it's going to be manufactured elsewhere I assume?

glitch · 9 Feb 2006 at 17:04

I'll let Carrot back his own argument up, but you can't just look at the MP rating and go by that. All the MP relates to is the image size and not the quality, you really need to be looking at the lens on the front and the type of CCD/CMOS chip inside the camera body.

As an example: I have a 4MP camera that produces better (for a given value of better) pictures than my work colleague's 7.2MP. His shots come out larger but lack the fine detail provided by the quality of the sensor and lens that my camera has.

Any photographer will tell you that the most important part of the camera is the lens. Followed closely by the person holding the camera itself!

Carrot · 9 Feb 2006 at 17:51

Matt Van Dam said:
Can you inform me as to why? Sorry I'm new to Camera technology and such, it's 5 Mega Pixel so surely it can't be that bad? It's only BenQ branded afterall, it's going to be manufactured elsewhere I assume?

Yeah, but by who?

Like glitch says, it's more about the quality of the pixels and how well they're processed than just the number of them. In fact, with the small sensors in compact digicams you need a really good processing engine working with the sensor or more megapixels will more than likely lead to a noisier (more grainy) final image than a lower resolution sensor. It's this sort of area where I'd trust the big camera manufacturers to know their stuff over whichever company is building BenQ's cameras.

Also, in my experience, no-name rebranded cameras, even if they are capable of producing good pictures, tend to be much more inconsistent in terms of exposure metering (getting the brightness of the image right) than those made by 'proper' camera companies. I'm speaking from bitter hours of experience here, fixing pictures taken on the cruddy cameras at work that some idiot thought would be 'good value'.

Like I said in my last post, for printing up to A4 size, 3 or 4 megapixels is plenty and it's way more than enough for use on the web/emailing. Something like the Canon A410 here on OcUK would probably be perfect if you can stretch to it, and the mju mini glitch mentioned is really nice, and produces great pictures.

Matt Van Dam · 9 Feb 2006 at 18:01

OK, thats all well and good, but as I say I'm not going to be using a cam to take super high quality pics that I'm printing off, its just to get some pics from my holiday that I can look at on my computer and smile at, maybe get the odd 1 or 2 printed off. So would the C500 suffice for that?

Carrot · 9 Feb 2006 at 19:21

Since I can't find any information about it anywhere on the web, except for a Benq press-release, I really don't know.

glitch · 10 Feb 2006 at 15:20

Matt Van Dam said:
OK, thats all well and good, but as I say I'm not going to be using a cam to take super high quality pics that I'm printing off, its just to get some pics from my holiday that I can look at on my computer and smile at, maybe get the odd 1 or 2 printed off. So would the C500 suffice for that?

As I've already mentioned, it's a glorified webcam. You really need something with an Optical Zoom at the very least.

Matt Van Dam · 10 Feb 2006 at 18:27

OK thanks for your input guys it's appreciated. Can you point me in the direction of a decent camera with optical Zoom around the £100, or am I asking too much? hehe

Carrot · 10 Feb 2006 at 18:54

Yes, like I already mentioned: the Canon A410 right here on OcUK for £100 would be perfect for what you want it for.

ToLearn · 10 Feb 2006 at 22:34

casio-z120 for 150 pounds 7.2mega pixel i know bit over budget but should last you along time and has got some good reviews

The Z-120 offers a number of different shooting modes to choose from, ranging from a very simple "Easy" mode, up to full manual control of aperture, shutter and more. This camera is designed to grow with you as you learn more about photography, making it a great choice for everyone from the casual point and shoot user to those wishing to be more creative with their photography.

The Z-120 also has a Best Shot mode, with 32 preset options for such scenes as portraits, night shots, and sports.

highly recomended on a few well know reviews sites

TRiP · 10 Feb 2006 at 23:00

you can get a lot mora camera for £100 than a canon a410.

£100 should get you something like a fuji a350 or an olympus fe110. both 5 megapixel, 3x optical zoom and produce excellent results. they are slightly older models, hence the lower price for higher spec.