"MC" <qwert@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "Amanda" <amanda.draper@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
news:dedb21ef-396a-4a0b-bf11-713555862b58@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Hi! I'm looking for assistance with my new camera - it is a digital
> > Olympus sp-55ouz, 7.1 megapixel. I bought it to take action shots of
> > horses - it has a 15fps burst rate which is great - but I'm having
> > problems with the focus. The images are not in great focus no matter
> > what I do! Anyone know about this camera? I was told that it was a
> > good choice for action photography - but so far I don't see it.
> >
> > Here are some photos I took:
> >
> > http://www.amandadraper.com/amanda/flower/quin_spines08.htm
> >
> > As you can see, they aren't really in focus and have a 'non-realistic'
> > quality to them....
>
> I can see what you are saying. They look like they were taken on a
cheap
> digital camera or even a low pixel phone camera. They could even be
> mistaken for stills from a video. Take it back from where you got it
from
> as it could be faulty. In the UK the onus is on the vendor, in the
first
> six months, to prove there is NOT a fault rather than the customer to
prove
> there is. Maybe there is a similar where you are.
>
> MC
I don't have the original message here for some reason so if you won't
mind me using yours as a bridge.
I do agree with you that there are so many things just don't look right
with those photos, and we can't pretty much be able to tell what the owner
has done at her end.
If it isn't the camera is defected then there must be something has done
to those photos, cuz P&S may not have more detail and sharpness of the
DSLR,
but in general they usually have good color tone those photos don't have.
And all the odd sizes it telling us that they ain't original.
|
