Can you believe it? W60 snaps a bear

[bill_tuthill]

I was shocked by the quality of this shot from the Pentax W60. Perhaps oversaturated in Photoshop, but undeniably

amazing for a P&S. Click on the image for 100% crop, 2370 pixels wide.

 

http://cacreeks.com/eel-hrst.htm

[mountainvisions]

<p>That is precisely the beauty of a camera like that, the ability to get shots you otherwise wouldn't get.</p>

<p>Sure compared to a DSLR the photo is probably pretty poor (though it looks pretty good to me at 100%) but you don't have a DSLR handy while paddling white water!</p>

<p>Nice find!</p>

[miserere_mei]

<p>I wouldn't throw a party for the IQ (and I had to rinse my eyes out after seeing that grass), but it's the camera you have with you that counts, and that shot is infinitely better than the one he would have taken without a camera.</p>

[craig_big]

That rocks. I spent 8 weeks paddling once, without a single photo to show for it. I would have killed to have a waterproof pocket digital with me at the time., especially one with 10MP and this kind of quality. It's a pretty tall order to produce a camera that's small enough to fit in your front life-jacket pocket, or even one that you can quickly tuck away under your skirt, and be water and shock-proof at the same time. I once paddled with a guy that would get ahead about 5 minutes, disembark, and produce from behind his seat a dry-bag with a full-size camcorder, safely tucked away and padded. He got great footage of the rest of the group hitting various stretches of the rapids. It was great trouble for him, though, to have to meticulously guard his gear against water and shock. I'm sure that guy today has one of these waterproof digitals, which are also capable of taking video.

[r.t. dowling]

<blockquote>

<p><em>"Perhaps oversaturated in Photoshop..."</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Perhaps? I think that photographer would have found Velvia to be too dull and subdued. ;-)</p>

[mountainvisions]

<blockquote>

<p>That rocks. I spent 8 weeks paddling once, without a single photo to show for it. I would have killed to have a waterproof pocket digital with me at the time., especially one with 10MP and this kind of quality.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Exactly!! Although, I've gotten pretty bold keeping my DSLR handy while paddling, I still take whatever my old "expendable" model is, and accept that it might not see another trip each time. So my images are always a sensor generation behind, although with the K10D now be my "old" model, I'm not really hurting that badly :-)!</p>

<p>The beauty of the W series is that at least for a few years (after that the seals shrink and gradually get weaker things change, although it's still plenty rain/splash proof for a while), it's nearly impossible to kill.</p>

<p>I liked the old W10/20 series, I used both, with the W20 being used much longer. The IQ was not great, but I actually did print a few larger images at around base ISO (not too big, but in the 8x10/11x14 range) and was very happy. Not on par with the Pentax DSLRs I own, but not horrible. I guess perfectly usable, just not gallery quality would be a great way to describe it.</p>

<p>My understanding is the W series actually dropped a few notches as they increased pixels (pretty common) so my results with the W20 might not be par for the current course.</p>

<p>I'm holding my breath Pentax produces something like a S90/G10/LX3 IQ in a W90 body. I'd be all over that in a second.</p>

<p>The W90 looks great, and I'm still tempted to bite on it if I can get a deal, but I as with the W80, I think the IQ is going to be just a little short of the minimum I personally expect from any camera.</p>