"dj_nme" <jeffreybd@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:40e8a22d$0$18668$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Pipper wrote:
> > "Eddie" <Woofdog@kennel.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:40e87d0f$0$24753$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> >
> >>"Pipper" <nomail@any.com> wrote in message
> >>news:40e80618@news.greennet.net...
> >>
> >>>I sent this email to several of Olympus's email addresses and Olympus
> >
> > have
> >
> >>>not replied to any of the emails.  Read what I wrote and you will see
> >
> > how
> >
> >>>bad this C765 camera is.  I do not recommend anyone to but one of these
> >>>cameras.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>(Sent to Olympus)
> >>>Hi,
> >>>
> >>>I have bought an Olympus C765 camera.  I have discovered a "very
> >
> > serious"
> >
> >>>defective camera programming in the camera's on-board software.  The
> >>>software defect makes the camera bloody useless for video playback to
TV
> >>
> >>and
> >>
> >><snip>
> >>
> >>Ummm, methinks that initially, a more polite mail would have been
better.
> >>You assert that this is a 'defect' and then state it is bad programming.
> >
> > If
> >
> >>it is  the latter then  it is not a defect. I agree that this 'problem'
> >>could be  frustrating and negate the video use. But there again, if I
wish
> >>to video I use a video camera. Still cameras, no matter how good, simply
> >
> > do
> >
> >>not match up to requierments in this area. It is nothing more than an
> >>emergency facility.
> >>
> >>I have the Canon G5, and have not bothered with the video function.
Might
> >>give it a try and compare with you. When I bought the Canon it was torn
> >>between it, the Olympus a Fuji, withe the large zoon ranges of the
latter
> >>two being of interest. The Olympus would have won.
> >>
> >>Lastly, how good is it in its native  STILL mode?
> >>
> >>
> >>Eddie
> >
> >
> >
> > In its native  STILL mode it is ok, very rarely need to edit any of the
> > photos.  In addition to the other faults the video mode records
everything
> > too dark, and every video has to be edited to lighten them up.  The
video
> > function is shite unless used in bright daylight.
>
> I have used s variety of digital cameras as low-res* video cameras.
> The bast ones I've used are the Aiptek mini-dv line.
> Regardless of this, all of them play back showing the tool icons on the
> TV screen.
> My assumption has always been that this is just a method of checking
> what's recorded (like a clearer viewfinder option), because most of the
> digicams (that I've used) came with video editing software of various
> levels of quality and that you could burn the video to DVD, VCD or SVCD
> and then watch it on any TV attached to a DVD player.
>
> My primary digital still camera is a Minolta Dimage 7I.
> This can do 30 second video clips, but why bother?
> As a still camera (I think at least) it is pretty darn good, but as a
> camcorder it leaves much to be desired.
>
> *by "low res" I mean 320x240, which gives (surprisingly) clear video in
> good lighting conditions.


Well this c765 with the 256mb card will do 12.5 minutes on 320x240