Please forgive my error indeed I just noticed the"m" and that it ws not "cm"
nor "in"
and I stand corrected you are absolutely correct :)
So now I need to understand your additional input on the"...focus your
attention of the level of magnification it iscapable of..."
Could you give an example, Kind Sir? it will then be assimulated quickly,
else I will need to get the manual ( which I still plan to do) read it and
find my way to the correct understanding, od how Super Macro results are
affected by the leavel of magnification.


"Tesselator" <jimmmboe@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bdmc59$pr8$1@catv02.starcat.ne.jp...
>
> "Dick" <Tungfree@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
news:QBwLa.57021$98.1923570@twister.socal.rr.com...
> > I did not have the facts on the macro of the c4040 before me but it
seemed
> > way bigger focal distance, so I went to the below site to compare again
> >
> >
http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/productcompare/productcompare.asp
> >
> > Note that the macro focus distance of the C4040 is 7.9" to 31.5" not as
> > short as you write below, while both the C-4000 and the C5050 have 1" -
8"
> > in Super Macro and 8" to 31" Macro.
>
> I said: "the 4040 is 0.2 - 0.8 m"   2 tenths of a meter is 20 centimeters.
> 20 centimeters sure sounds like 7.9 inches to me.
>
>                                                       O :-)
>
>
>
> >  I wish that you were correct in saying  "...Don't be put off by the
working
> > range of a camera's macro mode which in the 4040 is 0.2 - 0.8 m but
rather
> > focus your attention of the level of magnification it iscapable of..."
>
> first, I guess my expirience is a little wide as I've had exposure to many
> different cameras with lenses of varring focal lengths so in lou of what
> JK had to say:
>                   "Since the cameras being discussed have lenses of almost
> the same focal lengths and sensors of similar sizes, the degree of
> "magnification" will vary depending on the distance."
>                                                         My comment doen't
> carry as much weight as it would have if this discussion were open to a
widder
> range of camera models and lenses.  Good call JK!
>
>
>
> > Can you explain the leavel of maginfication that I should focus on I do
not
> > imediatly know what to look for.
>
> Also as JK clarified "magnification" in this sense should be measured in
> pixels per inch or pixels per CM.  which is correct ofcourse.  With this
> in mind it's simple math to abstract the "Magnification" based on the
> dot-pitch (resolution) of YOUR output device.
>
> Monitors are about 72 dpi (max) etc. etc.
>
>
>
> >  I do not have a long tome to decise on the C4040  if by chance Olympus
made
> > an error in teir spec sheet on the C40404 please please inform mr
quickly!!!
> > ICan get the C4040 used for about $399 shipped to me if it is not sold
soon.
> > if the focal distance is what I stated above what is your opinion then?
>
> Ya,  /maybe/ not what you're looking for (?).
>
>
>
> > Tomorrow Sunday I am considering looking into getting a refurbished
C5050
> > from some dealers.
>
> I briefly looked at the 4040... but played extensivly with the 5050...
> So without being able to compare the two models directly I can only
> say how impressed I was with the 5050!  So impressed infact I'm adding
> it to my collection having just bought a 5700 (Nikon) only a few months
> ago.  But that's me...  My wife and kids are thoroughly convinced that
> in just a few years the entire family fortune will have been invested in
> cameras.  Heh!  You should see my cam-corder equiptment...
>
>                                                             O :-P
>
>
> > Anyond have experience getting refurbished Digital cameras? Pro...?
Con...?
>
> I almost always buy used (from a used SHOP!) and then have them send it
off
> to the manufacturers for "referbbing" shortly after purchasing on the
3month
> (or whatever) warrentee that the shop offers.  I /always/ get back a
camera
> that has been hand tuned, bios upgradded, etc. and so is really better
than
> new.
>
> Nikon is the best for this and Sony is the worst!  But any digital camera
> manufacturer who also had some fame in the 35mm SLR sector will probably
> be good for this kind of practice.
>
>
>
> > > > The Olympus C-4000 4MP has a wonderful Macro feature going to about
one inch
> > > > to take a shot of a bee. The C4040 4.1 MP, suposedly a super set of
the
> > > > C-4000 does not have that super Macro and begins near 8". The new
C5050
> > > > 5MPhowever is outfited with that macro of near 1".
> > > > So either I seek the C4000 4MP or the C5050 at 5MP.
> > > > What other cameras have such a Macro near 1" ?
> > >
> > > Many (all?) models in the CoolPix line have 4cm or less in macro mode.
> > >
>
>
>
>
>
>