Olympus C-3000 Zoom

Announced Apr 24, 2000 •
3 megapixels | 1.8 screen | 32 – 96 mm (3×)
wyoming
 

...my film camera broke and i went out to se if i could afford digital. i tested the c3000 and decided to buy a film slr instead. i could buy a camera with full set of lenses for the same price and i still use it. but i think to the camedia as a model T of digital image, so i was very happy when recived one as a gift few months ago. no surprise that 15 years are enough to make it difficoult to download pictures but i think the results are very interesting. the camedia line was very famous ...

View review in forums Leave a comment on this review

Just got this camera off Ebay for only $20.00 and that included a 64MB card. The cards alone are selling at a premium price, so I might part with this camera and resell ir using better marketing techniques and make a big profit.So far it's been good to make spare money :) But I might keep this camera as it seesms to do well even though it's over 8 years old.

View review in forums Leave a comment on this review
aitchsee

Well, I bought this camera in July 2001, I've since owned 3 other digicams and the C-3000 still gives the best image. The colours are natural, noise is minimal in most situations. The focusing is excellent too. There are manual options when you need them and point & shoot mode when you don't have time. I never print bigger than 8x10 anyway so a 3 megapixels camera is fine for my needs. Problems: The only drawback now is that SmartMedia cards are no longer available.

View review in forums Leave a comment on this review
gburgos
 

Worst thing i ever did was give my c-3000 away. To Date; i have not found a non-SLR that even comes close. If you have one KEEP IT! It does great 8x10s and you will never been happy with photos from another camera even with a higher pixel-count. Problems: If you want rechargable batts you will have to get Rechargable AAs. They also make a single lithium batt for it which last a long time but again is not rechargable.

View review in forums Leave a comment on this review
Lights
 

Well after 6 years of use it's still ticking along. I've got a Canon DSLR and and Olympus 8080...but if you process the pics from this little 3.3mp camera right, for net use and for up to 8x10's it's excellent. Never regretted buying it (although at the time not cheap, looking in hindsight) I've seen good used ones today for under $100 and that's a steal. The battery drain isn't too bad..can get 100 pics or a few more on a set of NM's. Pretty good internal flash...and provisions for adding ...

View review in forums Leave a comment on this review
lillian6189

I brought my c-3000 camera last year [ 2006] on ebay for £40. to take photos of my classic camera collaction and other items to sell on ebay, i wasnt expecting a lot from it , as long as i could get a photo for selling on ebay, afterall it was 6 years old, only 3.3 meg pix.and i was useing a voigtlander vitessa t with a color- skopar lens at the time, how wrong i was !!! it gave my great 8x10 shots on my Epson printer with photo paper, that blew me away !! must be one of the greatest digital ...

View review in forums Leave a comment on this review

Other then the PROOOBLEEEMS...It's a good little camera! Problems: Slow write and read speeds, LOOOOOOOOOONG shutter lag, LONG shot to shot times. LOADS AND LOADS OF NOISE!!!

View review in forums Leave a comment on this review

I bought this camera in September 2000 for just over $600. At the time, 3 Megapixel compact cameras were new and this was a top performer at a reasonable price - my best choice in 2000. Over its lifetime, its has given me excellent picture quality in a wide range of lighting conditions. Since I never print images larger than 8 1/2" x 11" page, the 3 Megapixel size continues to be sufficient. It has proven to be quite sturdy as well. Over the 4 1/2 years of use, it has been dropped a few ...

View review in forums Leave a comment on this review
HJHilferink

Bought this camera in 2001. It performed good quality sharp images. I used the camera for pictures wich I had printed in brochures and magazines. This was a succes when I did not enlarge more than to A4. At that time I payed over $1200 fot this camera. I used an external flash with a connecting-cable. This was also an expensive attribute, but so I could avoid red eyes and used bounce-flash. Since one year I have a Canon G5 of wich I think it has more possibilities, but at that time The ...

View review in forums Leave a comment on this review
thirot
 

this camera (2001) is excellent compare to the 2004 cameras, I just bought a casio exilim ez-40 and I had to take it back because, the image quality was too bad. So I changed it for the canon s60 (I can not make a mistake) and again I took back the s-60. The C3000 is better for the AF, the WB, the lens is sharper, and the noise/ratio at 400 ISO much much much much much better. Problems: battery short, slow, the cap

View review in forums Leave a comment on this review