The cameras you mention use what is called a 'periscope' lens design..

The design allows for very nice small and flat designs which fit in shirt pockets and weigh next to nothing..

One drawback, for many people, is a certain softness of the photographs one produces with such a camera..

Another limitation is the zoom range and, usually, absence of macro capabilities..

Many people prefer to have a slightly larger camera and use a pouch to tuck it away when not in use.Protruding zoom lenses are ok as long as you handle them with a bit of TLC...

And several have reported how easy it is to put their finger over the lenses' window....

Regards, David..

Thx for the replays. But you guys havent convinced me that periscope optic cameras arent the better solution for easy of carry and are more rugged..

I have been looking at tons and tons of pictures between the different cameras and maybe it's just me but the difference is pretty slight in the $100-$300 price range. Im not seeing the fuzzyness in the folded optics camera and putting the finger in the way of the lens is no big deal on a digital, you see the picture right as you take it and can immediately take another. I will just have to figure out the best way to hold the camera..

I really really wanted the Olympus 770. Pretty small, pictures looked great, and it's water & shock proof! I just couldnt force myself to spend an extra 200$ on something that only looks 5% better and will be obsolete in a year or two..

Then I was going to order the Cannon SD 1000 but I feel after a year the lens will get dirt in it and jam up like every other camera I have owned..

So I ordered the Fuji Z1! For $120 how can I go wrong. I really dont need more mega pixels and comparing the Z1 5.1MP to other 7MP cameras on my monitor the difference looked pretty minor. I just needed something to keep in my pocket for work and to occasionally post a picture on the internet. Hopefully I made a good choice..

Lowlypawn wrote:....

Then I was going to order the Cannon SD 1000 but I feel after a yearthe lens will get dirt in it and jam up like every other camera Ihave owned..

I think this says rather more about the way you treat cameras. In 30 years of taking photographs I've never managed to get enough dirt into a camera to jam it up...

Spt_gb wrote:.

I think this says rather more about the way you treat cameras. In 30years of taking photographs I've never managed to get enough dirtinto a camera to jam it up..

Its probably true that I am very hard on cameras and stuff in general. I recognize this which is why I was looking for something a little more durable..

I had a Fuji that the lens wouldnt retract or extend, I think it got bumped when it was extended, so I guess that really wasnt a dirt issue. Then I sent it in and got it fixed but the zoom still doesnt sound 100% O-well, it's only and only like 1 MP so it's time for a new camera anyway..

Another example, my coworkers Kodak he has had for a little over a year, it still works but you can definitely hear fine grit in the lens when he zooms. I also work with a 20 other inspectors and we all carry digital cameras. Most of the time when one breaks it seems to be with the lens. To me is just seems to be most venerable part of standard camera..

I wanted a camera I can stick in my pocket and not have to put in a case every time. So thats why I decided to go with the periscope design. I was just wondering if there was some major drawback to that design becomes those cameras are really in the minority...

Lowlypawn wrote:.

I wanted a camera I can stick in my pocket and not have to put in acase every time. So thats why I decided to go with the periscopedesign. I was just wondering if there was some major drawback to thatdesign becomes those cameras are really in the minority..

I'd be more concerned with the LCD - part of why I like the rotating LCD on the Canon A610 - I can face it inward so it's not exposed. As for the lens - it retracts - when I put it in my pocket, it's not sticking out or anything. Anyway, I researched a few of the folded optics cameras when they first got popular (Minolta had a few, Sony, others) and aside from slow 3X zooms and the fact that they all seemed to be on cameras with extra small sensors, they all tested on the soft side. If IQ is suitable (and who needs great quality from a pocket cam ?) then it seems like a neat design - hope you enjoy it !.

- DennisGallery at http://kingofthebeasts.smugmug.com..

The Olympus Stylus series contain both folded optics and straight extending lens models. In that series the straight optics seem to offer better image quality and there are a lot of photos on the web that support this impression..

My organization has 300+ of the straight optic models and we use them in VERY dusty conditions. Dust is not an issue because they are well sealed and the lens seals are self cleaning. The only ones we've lost have been from drops. The SW (folded) ones are more drop resistant but our loss rate is low enough that the better optics is to our advantage...

I'll go along with that and add that I am still using a 35 year old camera. I don't know where you work but have you thought of getting an underwater housing for the camera. That's the only thing that will do it. As for obsolete, I think you mean replaced with something that's advertised even more: it's not the same....

Back OT I'd go for the smash/dust/water proof Olympus but read the fine print first..

Regards, David..