http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/31/ge-unveils-the-geotagging-10-megapixel-e1050-eight-other-new-ca/ Engadget Comments for GE unveils the geotagging 10 megapixel E1050, eight other new cams http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2010 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/31/ge-unveils-the-geotagging-10-megapixel-e1050-eight-other-new-ca/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/31/ge-unveils-the-geotagging-10-megapixel-e1050-eight-other-new-ca/Jan 31st 2008 6:50PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/31/ge-unveils-the-geotagging-10-megapixel-e1050-eight-other-new-ca/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/31/ge-unveils-the-geotagging-10-megapixel-e1050-eight-other-new-ca/Jan 31st 2008 7:04PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/31/ge-unveils-the-geotagging-10-megapixel-e1050-eight-other-new-ca/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/31/ge-unveils-the-geotagging-10-megapixel-e1050-eight-other-new-ca/
I only ask because not once in the (too many) posts we've had over the past few days do you mention much about the lenses on these cameras. Yes, we get the f-stop, yes we get the zoom "power" but not the most important thing which is the 35mm lens equivalent.

A 5x zoom is pretty useless if it's from 90-450mm on a general purpose camera. 28-140mm would be interesting and a 24-120mm lens would be something I start to pay real attention to. As it is I'm just pressing page down a lot.

I know the vendors don't alwasy mention this info but a little digging to find out wouldn't go amiss and next time they'll include it in the release.]]>Jan 31st 2008 7:18PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/31/ge-unveils-the-geotagging-10-megapixel-e1050-eight-other-new-ca/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/31/ge-unveils-the-geotagging-10-megapixel-e1050-eight-other-new-ca/Jan 31st 2008 7:22PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/31/ge-unveils-the-geotagging-10-megapixel-e1050-eight-other-new-ca/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/31/ge-unveils-the-geotagging-10-megapixel-e1050-eight-other-new-ca/
Kind of makes it less impressive than the article makes it sound.]]>Jan 31st 2008 7:23PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/31/ge-unveils-the-geotagging-10-megapixel-e1050-eight-other-new-ca/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/31/ge-unveils-the-geotagging-10-megapixel-e1050-eight-other-new-ca/Guess what: Dividing that small chip into 10.1 million pixels doesn't leave much space for a pixel to catch light anymore.

So this will not so much be a camera but rather a JPEG noise generator.
At 100 ISO it will probably just take bad pictures. But I really want to be far away if anyone ever tries to crank that thing up to the 3200 ISO sensitivity they claim.]]>Jan 31st 2008 7:28PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/31/ge-unveils-the-geotagging-10-megapixel-e1050-eight-other-new-ca/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/31/ge-unveils-the-geotagging-10-megapixel-e1050-eight-other-new-ca/Jan 31st 2008 7:29PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/31/ge-unveils-the-geotagging-10-megapixel-e1050-eight-other-new-ca/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/31/ge-unveils-the-geotagging-10-megapixel-e1050-eight-other-new-ca/Jan 31st 2008 8:27PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/31/ge-unveils-the-geotagging-10-megapixel-e1050-eight-other-new-ca/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/31/ge-unveils-the-geotagging-10-megapixel-e1050-eight-other-new-ca/
i guess i'm thinking too much like a techie and not as a general consumer, because first and foremost, a digital camera should be capable of taking excellent shots in my capable hands. These cameras will probably sell to the Kodak crowd that buys based on price, and will wonder why Canon can't put a touch screen or HD resolution (lol) in their cameras and yet they're so expensive.]]>Jan 31st 2008 9:43PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/01/31/ge-unveils-the-geotagging-10-megapixel-e1050-eight-other-new-ca/http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/31/ge-unveils-the-geotagging-10-megapixel-e1050-eight-other-new-ca/
(the reply button doesn't seem to be working for me)

I was thinking the exact same thing - even copied that line to paste in my own response.

No camera is a bargain at any price if it just takes average pictures, especially when there are so many cameras out there that take excellent pictures for not much money. This is just piling on features to make up for the camera's core shortcomings.

I mean, it's like a company making a television that also happens to make toast, and then saying "who cares if the picture quality sucks - it makes toast!" That really doesn't matter if it doesn't do the one thing you're actually buying it for well.

Find a camera that takes excellent photos at a reasonable price and that is your bargain, regardless of what extra junk it does or doesn't have tacked on.]]>Jan 31st 2008 11:22PM