Olympus C-765 vs Minolta Z3

[Jeremy]

Olympus + Better image quality.
Minolta + Faster?, Image stabilization, External flash, Better video quality.

On paper Minolta seems better but when comparing image quality Olympus is lot better.

I would like to use it as a allround camera 24/7 and also take pictures inside and low light using zoom so Iam wondering can I do that with Olympus without tripod or should I just buy Z3 and settle for image quality that it offers.
Are there even so many differences in image quality exept daytime?

Somebody said that image quality in minolta is horrible but anotherone said its allright.

[John_Reed]

Olympus + Better image quality.
Minolta + Faster?, Image stabilization, External flash, Better video quality.

On paper Minolta seems better but when comparing image quality Olympus is lot better.

I would like to use it as a allround camera 24/7 and also take pictures inside and low light using zoom so Iam wondering can I do that with Olympus without tripod or should I just buy Z3 and settle for image quality that it offers.
Are there even so many differences in image quality exept daytime?

Somebody said that image quality in minolta is horrible but anotherone said its allright.Have you considered the Panasonic DMC-FZ3, -FZ15, or -FZ20? They all have longer zoom range than the C-765, they have AF illuminators, faster lenses than the Z3, (f2.8 across the zoom range) and all have optical image stabilizers. Image quality is great for any of them.

[Jeremy]

Yes I have but only DMC-FZ3, is about same price range that I am lookin for and it has 3Mp and Minolta and Olympus both have 4Mp.
I have also considered Canon S1 IS but after reading reviews and comparing images + the price, Olympus and Minolta are only ones left:)
Like I said, on paper Minolta seems better but the quality difference on pictures
with Olympus is clear.
And both of them cost about the same (330e)

[PhilR.]

Of those two, I would pick the Olympus. It has better picture quality in a smaller camera. IS is nice, but it's not like you will need it for every shot.

On the other hand, I would have to say that you should really consider Mr. Reed's suggestion above. If you want the best of both worlds, you would want the Panasonic FZ3, especially since it is in the same price range as the others. Yes, the FZ3 does have 0.8mp's less, but if you can't do with 3.2, then I doubt that going up to 4 will help.

PhilR.

[Mary]

I second the FZ3 suggestion... I've read time and time again that the FZ3 (though only 3mp) shoots much like a 4/5 MP camera from other brands due to its sharp lense.

I've researched the same class of cameras more than I'm willing to admit... and the FZ3 not only comes out ahead with its "specs"... but with actual user reviews.

The pictures are amazing.

Mary