View Full Version : C5500 - false specifications?

03-27-2005, 06:32 AM
I have had this camera for few days now and cannot figure out one feature.
Olympus and some other internet sites (Steves Digicams, DP Review) advertise that this camera has a 2.7 frames per second sequantial drive speed. Although the camera manual states on page 74 that it's only 1.2 frames per second and also the practical testing shows that the speed is about 1.2 fps. It maybe a little harsh to say this but I'm beginning to think that Olympus is giving false information about the specifications of this camera on their own web page. Please somebody tell me I'm wrong.


03-27-2005, 10:26 AM
The Oly website specs read:

High-speed: 2.7 frames per second up to 5 frames Normal speed: 1.4 frames per second up to 10 frames in HQ mode; in default recording mode.

I would take the above to mean that 2.7 f/ps is only achieved in "standard quality Mode." While in High Quality Mode, the rate is reduced to 1.4 f/ps.

I am considering buying this camera, so i would be interested in any issues regarding the camera.


03-27-2005, 01:46 PM
I have tried all of the quality settings. The burst speed is the same (1.2 fps)at all of the settings, even 640x480@normal quality. And there is only one sequential drive mode. There is no "Normal speed" and "High speed" burst modes in the menu. Only one option as seen from the manual screenshot in my first post. I have no idea where this 2.7 fps comes from.

04-04-2005, 01:16 PM
playing with the camera....i noticed it didnt have that speed either....

but i also noticed that the olympus america website only claims 1.2 - 1.4 speeds now.

04-05-2005, 06:52 AM
Yes, they do now. That's because I contacted Olympus Europe and they insvestigated the problem and confirmed that it could be a mistake.

That was the answer from them:

"We tested the camera right now and it seems the drive speed is only 1.2, so there may be false info on the website, though we cannot confirm this yet, I will forward this info to our technical manager."

Next day the information was corrected on their webpage.

04-05-2005, 04:45 PM

it would make me happy if they came out with firmware update that might enable that feature...

(hoping that it was planned...they just couldnt get it right)