The "Clarity of Resolution"

[Howard Smith]

Justin, let me add that 35mm lens makers when they put DoF scales on their lenses are usually assuming a 35mm negative will be enlarged about 5X, or a 5x7 print.  An acceptable CoC on that print is assumed to be about 1/100th to 1/200th of an inch in diameter.

An 18x24 print from your F717 is more like a 20X enlargement.  That will require a CoC on the sensor 1/4 the size to get the same 1/100 CoC on the print.  This doesn't take into account changes in viewing distance ssumed for a 5x7 and an 18x24.

[George Barr]

I used to have an Olympus 2100 - that 38-280 sure brought things in close. For depth of field, you can't do better than a smaller sensor camera stopped down to f8, camera mounted on a tripod. Even then, at 380 mm. the depth of field isn't that huge. There are new replacements for the 2100 - eg. Olympus 750, the new Canon IS and Minolta Z2. I have to say that with long lenses (35 mm. equiv. of 3800) the image stabilization (which was canon's and olympus just bought their lens for the 2100) makes sense therfore suggesting the Canon IS would be your best bet. If you want really top quality prints and don't need to be at 380 mm., consider stitching.

[B McCarthy]

[font color=\'#000000\']I have the sony f828 and have been amazed at the digital zoom.  Higher ISO's leave noise, but at 200, I've had almost none.  Will be moose hunting with the camera next week and will have a better idea of how it performs on the run.[/font]