Jump to content

Is the Oregon 450/550 screen any good on a bicycle?


Recommended Posts

No doubt you will get at least as many opinions as responses, but I'll start.

 

I don't have an Oregon but a Dakota 20, so pretty much the same thing. I have used it on both road and mtn bike quite a bit for the last two years, before that used a eTrex Vista HCx. No question the Vista has an easier to read screen, but in every other way the Dakota is better for what I want on a bike. The profile configuration gives all the flexibility I need and the touch screen is way more convenient when riding. The new eTrex may even things out a bit, but I still think the touch screen would sway me.

Link to comment

I have one but do not use it to bike (but I plan to once I buy a bike this summer.) I can say it is readable in sun light most of the time. Only once in a while does the sun directly glare on the unit where I cannot read it. Personally I would have no problem buying one for use on a bike alone and I would not let the glare problem change my buying decision as it only effects it only once in a great while.

Link to comment

Is the 550 worth buying compared to the 450, just because it has a camera?

The camera is decent (and only decent, a bit better than a cell phone camera). The reason I bought my 550t was to get the geotagging that comes with the camera. Every photo I take with the 550t's camera is tagged with its geographic coordinates. If I'm visiting a place I know I'll want to get "keeper" pictures of, I'll also take my "real" camera along, and use the camera in the GPS to geotag the location.

 

I use my 550t on my bicycle all the time (with a mounting bracket), and the combination works well for me. The visibility depends on the sun angle to a certain extent, but I can usually see the screen well enough.

 

--Larry

Link to comment

I bike with the 450 all the time. However I use the Ram Mount so I can grab it and change the angle to see it well as I move along. If you using the Garmin mount which is stationary it is pretty much useless. I used the Garmin mount until my Ram arrived.

 

The touchscreen interface makes the other problems worth it.

 

If you can handle the price the Montana is supposed to have great visibility in daylight. There was a video from GPSCITY that compared them side by side outside. Marvelous.

Edited by Walts Hunting
Link to comment

I found my Oregon 450 to be unreadable 98% of the time when it was on the bicycle mount. I generally had to stop and remove it from the mount to read it. My GPSMap 62S on the same mount is virtually always readable.

 

Wow. 98%? That's weird.

 

My 550 works just fine on my mountain bike, as does my Dakota 20. There are lighting situations that are more difficult to see in than others, but nothing that can't be fixed by simply adjusting the tilt of the GPS. I find it to be about the same as when I use them on my quad.

 

At least, that's been my experience 98% of the time.

Link to comment

I bike with the 450 all the time. However I use the Ram Mount so I can grab it and change the angle to see it well as I move along. If you using the Garmin mount which is stationary it is pretty much useless. I used the Garmin mount until my Ram arrived.

I should have mentioned that I also use the Ram mount and not the Garmin mount on my bicycle.

 

--Larry

Link to comment

I have used both a 400T and a 450 in a ram mount on my bike with great success, to include reading the screen. I tend to use the backlight instead of just relying on available light, so I'm in the habit of touching the screen to activate it when I need to look at it. Having a touch screen for zooming is a benefit when you're on a bike.

Link to comment

The newer Oregons are great as handhelds, because you intuitively tilt them for the best viewing angle. I find them to be a poor choice for fixed mount use. The 62 series is ideal, and it is much easier to navigate through different screens "on the fly." If you really want a touch screen, the Dakota has better visibility than the Oregon series.

Link to comment

I bike with the 450 all the time. However I use the Ram Mount so I can grab it and change the angle to see it well as I move along. If you using the Garmin mount which is stationary it is pretty much useless. I used the Garmin mount until my Ram arrived.

I should have mentioned that I also use the Ram mount and not the Garmin mount on my bicycle.

 

 

I use the regular, cheap Garmin mount on my bike and still have no problems. Just don't tighten the zipties completely.

Link to comment

The newer Oregons are great as handhelds, because you intuitively tilt them for the best viewing angle. I find them to be a poor choice for fixed mount use. The 62 series is ideal, and it is much easier to navigate through different screens "on the fly." If you really want a touch screen, the Dakota has better visibility than the Oregon series.

Ahhhh!...now I'm confused because mostly everybody else said that the oregon would be ok on a bike but then you had to say that the 62s would be better!

 

And another question...how are you supposed to know if you prefer the buttons or the touchscreen is if you've ahd the old etrex...??

Link to comment

I found my Oregon 450 to be unreadable 98% of the time when it was on the bicycle mount. I generally had to stop and remove it from the mount to read it. My GPSMap 62S on the same mount is virtually always readable.

 

Wow. 98%? That's weird.

That's what I thought when I read it, too, and I've done a fair number of bike caching runs. Like you and another poster above, I left enough slack in the mount for a little tilt adjustment, but don't use it often.

 

I find that on a bicycle mount, the 450 is no different than when elsewhere -- twilight is the only time that I have issues. Can't use the sun, and the backlight isn't quite as bright as I'd like it.

 

My only gripe about the 450 on the bicycle mount is that it isn't quite as easy to release as the older designs.

Link to comment

The 60/62 has better visibility In sunlight. Theres no disputeing that

 

I can only assume that the people you keep saying that have ever only seen an "old" x50 model. They changed the screens sometimes last year or so. The new ones are much better.

Link to comment

The 60/62 has better visibility In sunlight. Theres no disputeing that

I'd disagree. If you use the sunlight to your reflective advantage on an Oregon, it may be even brighter than the older models and the newer non-touch models. Does require that you orient to make use of that feature, though.

 

However, I think that there's no disputing that the 60/62 (and all of the other non-touch Garmins) are much easier to read in twilight - where the 450 falls a bit short. I can cache all day without putting on my glasses, but when twilight hits, it's a double whammy. Not only do my pupils open up (reducing depth of field), but that backlight just isn't quite up to snuff at that point, and out come the reading glasses. As an example, my old Summit HC is easier to read in 'half light' situations. Heavy forest cover can create this situation as well.

 

While I'm a BIG fan of resistive touch screens (vs. capacitive touch screens) for serious outdoor devices like these, I'd like to see a model with a different backlight technology that could up the lumens without killing the battery. The capacitive screens don't block the light the way the resistive screens tend to do, but I don't want to have to use by bare pinkie to do the work, either. Resistive screens don't much care what you poke them with as long as you can aim whatever it is at the square.

Link to comment

The 60/62 has better visibility In sunlight. Theres no disputeing that

 

I can only assume that the people you keep saying that have ever only seen an "old" x50 model. They changed the screens sometimes last year or so. The new ones are much better.

 

Mine is 30 days old and sucks in the sunlight. As I bike along I am constantly adjusting the screen so I can see the map screen. The comment about it can be brighter if adjusted to get the right reflection is correct. And don't blame my eyes. I just got two new lens put it and vision is perfect.

 

I did get a personal note that said they couldn't see any difference in the GPS City video. I see a huge difference between the Oregon and the Montana. When it comes out I will take my 450 down and hold them both outside with the same map.

Edited by Walts Hunting
Link to comment

I am so confused and angry!!!!!

 

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

 

You're getting serisouly agigtated there eh?

I don't get "agigtated"...I either go berserk, or I get distraught, enraged, exasperated, excited, frantic, frenetic, fuming, furious, incensed, infuriated, irritated, livid, provoked, raging, resentful, uncontrolled, very upset, wild, and wrathful!

 

:mad: :mad:

Link to comment

I am so confused and angry!!!!!

 

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

 

You're getting serisouly agigtated there eh?

I don't get "agigtated"...I either go berserk, or I get distraught, enraged, exasperated, excited, frantic, frenetic, fuming, furious, incensed, infuriated, irritated, livid, provoked, raging, resentful, uncontrolled, very upset, wild, and wrathful!

 

:mad: :mad:

And I never do anything serisouly! If you spell another word wrong, I'll have to start giving you the antonyms too!!

 

 

 

:)

Link to comment

The newer Oregons are great as handhelds, because you intuitively tilt them for the best viewing angle. I find them to be a poor choice for fixed mount use. The 62 series is ideal, and it is much easier to navigate through different screens "on the fly." If you really want a touch screen, the Dakota has better visibility than the Oregon series.

Ahhhh!...now I'm confused because mostly everybody else said that the oregon would be ok on a bike but then you had to say that the 62s would be better!

 

And another question...how are you supposed to know if you prefer the buttons or the touchscreen is if you've ahd the old etrex...??

 

I think if you read closely, you'll see that a few people have noted that you need to change the angle on the Oregons for the best visibility. I challenge anyone to put the 62 series and Oregons side by side, in a wide range of conditions and viewing angles, and say that the 62 series isn't better in most cases.

 

With a touch screen unit, you will have to look at the screen to change pages. With the 62 series, you can do it while keeping your eyes on the trail or road.

 

I own a 62s and Oregon 450. My primary form of recreation is mountain biking. I haven't put the Oregon on my handlebars in months; I always go for the 62s.

Link to comment

The newer Oregons are great as handhelds, because you intuitively tilt them for the best viewing angle. I find them to be a poor choice for fixed mount use. The 62 series is ideal, and it is much easier to navigate through different screens "on the fly." If you really want a touch screen, the Dakota has better visibility than the Oregon series.

Ahhhh!...now I'm confused because mostly everybody else said that the oregon would be ok on a bike but then you had to say that the 62s would be better!

 

And another question...how are you supposed to know if you prefer the buttons or the touchscreen is if you've ahd the old etrex...??

 

I think if you read closely, you'll see that a few people have noted that you need to change the angle on the Oregons for the best visibility. I challenge anyone to put the 62 series and Oregons side by side, in a wide range of conditions and viewing angles, and say that the 62 series isn't better in most cases.

 

With a touch screen unit, you will have to look at the screen to change pages. With the 62 series, you can do it while keeping your eyes on the trail or road.

 

I own a 62s and Oregon 450. My primary form of recreation is mountain biking. I haven't put the Oregon on my handlebars in months; I always go for the 62s.

 

its all personal choice, i would never consider getting a GPS with buttons and i seriously can't stand the design of the 60 series

 

as for biking, when i choose i destination on the bike i see no need to change any pages

Link to comment

Now that I have decided mostly on the 550 and I might go to REI to get a feel for both of them, jsut to make sure, does anyone have any good ideas for me to make money to buy it?

You will likely save yourself a bunch of $ by reconsidering the 450 again. As has been noted, the 550 camera can be handy, but it's not as good as many regular point-and-shoot cameras.

 

If you hit the 450 pricing at the right time, you can score one for $250 instead of the usual $350. Keep an eye on the pricing at both Cabela's and REI since both seem to offer that price once or twice a year. Until then, $325 will be about the best price you'll see.

Link to comment

Now that I have decided mostly on the 550 and I might go to REI to get a feel for both of them, jsut to make sure, does anyone have any good ideas for me to make money to buy it?

You will likely save yourself a bunch of $ by reconsidering the 450 again. As has been noted, the 550 camera can be handy, but it's not as good as many regular point-and-shoot cameras.

 

If you hit the 450 pricing at the right time, you can score one for $250 instead of the usual $350. Keep an eye on the pricing at both Cabela's and REI since both seem to offer that price once or twice a year. Until then, $325 will be about the best price you'll see.

But isn't the screen on the 550 better?+

Link to comment

Now that I have decided mostly on the 550 and I might go to REI to get a feel for both of them, jsut to make sure, does anyone have any good ideas for me to make money to buy it?

You will likely save yourself a bunch of $ by reconsidering the 450 again. As has been noted, the 550 camera can be handy, but it's not as good as many regular point-and-shoot cameras.

 

If you hit the 450 pricing at the right time, you can score one for $250 instead of the usual $350. Keep an eye on the pricing at both Cabela's and REI since both seem to offer that price once or twice a year. Until then, $325 will be about the best price you'll see.

But isn't the screen on the 550 better?+

 

Unless they changed something recently, no. Same screen, same GPS, basically. The camera being the main difference. I disagree with ecanderson on the camera though. I wouldn't trade that feature for the money it cost me to have it. Unless you're looking to be the next Ansel Adams or something, this GPS takes great pics for geocaching and hiking in general.

 

Nearly every picture listed here on my coin's page was taken with my Oregon 550t camera. Check them out and judge for yourself. I'm sure it's a personal choice kinda thing. But it definitely works for me.

Link to comment

Unless they changed something recently, no. Same screen, same GPS, basically.

Earlier on, there was a difference. That hasn't been the case for quite some time, but if the OP goes for a used unit, he could get one of the older 550's with the lesser screen (wasn't it about a year ago that the 550s got the better screen?). There haven't been any in new 550 stock in a long time that had the dimmer screen, though, so now they're all the same, and he'd be fine either way with new stock.

 

The camera being the main difference. I disagree with ecanderson on the camera though. I wouldn't trade that feature for the money it cost me to have it. Unless you're looking to be the next Ansel Adams or something, this GPS takes great pics for geocaching and hiking in general.
Since I spent quite a number of years working for a major camera manufacturing company, and have had my pick of the best of the smaller cameras, I'm a bit prejudiced. I keep mine in my bike bag along with the extra Slime and tube and ... it's just another standard item for me. One big ding is image quality vs. available light. But more than that, I can't abide the 'digital zoom' scam all the manufacturers try to play, even on the products I own that try to extend range with it. Fortunately, they all allow that to be turned off so it isn't accidentally selected during high zoom levels. I've tried a couple of fixed and 'digital zoom' cameras, but without a true optical zoom, I'm always wishing I had a different camera along... and believe me, I ain't no Ansel Adams. I don't use my cell phone camera - except in an emergency - for the same reasons.
Link to comment

Nearly every picture listed here on my coin's page was taken with my Oregon 550t camera. Check them out and judge for yourself. I'm sure it's a personal choice kinda thing. But it definitely works for me.

Just had a look and is about what I expected. The coin shots were obviously well lit and the quality there is quite good. The lower light picture of your pack really lacks contrast and sharpness. The tiny lenses on cell phones and the 550 just don't trap a great deal of light to begin with, and given the secondary nature of their function in these devices, not a lot of processor power/time is being applied to try to clean the images up. At 5Mpix, the Yosemite patch should be a lot clearer, for example.
Link to comment

Nearly every picture listed here on my coin's page was taken with my Oregon 550t camera. Check them out and judge for yourself. I'm sure it's a personal choice kinda thing. But it definitely works for me.

Just had a look and is about what I expected. The coin shots were obviously well lit and the quality there is quite good. The lower light picture of your pack really lacks contrast and sharpness. The tiny lenses on cell phones and the 550 just don't trap a great deal of light to begin with, and given the secondary nature of their function in these devices, not a lot of processor power/time is being applied to try to clean the images up. At 5Mpix, the Yosemite patch should be a lot clearer, for example.

 

I don't really have any coin pics on my coins page, but if you were looking at my gallery and not my coin page, those coin pics were not taken with the 550, but with a Canon DSLR.

 

I don't really understand much of what you said above, but I'm not a photographer, and I'm certainly not saying that you're wrong. I'm more saying that I appreciate the availability of something to document the stories I get myself into and live to tell about. For that, this camera serves me well, as I think it would anyone doing similar. As long as my GPS is on me, the camera is on me, and I appreciate multi-function. No extra weight, no extra room in my pack. These are things that are much more important to me.

 

The zoom, I still don't understand what you were talking about, but it sounds like you think it sucks. We agree on that! Luckily I don't do much "zooming", but when I try it, it comes in grainy. I'm not a fan. For instance, this pic is one I took of a river rescue, with the 550, all the way zoomed in. Not so good.

 

b69e675b-f799-48a5-8b4f-daaebc7ded5a.jpg

 

One more thing though, the Oregon 550 camera is not 5mp, it's 3.2mp. I believe the 5mp camera from Garmin is being introduced with the Montana.

Edited by Guns & Cockpits
Link to comment
The zoom, I still don't understand what you were talking about, but it sounds like you think it sucks. We agree on that! Luckily I don't do much "zooming", but when I try it, it comes in grainy. I'm not a fan.

 

Just for clarification: "digital zoom" means that the camera takes a picture as it always does, and then blows up that picture in software. Like you would do in an image editor on your PC, but probably in worse quality. Oh, and it also discards the off-center parts of the image. It's a lose-lose situation.

Link to comment

I need money!

How much do you have saved up? How soon is your birthday? Xmas is a ways off, but add them all together and it might get you an Oregon 450 :-]

 

Back when I was your age, it seemed like everything took forever to happen. Once you grow up a bit, time just flies...

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...