Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : WDC/Sandisk Corporation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ausdauer who wrote (9368)	2/29/2000 9:33:00 AM
From: Art Bechhoefer	Respond to of 60323

The Nikon 800 has the most useful features of the 950 in a small, lower cost package. Based on my own use of the 950, the 800 would provide every feature I regularly use about 98 percent of the time. Again, based on the quality I am getting from using those same features, the 800 is actually LESS EXPENSIVE to use than a good quality 35mm camera selling around $250, because, of course, you don't have to keep buying film and processing. For me, the 950 is still dirt cheap because I print roughly 200-300 photos in a year, without having any more outlays for film. My 8x10 print costs run about $0.60 per copy for both the paper and the ink. If I use the heavier photo quality stock, then I'm up to about $1.00 a shot. Sure beats the $9.00 per shot I used to pay at the commercial photo finisher. An additional thought: It is inconvenient to prepare a slide show (one of the Nikon features that allows you to arrange the order of your images held in the CF) on the regular CF you would ordinarily use. That is, I regularly use the 96 mb CF, but for slide shows, I prefer to store the shots on the 8 mb card supplied with the 950 when I bought it. I can see a point where I will be keeping several 8 or 16 mb cards ready for slide shows - another after market niche for CF. Art