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: quidditch who wrote (21393)	12/30/2001 11:41:32 AM
From: Ausdauer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 60323

Quidditch, since you are a potential SLR-to-digital convert I trust camera size is not an issue. I would consider a Canon G2. I think it will set you back about §750.00 now, but I suspect it will be much cheaper in the next few weeks to months. I would consider a Canon S30 or S40 if you want a more compact camera. I also like the styling of the Olympus D-4000 series. I bought an Olympus D-3000 for my father-in-law last year and he is very happy with it. This camera uses SmartMedia. I probably would avoid the 2.1 megapixel cameras altogether. That resolution has been available well over 2 years and I think it will likely mean an upgrade for you in the near future if your interest in piqued by the purchase. On the other hand, a 2.1 megapixel purchase just to get your feet wet is an option as it will be less initial investment, especially if you are disappointed with your results (which I doubt). I find the Nikon 7xx abd 8xx series a bit too small and too light for my tastes. I also do not particularly care for the Nikon 9xx series with the swivel, although these have been extremely successful cameras commercially. I bought a Casio QV4000 for my uncle, but returned it. The camera was great, but I did not like the software that Casio developed for image rendering. I found it a bit too soft compared to my Canon experience. My previous cameras of choice were from Epson. You may be able to get a decent price on a Photo PC 3100, but I believe Epson has otherwise dropped out of the race. If simplicity is important, consider a Kodak 3900. If economy is important, try one of the point-and-shoot Fuji cameras. Aus

To: quidditch who wrote (21393)	12/31/2001 5:41:43 PM
From: Art Bechhoefer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 60323

quidditch--If you are more comfortable with SLR cameras, you may prefer either the Olympus E-10 or E-20 cameras. The earlier model E-10 may now come down in price because the E-20 has 4 mp resolution. Both cameras allow you to view and focus through the actual lens. Both cameras allow either compact flash or SmartMedia cards. Both have excellent lenses, and they are larger than the tiny Nikon 775 and 885 cameras. Someone with large hands should also avoid the new Nikon 5000, which has its exposure meter placed in such a way that a person with large fingers could block the meter. As a group, the Canon cameras seem to have some of the easiest to use controls, placed well on the camera, and great ease transferring to your computer or printing direct to a growing number of printers that can operate without being hooked to a computer. I'm still using my Nikon 950 and obtaining excellent results up to 11 x 14 (but only from the full frame), helped by the use of the sharpening tool in the Adobe PhotoShop software. The main drawback is that for really good results on the 950, one should use the raw TIFF format, which causes you to wait about 25 seconds for the camera software to write an image to the flash card. During that period, the camera is immobilized. Using the highest JPEG resolution, however, eliminates the waiting period. Art