Am I mistaken, or wasn't the Minolta CLE also sold in a different skin
as a Leica?
Dave King wrote:
I'm a big Minolta CLE fan also. I sold my Leica M camera years ago to
get one. It doesn't have the build quality of an M, and the auto
exposure shutter electronics can be finicky (don't
Leica) info.
http://www.cameraquest.com/cle.htm
Dave
- Original Message -
From: Arthur Entlich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 02, 2001 4:03 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Digicams again was Re: filmscanners:
Minolta DiMAGE Scan Dimage 7 camera
Am I mistaken
: filmscanners: Minolta
DiMAGE Scan Dimage 7 camera
--- Frank Nichols [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Based on the advances in RAM technology over the
past 10 years I am
predicting a 1Giga Pixel camera in the not too
distant future (5 years or
less). The significance of this camera will be a
drastic
Frank,
Memory has increased at a rate of about 2 every 1.5
years. There is good reason to believe that this will
not change a lot during the next few years to come.
Even with new technologies being developed (if it
succeeds and can be used for imagers) it takes years
to get it ready for
At 07:42 AM 6/30/01 -0600, Frank Nichols wrote:
Robert,
I understand your hesitancy, however, you make several assumptions that I
didnt.
1. SNR remains at todays levels.
2. Sensitivity remains at todays levels.
3. The array would be small - why not a 4 x 6 with a 10x increase in
density? that
Dan Honemann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snippage]
possibility of 6 Megapixel CCDs that are the same size as a 35 mm frame, I
have to wonder if a $3k film scanner is a smart investment right now.
I for one have hundreds of images already on 35mm film I want to translate
to digital, so the film
Herch wrote:
However, there is no way I could use a D-1x, or an F-5 and a
set of lenses, etc., without pain and suffering.
Rafe wrote:
I visited Michael Reichmann's web site yesterday (not sure about
the spelling) wherein he claims that the Canon D30 produces a
better image, all around,
Herch wrote:
However, there is no way I could use a D-1x, or an F-5 and a
set of lenses, etc., without pain and suffering.
Rafe wrote:
I visited Michael Reichmann's web site yesterday (not sure about
the spelling) wherein he claims that the Canon D30 produces a
better image, all
Right now, I have three film cameras, a bunch of lenses and
a Nikon LS30 film scanner. I *don't* have thousands of
dollars to spend on a digicam. So I just want to get the
best out of the gear I have, and that's why I'm here on
this list. :)
It's a pivotal time, and it makes buying
At 07:37 PM 6/29/01 -0400, Dan H. wrote:
I figure on spending $10-20k when all is said and done (spaced out over a
period of 2-3 years). I'm not opposed to spending $3k of that on a very
high quality film scanner, and several thousand for a top-notch SLR and pro
lenses. But I have to wonder if
I visited Michael Reichmann's web site yesterday (not sure about
the spelling) wherein he claims that the Canon D30 produces a
better image, all around, than a Provia slide, shot on an EOS-1V,
and scanned on an Imacon at 3200 dpi.
Not sure I believe it, myself, but it is very provocative.
Based
on the advances in RAM technology over the past 10 years I am predicting a 1Giga
Pixel camera in the not too distant future (5 years or less). The significance
of this camera will be a drastic reduction is the required size of lenses by
using software digital zooming - this will be
--- Frank Nichols [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Based on the advances in RAM technology over the
past 10 years I am
predicting a 1Giga Pixel camera in the not too
distant future (5 years or
less). The significance of this camera will be a
drastic reduction is the
required size of lenses by
Steve wrote:
The original poster was talking about using one for web pictures -
I'd say he'd be completely mad to use film.
If all you ever want is screen resolution I'd agree. But most
people want to print things, and that takes more resolution.
The average person doesn't understand this;
14 matches
Mail list logo