Re: Good, inexpensive digital camera

On to another topic! Would I be better off using a remote FireWire HD or using the one in my Pismo/400 for digital capture? If a remote, should I use the FireWire port or a PC Card adapter for FireWire for the fastest transfer? Tom -- G-Books is sponsored by and... S

Re: Good, inexpensive digital camera/Lag time

>Most digital cameras have a continuous shoot mode which allows you to shoot >a number of shots fairly quickly (until your buffer runs out) Right, I have this, but this is a compromise. Anyway, back to Powerbooks! Aron -- Ar

Re: Good, inexpensive digital camera

In a message dated 4/20/02 12:29:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << Kodak offers a photo CD with every roll of film you have processed by them if you want it. >> I hope Kodak has upgraded that service in the last year or so... I had clients bring me their disk from Kodak expecting the scans t

Re: Good, inexpensive digital camera

Kodak offers a photo CD with every roll of film you have processed by them if you want it. Tom > My wedding photo was shot digitally and was shared among all our guests > instantly across the country over the net. Then we mailed each guest a CD of > the full 500+ images of our wedding for 33 cent

Re: OT topic of film vs. digital

> I still shoot both ways out there in the real world, but I cringe and moan > when the client insists on film. Interesting comment, my wife and I didn't even consider any photographer that refused to shoot digitally for our wedding. I read something the other day that a lot more couples are insi

Re: Good, inexpensive digital camera

Sony offers the DSC-S75, a 4 MP camera with a black body. It's pretty slick. Almost got one myself, but opted for the Canon s110 Elf. I love how small the camera is, and take it with me everywhere. All of Sony's camera are great. The biggest advantages of the designs come from their experiences

Re: Good, inexpensive digital camera

I have used one and am thinking about replacing my Nikon 995 with the Sony, since it has such great reviews and worked extremely well when I was using it. Even so, I never go anywhere with my digital unless I take a film camera also, especially on vacation. Digital cameras are at a real disadvanta

Re: Good, inexpensive digital camera/Lag time

Most digital cameras have a continuous shoot mode which allows you to shoot a number of shots fairly quickly (until your buffer runs out) and then they usually take around 7 to 10 seconds to recover and be able to do this again. The smaller the file size the more shots that can be taken in rapid s

Re: Good, inexpensive digital camera

Hang on to that shoe box of prints and negatives, since they will still be usable when the digital prints are long gone. My film camera shoots 5 frames per second, but its biggest plus compared to digital is that it turns on instantly for photo's that show up unexpectedly, unlike all digital camer

Re: Good, inexpensive digital camera

In a message dated 4/19/02 8:16:02 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << Speaking of expensive (:--)), has anyone tried, or seen (in person) the new Sony DSC-F707? It received some good reviews (speed-wise) on the dpreview.com site. >> I purchased a Sony DSC-S70 about a year ago, a 3.34MP camera wi

OT topic of film vs. digital

Recognizing that this is not a suitable topic for this list, I still must comment on the view expressed earlier (I'm on Digest) concerning film being preferable to digital for photography today. I have been a working photojournalist for over 30 years and since the advent of the Nikon D1x I think

Re: Difficulty in setting up intranet

On Friday, April 19, 2002, at 07:39 PM, Douglas Taylor wrote: > I'm trying to get my iMac (rev. D) and my iBook (Indigo) to make a small > TCP/IP intranet. I've configured each of them to do TCP/IP via > ethernet, > given them IPs and set the subnets. > > The iBook (OS 9.1) does okay, but the

Difficulty in setting up intranet

I'm trying to get my iMac (rev. D) and my iBook (Indigo) to make a small TCP/IP intranet. I've configured each of them to do TCP/IP via ethernet, given them IPs and set the subnets. The iBook (OS 9.1) does okay, but the iMac (OS 8.6) won't cooperate. System Profiler shows that TCP/IP is active

Re: Good, inexpensive digital camera

Speaking of expensive (:--)), has anyone tried, or seen (in person) the new Sony DSC-F707? It received some good reviews (speed-wise) on the dpreview.com site. I have a house full of old 35mm Nikons from my old news photog days. Now have a disability and am researching a move to digital. Want h

Re: Good, inexpensive digital camera/Lag time

Aron Nelson wrote: >>That is not a basic problem of digital cameras. That is a basic problem of >>the model you have. > > > Apparently most/all Digital cameras have lag time after the shot. I > have tried many at CompUSA and Circuit City and they all had lag > after shooting. Yes, they do hav

Re: Good, inexpensive digital camera/Lag time

>That is not a basic problem of digital cameras. That is a basic problem of >the model you have. Apparently most/all Digital cameras have lag time after the shot. I have tried many at CompUSA and Circuit City and they all had lag after shooting. The lag times are even parts of the review proce

Re: Good, inexpensive digital camera

That is not a basic problem of digital cameras. That is a basic problem of the model you have. > > > I was TOTALLY into my digital camera until I recently went to a party > and I wanted to take pictures FAST. > > NO WAY! I got one shot off and had to wait while the damn thing took > its time get

Re: Good, inexpensive digital camera

My Olympus 2100 can take up to 2 pictures a second when not using the flash. My previous film camera was no faster with or without the flash. We simply got tired of the shoe boxes full of prints. Have been using digital for two years and would have an additional 50+ sets of prints for the shoe box

Re: Good, inexpensive digital camera

Of all the good points you brought up, this one is the killer for me. I was TOTALLY into my digital camera until I recently went to a party and I wanted to take pictures FAST. NO WAY! I got one shot off and had to wait while the damn thing took its time getting ready for the next shot. Not onl

Re: 802.11 card for 3400, 1400

Thanks, Bruce. I could get access to a PC with a PCMCIA slot. That would be no problem. I don't want to mess with it, though, if it's hopeless. Gary Bruce Johnson wrote: > Gary D. Adams wrote: > > Well, I can tell you the Lucent Turbo Silver Lan card shows up on the desktop > > of my 3400 but i

Re: Good, inexpensive digital camera

Thomas Ethen wrote: > Actually I love both digital and film and use both on a daily basis! I am > still unsure as to what will be done for storage when the digital camera > catches up with film, since the files will be incredibly large. > Tom Psychedelic Holocubes, baybee! Seriously, this is one

Re: Good, inexpensive digital camera

Don't forget the archival quality of film over digital! Tom > > I do love film, much richer colors and depth, but it is too expensive, in the > long run, and just one huge hassle. In this case, I will take convenience and > price over quality and hassle. Unfortunately. However I lament. > > P- >

Re: Good, inexpensive digital camera

Actually I love both digital and film and use both on a daily basis! I am still unsure as to what will be done for storage when the digital camera catches up with film, since the files will be incredibly large. Tom > > I'd guess that digital cameras are still 3-5 years from surpassing film > in p

Re: G3 powerbook

Thanks Laurent, this is the kind of stuff I need to know [EMAIL PROTECTED] Madison heights, mich -Original Message- From: G-Books [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Laurent Daudelin Sent: Friday, April 19, 2002 1:36 PM To: G-Books Subject: Re: G3 powerbook On 19/04/02 03:03, "d

Re: Good, inexpensive digital camera

Thomas Ethen wrote: > These are not inexpensive digital cameras that we are talking about now! An > inexpensive 35mm film camera (less that $100) will outshoot any inexpensive > digital camera (less than $300) out there when it comes to photographic > sharpness. > > Having used the D1X (5.33 Mega

Re: Good, inexpensive digital camera

I find film to be one of the largest nuisances of the 20th and 21st centuries. It's a pain to use film and film companies have nothing but themselves to blame for not making developing easier. They should have contrived some contraption to take your film (easy-load, which finally has made an appea

Re: Good, inexpensive digital camera

These are not inexpensive digital cameras that we are talking about now! An inexpensive 35mm film camera (less that $100) will outshoot any inexpensive digital camera (less than $300) out there when it comes to photographic sharpness. Having used the D1X (5.33 Megapixel) and an EOS-1D (4.06 Megap

Re: Good, inexpensive digital camera

Clyde Kahrl wrote: > Film is infinitely better and cheaper than digital. > I have done it both ways now, and film is so much cheaper than > digital there is no comparison.Film is also infinitely superior in > quality---by at least 3 orders of magnitude. Well, film has been around a

Re: G3 powerbook

On 19/04/02 03:03, "dominic" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What I was asking is there are certain desktops, PowerBooks that have > been plagued with problems, so what I wanted to know is if I choose the > g3/300 or the 292 as you mentioned will it be a good stable machine or > are there potential

Re: Good, inexpensive digital camera

On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 12:44:01PM -0400, Clyde Kahrl wrote: : : For years, film has evolved to en extremely efficient medium. Film cameras have been around longer than digital cameras by around two orders of magnitude. : Everyone knows (or should know) that there is a difference between

Re: Good, inexpensive digital camera

On Fri, 19 Apr 2002, Clyde Kahrl wrote: (amazingly biased rant snipped) Well, that was incredibly off topic. KeS -- G-Books is sponsored by and... Small Dog Electronicshttp://www.smalldog.com | Refurbished Drives | -- Check our web site for refurbished Power

Good, inexpensive digital camera

Film is infinitely better and cheaper than digital. I have done it both ways now, and film is so much cheaper than digital there is no comparison.Film is also infinitely superior in quality---by at least 3 orders of magnitude. As an example, scanning Fuji ASA-800 film o

Re: 802.11 card for 3400, 1400

Gary D. Adams wrote: > Well, I can tell you the Lucent Turbo Silver Lan card shows up on the desktop > of my 3400 but is not otherwise detected by the software. I took a chance on > it. Oh well. There is also, possibly, a firmware issue on these, for which, alas, you need access to a PC with PCM

Re: Wallstreet procrssor board failure AGAIN

> They are dogs, but I like mine. Always in awe of the design. > > The first generation Wallstreet was available with a 12" passive matrix LCD > with both the cacheless 233, and the 250Mhz model. The units with the 12" > Passive Matrix LCD came with only 2 Meg VRAM. The 13.3" and 14.1" screen >

Re: Wallstreet procrssor board failure AGAIN

> Subject: Re: Wallstreet procrssor board failure AGAIN > From: "Chrys R. Cruz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > The Kanga runs at 250MHz with 50MHz bus speed. The 250MHz Wallstreet uses a > logic board running at 83MHz, as does the 292MHz WS. The cache- less 233MHz > (aka Mainstreet) runs at 66MHz w/ an A