digital cameras

From: Hans Franke <>
Date: Thu Jul 15 11:23:55 1999

> As for a basic rule for purchasing a digital camera, expect to pay more
> than $200 for a decent one that takes pics good enough for a web site
> without having to do all sorts of post-processing. Don't settle for a
> cheapo one like the low end Kodaks. They suck. Make sure you get one
> with removable storage too.

> Once you realize you need a really good camera then spend the big bucks,
> but don't go wasting money if you don't need all the fancy features. a
> $300 digital camera will do you right for any occasion if you're the
> casual photographer (like me.

> Once I get back home I'll be creating a web site for my visit to Peru, all
> the pictures having been taken on my D-220L (max. resolution is 640x400
> but most of the pictures are 320x200, except for the closeups of the
> amazing Inca stonework, which I took at 640x400). They came out great!

Thats exactly what these cameras ar for - taking vacation pictures.
As an example, look at
it took me several atempts to get this picture (and additional stuff
like lightening etc.) with my Camedia 810 and I think it's quite ok
to give an overview. But as you see with the enlargement (done by
Cameron - just factor 2 and I think he did also sharpen it) the
details you can get are quite lousy.

Also it is hard to make a decent picture when you're limited
to one type of lens. To get usable details and figures showing
them _without_ doubts, you just need higher resolution and
interchangeable lenses.

Anyway, Have fun in Peru, lucky one.

Stimm gegen SPAM:
Vote against SPAM:
Votez contre le SPAM:
Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut
Received on Thu Jul 15 1999 - 11:23:55 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:32:12 BST