[thelist] digital camera shopping

[aardvark]

> From: "M. Hannan" <desmoljones at hotmail.com>
>
> Beware the sub-200's...or at least expect to get what you pay for.  The 
> 640x480 crapameras are a shoe-in to disappoint.  If you can squeeze the 
[...]
> Features and format are more important than brand name.  Standard smart 
> cards are best, tiff/jpeg are better than proprietary format (don't get 
> anything that's not a standard 4:3 ratio either, those are just plain 
> weird).  USB is a plus.  That being said I'm partial to Olympus.

i'll second all this... after much research (you may remember me 
commenting on this in the past) for a $300-ish camera for my 
brother to take overseas (to use with that oft-cited text-based CMS 
i made), i ended up recommending the Olympus D340 R... i think 
there is a newer model out...

good color, clarity, brightness, etc... the software to get it to your 
PC can be wonky, and his wasn't y2k-friendly, but he downloaded 
a patch... he didn't want USB, either, but i think they have USB 
now...

anyway, you can see sample images at http://roselli.org/tour/ 
(recently he posted a good, odd, set at 
http://roselli.org/tour/entry.asp?articleID=1000114&folder=11_2000, 
all taken with that camera and posted after run through a droplet i 
gave him)...


> Digital cameras are great, but don't pull a pic off your your 3.3 
> megagooglepixel camera onto your PIIII/6trillion and upload it to your site 
> via your DSL connection then tell all your friends stuck in 56k land to 
> "look at this"....chances are that a year-and-a-half later they'll see 
[...]

that web photo gallery option in Photoshop 5 is a great 5-second 
way to post them hi-res pics without them being fat files... you may 
not like the HTML (i don't), but who cares if it's among friends...?