Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1998 20:09:43 +0200 (MET DST) X-Sender: j7...@mail.pi.se Message-Id: <v02140400b1d94bdb7caa@[195.7.73.87]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: mc...@world.std.com Subject: Re: Digital camera use
Hello Marla Misunas and listreaders! M. Misunas wrote: >I know someone asked recently about what kinds of digital cameras people >were using, but we weren't actually buying one at that time so I ignored >the messages. Can someone either fill me in with recommendations or >direct me to the archive? Thanks In my profession I have worked with varoius brands, for example Dycam, Minolta and Sony. Good performers in my opinion have been Minolta and Sony. Currently using a Sony Mavica which has many advantages. It stores images on floppy disks in JPG format (high and medium quality avaiable) which can be read instantly on PC and Mac. Further, it has a great zoom and relays pretty accurate colours. Good for documentation/report purposes and electronic publishing - web or multimedia. The downside is the limited resolution and not being able to upgrade. It really depends on what you need the camera to do. Do you need high resolution for printing? Stationary or mobile use - look at the weight and body design. Is colour accuracy important or less important? Compare colour reproduction as these tend to vary a lot. Many cameras use a lot of battery power to view images internally as well as downloading to a pc. Is it possible to upgrade and increase memory size? The most important aspect: price range! Plenty of mid-range good performers on the market performing surprisingly close to expensive models. Finally, you might try the feature archives on the "Publish RGB" web-site, they have reviewed digital cameras previously: http://www.publish.com In Europe many of the glossy photomags have provided good surveys. Maybe photomags could be worth reading too? Best wishes, Paul Henningsson, Goteborg Sweden Freelance producer of culture/heritage multimedia
