It reminds me that when I first worked for Hewlett-Packard their PC keyboards used keys with "Brighton Rock" lettering. Like the best typewriter keys the letters would never wear off. HP never made any money from those PC's. I seem to remember they bought the keyboards from one supplier, shipped them to a factory in the south of France, then prised off all the "crap" keys to replace it with the keys with "sufficient quality".
They dumped this tradition at the end of the 80's and by the mid 90's were the largest shipper of home PC's in the US.
But the bulgy back of the Kodak DSLR is quite nasty... but the pictures are very nice. I attended one of the try before you buy workshops this week and try as I might couldnt get the SLR/n to misbehave. I pointed it straight into tungsten lights (no legendary magenta halo), photographed grass (no painted effect) and all that with an entry level Sigma zoom. Bit weird that they only gave us a cheap lens like that to try out. Luckily one of the other attendees had a Nikkor macro so we could see that the camera still worked with a good lens.
Certainly considering buying the c version, would like to see some more challenging sample shots than the ones on the Kodak site though.
On 13 May 2004, at 16:44, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The other choice would be to have, like Canon and the preceeding Kodak cameras a high end body that will outlive the technology at twice the price.
How many 410,420 and 660 cameras are sitting on shelves perfectly useable
but technologically outdated?
PRW Freeman www.architecturalimages.co.uk
=============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
