is remembered in many Corporate Boardrooms.
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Kevin Waterson
Subject: Re: 7 mega pixels
I am not claiming they should be at the forefront, just to let end
users
know what they may, or maynot be developing (exuse the pun).
It would
I would have pointed that out but what's the point.
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Dave Madsen
Subject: RE: 7 mega pixels
but the fact is that we
have already met/surpassed 35mm so at this point it becomes more of
a status
symbol than a real improvement.
I
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: 7 mega pixels
Exactly the reason I'm strongly leaning towards Canon. However I am also
concerned from a business and practicality standpoint about value for the
dollar. Pentax has provided a very good value in the past. Canon and Nikon
typically have higher costs from
Indeed, 6mp was the grail sought by Kodak for years as they felt that
was what was required for a double page magazine spread at the usual
halftone reproduction.
--
Paul Stenquist wrote:
On Sep 18, 2004, at 10:07 PM, Kevin Waterson wrote:
Perhaps it is the
changing business environment that
Kevin Waterson felt left behind when he wrote:
It urks me that there is a 7 megapixel PS, Optio750Z, but the
'flagship' is but a mere 6. Any rumours on when we can expect the
next leap forward?
Will there be another leap forward for pentax in DSLRs?
Are there enough Pentax users to justify a 12
Don't bother. If your sole concern is ultimate image quality, get a
Sinar and shoot 8x10 sheets.
Digital is all about convenience, it's the same tradeoff you make when
chosing a 35mm SLR over a viewcamera. Some more or less pixels ain't the
important part.
Tom Reese wrote:
Kevin Waterson felt
6 matches
Mail list logo
