View Single Post
Old 12-17-2001, 06:58 PM  
~Z~
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: dallas,texas,usa
Posts: 94
Nikon doesn't have the resolution that kodak does. for the same money, and the same aquire problem, though not as bad as the fine pix.
I think that the success of the Nikons is there name,
and all of the die hard Nikon buyers/owners
will blindly buy assuming that it's the best just by name.

The fine pix is fairly easy to handle, The Kodak is better because it's really a nikon with a kodak digital butt stuck on it.
Fine pix is some kind of hybrid that accepts nikon lens'

Do Not buy anything that doesn't have a firewire connection. These enable remote camera handling,
"when my LCD bit the dust, I was able to continue working", USB just can't do that.

The down loading problem....
A card is a card.
Most likely you will be popping your card into a reader for downloading while you keep shooting whith your second card*
*"always have at least two"

I wouldn't recommend a card over 350 megs for download speed. Few things suck more than a model ready to do nasty when you have to stop for a "technical thing"

The real problem with fine pix aproach is that
the images are just thrown into a direcry as either jpegs or tiffs, and you have to open every damned one of then to see what they are.

With the Kodak, they provide a photoshop plug in to aquire the images in a contact sheet format that you can then choose just the images that are worth opening.

Of course "al of mine are worth opening"

Yah right.

My friend has a 1 gig micro drive.
I made the mistake of filling it.
Very nice during the shoot...
2 hours to download it via usb.
And Yes my systems are fast...

And Mac.



------------------
~Z~
M.Zabel Productions
Extraordinary Fetish Content
~Z~ is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote