Re: [tlug] Digital Camera Choices: Canon IXY 320 ?

["Jonathan Q" <jq@example.com>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Thomas Kruemmer" <tkruemmer@example.com>

> Generally, I find digital pictures still do not match a standard film camera's pictures. 

You haven't seen my Nikon :-)

I'll try to remember but will probably forget to send you some of the excellent macro shots it does.  Most recently, I've been doing people shots (my 11-day-old daughter) and we've printed some out on our Epson Photo 810.  They are indistinguishable from film, and this is only a two megapixel camera.  You should see what the new Nikon Coolpix 5700 ( megapixel) can do.  And it has the thing  I've always wished for in the 900 series - a flash hotshoe.  Mine only has a plug for a sync cable.

Plus, nowadays, if you bring a film for development, you can have it burnt on CD anyway. If it ain't quality and/or convenience, what is the point of having a digi-cam?

To expand on what  Godwin said, sucking the pics right from the media into my computer, doctoring up any flaws, making small web versions  and keeping the originals for printing is certainly convenience.  And since I don't want hard copies of most of them, just electronic ones, the higher purchase price of a good digital camera is offset in the long run by the much lower operating cost.  I've shot thousands of photos with my digital camera, something that would have been a very expensive proposition on film.  I don't even own a film camera anymore.

And if you can lay out the cash, Nikon's highest-end digital cameras accept standard Nikor SLR lenses, and they absolutely rock.  You'll lay down a few thousand dollars for one, but they are truly  great.

OT: I put some more baby pics online the other day, visible at http://photos.yahoo.com/yamame2002 in the Q Baby Q album.  They were all taken with my Coolpix 950, and some reveal its worst flaw: an incredibly anemic built-in flash (thus my wish for a hotshoe).

Jonathan