Is there any camera on earth meeting 4 simple requirements (AA,CF,7x)

On 18 Jun 2005 19:51:03 -0700, "Susan (Graphic Artist)"
wrote:

Paul Rubin wrote:
When I bought my first digicam (Coolpix 900S) I bought a 45 MB CF card
with it for $200 or so. Sometime later I bought a 128MB card that
I didn't need, just because it was such an astonishing bargain at
around $110. These days a 256MB card (CF or SD) is just $20 or so
if you shop carefully. So I don't mind buying one. I've found that
128MB is way more capacity than I need for the S100, and I don't feel
the need for gigabytes of memory cards for a P/S camera. However,
if your shooting habits require multiple GB, it may be more of an issue
for you.

I went through the same media exercise that I presume everyone else
did.

First, I couldn't live with the puny 8 Mbyte or 32 Mbyte CF card that
came with each of my p&s digital cameras; then my immediate 128 Mbyte &
subsequent 256 Mbyte upgrades for more than a hundred bucks each at
CostCo when they first came out; then a few more 512 Mbyte CF cards;
then the set of 1 Gbyte compact flash cards for a few hundred dollars;
and now the multi-GB CF cards for about the price that I paid for the
initial 512 Mbyte cards when they first came out.

With the kids being the most adorable things on earth, I shoot a dozen
video clips a day and often a few hundred shots a day (depending on the
day of course). I often fill up the 1GB compact flash cards within a
half day (mostly with video clips). Certainly a 1 Gbyte card wouldn't
last a heavy weekend. So, I couldn't live with the 512 MB and smaller
compact flash cards (I use them only for emergencies - which is to say
I use them pretty often

I don't wish to go through that same inventory building curve for SD
media when SD gains me nothing over CF - especially considering I only
have portable computers which all have a passive CF card adaptor in the
PCMCIA slot so I never have to use wires or advertisement-filled
manufacturer software just to transfer my data over to my hard drive
and onto the DVD disc a few times a month as I fill up 450 Gbytes of
photo memories for my children and their ancestors.

In summary, for some people, buying ONE flash card is enough; but not
for me.
My main resistance to other media is the inventory I have currently in
CF media and the fact that that other media gains me nothing whatsoever
as long as I can find a decent camera that uses the CF media.

I'm beginning to smell a troll, here.
You take this many photos, yet have no idea of what Dpreview is
talking about?
You are this much of a photographer, and think Consumer Reports is the
last word in photography hardware reviews?
You post from Google?
All this, and more, much more, adds up to a troll, to me.

--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"

"Bill Funk" wrote in message
...
On 18 Jun 2005 19:51:03 -0700, "Susan (Graphic Artist)"
wrote:

Paul Rubin wrote:
When I bought my first digicam (Coolpix 900S) I bought a 45 MB CF card
with it for $200 or so. Sometime later I bought a 128MB card that
I didn't need, just because it was such an astonishing bargain at
around $110. These days a 256MB card (CF or SD) is just $20 or so
if you shop carefully. So I don't mind buying one. I've found that
128MB is way more capacity than I need for the S100, and I don't feel
the need for gigabytes of memory cards for a P/S camera. However,
if your shooting habits require multiple GB, it may be more of an issue
for you.

I went through the same media exercise that I presume everyone else
did.

First, I couldn't live with the puny 8 Mbyte or 32 Mbyte CF card that
came with each of my p&s digital cameras; then my immediate 128 Mbyte &
subsequent 256 Mbyte upgrades for more than a hundred bucks each at
CostCo when they first came out; then a few more 512 Mbyte CF cards;
then the set of 1 Gbyte compact flash cards for a few hundred dollars;
and now the multi-GB CF cards for about the price that I paid for the
initial 512 Mbyte cards when they first came out.

With the kids being the most adorable things on earth, I shoot a dozen
video clips a day and often a few hundred shots a day (depending on the
day of course). I often fill up the 1GB compact flash cards within a
half day (mostly with video clips). Certainly a 1 Gbyte card wouldn't
last a heavy weekend. So, I couldn't live with the 512 MB and smaller
compact flash cards (I use them only for emergencies - which is to say
I use them pretty often

I don't wish to go through that same inventory building curve for SD
media when SD gains me nothing over CF - especially considering I only
have portable computers which all have a passive CF card adaptor in the
PCMCIA slot so I never have to use wires or advertisement-filled
manufacturer software just to transfer my data over to my hard drive
and onto the DVD disc a few times a month as I fill up 450 Gbytes of
photo memories for my children and their ancestors.

In summary, for some people, buying ONE flash card is enough; but not
for me.
My main resistance to other media is the inventory I have currently in
CF media and the fact that that other media gains me nothing whatsoever
as long as I can find a decent camera that uses the CF media.

I'm beginning to smell a troll, here.
You take this many photos, yet have no idea of what Dpreview is
talking about?
You are this much of a photographer, and think Consumer Reports is the
last word in photography hardware reviews?
You post from Google?
All this, and more, much more, adds up to a troll, to me.

More fool you. There are plenty that irrational/illogical.

Rod Speed wrote:

"Bill Funk" wrote in message
...

On 18 Jun 2005 19:51:03 -0700, "Susan (Graphic Artist)"
wrote:


Paul Rubin wrote:

When I bought my first digicam (Coolpix 900S) I bought a 45 MB CF card
with it for $200 or so. Sometime later I bought a 128MB card that
I didn't need, just because it was such an astonishing bargain at
around $110. These days a 256MB card (CF or SD) is just $20 or so
if you shop carefully. So I don't mind buying one. I've found that
128MB is way more capacity than I need for the S100, and I don't feel
the need for gigabytes of memory cards for a P/S camera. However,
if your shooting habits require multiple GB, it may be more of an issue
for you.

I went through the same media exercise that I presume everyone else
did.

First, I couldn't live with the puny 8 Mbyte or 32 Mbyte CF card that
came with each of my p&s digital cameras; then my immediate 128 Mbyte &
subsequent 256 Mbyte upgrades for more than a hundred bucks each at
CostCo when they first came out; then a few more 512 Mbyte CF cards;
then the set of 1 Gbyte compact flash cards for a few hundred dollars;
and now the multi-GB CF cards for about the price that I paid for the
initial 512 Mbyte cards when they first came out.

With the kids being the most adorable things on earth, I shoot a dozen
video clips a day and often a few hundred shots a day (depending on the
day of course). I often fill up the 1GB compact flash cards within a
half day (mostly with video clips). Certainly a 1 Gbyte card wouldn't
last a heavy weekend. So, I couldn't live with the 512 MB and smaller
compact flash cards (I use them only for emergencies - which is to say
I use them pretty often

I don't wish to go through that same inventory building curve for SD
media when SD gains me nothing over CF - especially considering I only
have portable computers which all have a passive CF card adaptor in the
PCMCIA slot so I never have to use wires or advertisement-filled
manufacturer software just to transfer my data over to my hard drive
and onto the DVD disc a few times a month as I fill up 450 Gbytes of
photo memories for my children and their ancestors.

In summary, for some people, buying ONE flash card is enough; but not
for me.
My main resistance to other media is the inventory I have currently in
CF media and the fact that that other media gains me nothing whatsoever
as long as I can find a decent camera that uses the CF media.

I'm beginning to smell a troll, here.
You take this many photos, yet have no idea of what Dpreview is
talking about?
You are this much of a photographer, and think Consumer Reports is the
last word in photography hardware reviews?
You post from Google?
All this, and more, much more, adds up to a troll, to me.


More fool you. There are plenty that irrational/illogical.

Hi...

And I'll throw in two cents worth; don't think there's
anything unusual at all.

Some of us are photographers; some like me simply take
pictures. My theory is if I take enough pictures every
once in a long while I accidentally get an outstanding
one. It works.

And now with digital I can take all I want... no film
cost, no processing cost, mostly no printing cost.

Heck, I spend hundreds of hours sitting in a boat with
the youngsters alternately taking pictures and fishing.
I don't know what the dpreview equal in fishing gear is.

Ken

Bill Funk wrote:
Given the above, I would suggest that you educate yourself.
You don't know what DPREVIEW is talking about? Then find out.
You've had bad experiences with proprietary batteries?
Maybe you were doing something wrong? Did that thought occur?
If so,did CR help? Obviously not.
Educate yourself.
I hate to be Mr. Obviousman, but it seems pretty obvious that what you
consider to be four simple goals that are wanted by most people,
aren't. Maybe there's a reason for that. Your job is to find out what
that reason is.

Wow. You shocked me. I didn't realize I was 'complaining'.
I just thought I was presenting my situation.
I am sorry.
I didn't mean to 'complain' about dpreview not having what I need.
From your post, I see it's not the right thing for dpreview to have a
single number or value for the quality of photos taken by a camera (how
does Consumer Reports get away with doing that though)? I really
thought that CR hired engineers who knew what they were doing. If they
are giving me a single value (which is, after all what I want) that is
wrong (which isn't, after all, what I want), then it's not necessarily
meaningful.

The algorithm I was using was to ignore any camera that didn't have a
big red dot (just like I ingore any automobile that has those big black
dots). If that's the wrong algorithm, then I'm sorry (at myself) for
using it and I'm sorry to have said that dpreview would be more helpful
to me if it did.

I'm sorry for the assumptions I made and for sounding like I was
complaining.
I was just trying to state my situation and my needs and my desires in
a way so as to be understood for the purpose of arriving at the answer
we sought thanks to the help from you (almost all of you know more than
I do and I respect that knowledge - otherwise I wouldn't be asking and
responding to each question so diligently).

Susan Henderson

On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 04:27:42 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:

I'm beginning to smell a troll, here.
You take this many photos, yet have no idea of what Dpreview is
talking about?
You are this much of a photographer, and think Consumer Reports is the
last word in photography hardware reviews?
You post from Google?
All this, and more, much more, adds up to a troll, to me.

More fool you. There are plenty that irrational/illogical.

Does that mean they aren't trolls when they take the industry to task
with little thought?
When they admit they know next to nothing after taking as many
pictures as this troll has said she takes?
When they try to defend using Consumer Reports as the last word in
digital camera reviewing?

--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"

John A. Stovall wrote:
And pray tell how does that fount of photographic technical knowledge
Consumer Reports rate the Canon 1DsMkII or a Hasselblad with and
Ixpress digital back?

Wow. Had I known how much you guys don't like Consumer Reports, I'd
have kept it under my bed and only pulled it out to read by flashlight
when the shades were down.

I did not mean to unleash the fount of disdain that seems to be welled
up here against what I can no longer confess to be one of my trusted
sources of information.

I'll be more discreet about the magazines I peruse next time.

Susan Henderson

Ken Weitzel wrote:
Some of us are photographers; some like me simply take
pictures. My theory is if I take enough pictures every
once in a long while I accidentally get an outstanding
one. It works.

And now with digital I can take all I want... no film
cost, no processing cost, mostly no printing cost.

I'm like Ken.

I can easily take twenty 1-minute videos of my kids in an hour having
fun (each video being over 17 Mbytes in size). In a half day of that,
my 1GB card is filled up - but - so what. I just pop in another 1Gb
compact flash card and I can snap pictures and videos continually of my
three kids playing in the water at an amusement park.

When I get home, I pop those filled-up 1GB compact flash cards onto the
PQI passive Compact Flash Adapter safely tucked away in the PCMCIA slot
of all my portable computers and I just move the files over to my photo
directory - where I keep one directory for each days' worth of photos
listed as 20050601, 20050602, 20050602, etc. I have taken pictures of
each of my kids since the day they were born (friends joked they'd go
blind from all the flash but they seem to all have perfect 20:20 vision
so maybe there is something medicinal to daily photography after all).
I could even make a video of each of their lives simply by taking one
photo of each kid in the same setting every day and then collecting
them all together to play in a continual video.

All this takes space but each day I simply dump the filled CF cards
content onto the hard disk and when I get to a few Gbytes, I just dump
them onto a DVD and then clean up the 80 Gbyte hard disk to start anew.

Doesn't almost everyone take a lot of digital photos of their kids
every day?
How often do YOU take snapshots and videos of your kids (they don't
stay this cute forever you know)?

Susan Henderson

"Susan (Graphic Artist)" writes:

I can easily take twenty 1-minute videos of my kids in an hour having
fun (each video being over 17 Mbytes in size). In a half day of that,
my 1GB card is filled up - but - so what. I just pop in another 1Gb
compact flash card and I can snap pictures and videos continually of my
three kids playing in the water at an amusement park.

If you want to shoot video, why don't you get a video camera? You'll
find it works a lot better for video than a camcorder does.

Doesn't almost everyone take a lot of digital photos of their kids
every day?
How often do YOU take snapshots and videos of your kids (they don't
stay this cute forever you know)?

It still seems like way too many.

Bill Funk wrote in message
...
Rod Speed wrote

I'm beginning to smell a troll, here.
You take this many photos, yet have no
idea of what Dpreview is talking about?
You are this much of a photographer, and think Consumer
Reports is the last word in photography hardware reviews?
You post from Google?
All this, and more, much more, adds up to a troll, to me.

More fool you. There are plenty that irrational/illogical.

Or just ignorant.

Does that mean they aren't trolls when they
take the industry to task with little thought?

Corse they arent.

They just dont understand why most cameras
dont use AA batterys for example.

When they admit they know next to nothing after taking
as many pictures as this troll has said she takes?

Taking a lot proves nothing with digital cameras where
there is no cost with taking a lot and discarding the duds.

When they try to defend using Consumer Reports
as the last word in digital camera reviewing?

She didnt do that. You're lying/trolling there yourself.

Bill Funk wrote:
When they admit they know next to nothing after taking as many
pictures as she takes?
When they try to defend using Consumer Reports as the last word in
digital camera reviewing?

Hi Bill,

I have a question for you which I hope you take in the right way.
Do you have kids?

I assume you do; so may I ask how many photos and videos do you take of
your kids every day?

If you don't take videos and snapshots of your kids every day, do you
at least buy the yearly class photo that their grade school offers to
you?

If the answer is no to all of the above, then I can't really identify
with you and you can't really identify with me.

My personal opinion is that it is one of my many jobs as a parent to
capture and preserve the thousands of precious moments of their lives
which are all too often frail. I lost a child long ago (when I was
young and stupid) and I have almost nothing by way of memories to show
for that mistake at a fragile time of my life. Not that that should
sway you but my point is only that I will continue to capture and save
my memories of my children as much as I can despite the way you
apparently feel about this practice.

I consider that I will have been successful if my children's children
appreciate the effort long after I'm gone from this earth. I hope they
read these letters and they stand up for their mother and grandmother
and say, twenty, thirty, forty years from now "My grandmother did the
right thing by saving thousand of precious childhood moments for me to
enjoy and for my kids to enjoy".

You are welcome to feel different and you're even welcome to try to
insult me for feeling differently than you - but I will continue,
despite your disdain for me and my "stupidity" - to try to learn and to
continue to ask questions where I don't understand and to respond to
those who ask me questions.

I have stated my position; if you answer my three questions to you
above, that will be helpful for me (us?) to better understand your
position.

Susan Henderson