hort.net Seasonal photo, (c) 2006 Christopher P. Lindsey, All Rights Reserved: do not copy
articles | gallery of plants | blog | tech blog | plant profiles | patents | mailing lists | top stories | links | shorturl service | tom clothier's archive0
Gallery of Plants
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Mailing Lists
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
New Trillium species discovered

Disease could hit Britain's trees hard

Ten of the best snowdrop cultivars

Plant protein database helps identify plant gene functions

Dendroclimatologists record history through trees

Potato beetle could be thwarted through gene manipulation

Hawaii expands coffee farm quarantine

Study explains flower petal loss

RSS story archive

Re: PHOTO: Digital camera vs Digital Camcorder

  • Subject: Re: PHOTO: Digital camera vs Digital Camcorder
  • From: Tom Greaves <tomg@iadfw.net>
  • Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 05:02:00 +0000

Like Iris Moose, I also use the Nikon Coolpix 950 digital
camera.  I love it.  My son has the 990.  It can take higher
resolution pictures, but he never uses that resolution as
the lower resolution is fine for 8" x 10" enlargement which
is as big as we ever print.  I paid $699 a couple years
ago.  It is now probably in the $500 range.  But be aware of
the extra costs.  By the time you get extra batteries, a
charger, A/C adapter, extra flash card, flash card reader,
filters, etc., you have another $300 or so invested.  But it
is still well worth it.  These cameras also have the macro
capability that allows you to take extreme closeups.  I took
one picture of a ladybug eating an aphid and the ladybug
appears to be several inches in diameter.   On vacation last
month I took over 300 pictures on a single 64 meg flash card
at pretty good resolution.  At the end of the day we could
view them on the hotel TV and delete ones we knew we would
not keep.  You can also get free software that allows you to
layout several pictures on a page then print them in color
on a $99 printer.  If you use photopaper, you can't tell the
difference between them and professionally developed film.

I did a lot of comparisons and research before I got my
Nikon.  I also have an expensive Nikon SLR film camera that
I never use anymore.  I almost got the Sony Mavica F91, but
the Nikon macro capability won me over.  My daughter ended
up getting the Ricoh that came out last year.  It has some
ease of use features that she liked.  I like to play with
exposure time and depth of field that is easier to do on the

Using the snapshot feature on a camcorder results in poor
quality pictures in every case that I've seen.  

Tom near Dallas, TX USA zone 7


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

 © 1995-2017 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index