I will take exception here. I have the Kodak DC-210Plus. When you set the
resolution to its highest, best quality, the images are better than any 35mm
I have ever seen. You also have the ability to do enhancements before the
final cut. One other good point, NO FILM or DEVELOPING COST. Come on you
old farts out there, step up and join the rest of us old farts...
VLADIMIR
96 Indy "FASRAM"
http://home.austin.rr.com/fasram/
http://www.indyram.org/
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-dakota-truck@buffnet4.buffnet.net
[mailto:owner-dakota-truck@buffnet4.buffnet.net]On Behalf Of
DodgeBoyz3@aol.com
Sent: Saturday, January 02, 1999 9:34 PM
To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net
Subject: Re: DML: Digital camersa (non Dak related)
In a message dated 02-01-99 7:10:16 PM Central Standard Time,
fawcett@uism.bu.edu writes:
> I go back to my 35mm Nikon's and have the images scanned (I
> guess that makes me an old fart?! ;-)
Yeah, guess I'm an old fart too :-)
The Nikon does deliver some nice detail that the digitals seem to lose.
Clarity is a bit better too.
Gene in Baytown
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:11:51 EDT