If you do, could you tell me the pros and cons of your model? Also the price range, if you know it? I am thinking of buying one and all the manufacturer web sites I've been to just don't give enough information. Like, how many pictures (on average) does the storage unit of the camera hold? How long does the battery last? Does it require special software, and is it Win2k compatible? Can you buy accsessories, such as zoom lens or other special lenses for it, like an SLR? Please tell me everything you can think of about your camera. Thanks!

-- Anonymous, May 25, 2001

Answers

I have a Pretec DC-300. It holds 64 pix, and is a tremendous piece of crap. All the pix end up looking like they were taken by a 5 year old with a pinhole camera. In the dark. With a thumb over the lens.

-- Anonymous, May 25, 2001

For more information on digital cameras than one could possible know what to do with, check out Digital Photography Review. It's very comprehensive.

-- Anonymous, May 25, 2001

I have a Kodak 210 or 215. (I can't remember the model number - sorry! But it is a Kodak.) I love it. If I take pictures at the highest resolution and biggest size, I can get about 12-15 with the amount of memory I have. At the small end, I can fit about 55 pictures in there. It cost me around $300 - totally worth it. Good luck in your search!

-- Anonymous, May 25, 2001

i bought a Leica digilux zoom early last year and it has been fantastic. Leica have released a newer model than the one i own and it is much better. i think it costs about $US700. The model i have doesnt have USB so downloading was really slow (and i ended up buying a USB SmartMedia reader/writer), however the newer model does have USB. That is the only con i can think of! Leica are renowned for their lenses in 'normal' cameras and i think they are good in digicams too but i am no photographer. The internals are actually Fuji (who haev their own line which look similar). My camera came with an 8Mb SmartMedia card and we soon upgraded that to 32b as to how many pics that really depends upon the quality and res the camera is set to.

-- Anonymous, May 25, 2001

Thank you! I appreciate the answers. That web site was....TOO much, Lyn. I didn't even know what the terminology meant!

-- Anonymous, May 26, 2001

Keep in mind that you can get a great 1.3 megapixel (the higher the number, the better the possible resolution) camera for $250 or so. Throw in a 64mb smartmedia card (which you can get upwards of 400 mid- res pictures on) for another $75, and you'll be quite happy.

Highly recommend finding something with a USB connection from the camera for downloading, though. Serial is painfully slow.

-- Anonymous, May 26, 2001

I bought a used Canon A50, a battery charger, and a USB thingy you can plug the compact flash card into for $250 on eBay. The Canon takes sharp pictures. I'm reasonably happy with it, though its hard to take action shots with a digital camera when your reflexes are tuned to an SLR. I seldom shoot more than two dozen pictures between charges/downloads, so I have little to say about battery life.

If I had to do it over and could afford to, I'd probably go with the smaller (and more expensive) Canon S100.

-- Anonymous, May 27, 2001

I bought a Nikon 950 a year and a half ago and I LOVE it. I also recommend an external smartmedia card reader, it saves on batteries as well as is way faster. The Nikon optics are pretty awesome, and the auto modes for focus and aperture are really decent. I like mine bunches. Digital cameras are cool.

-- Anonymous, June 01, 2001

I've got a Canon D-490 Zoom and just love it. At the highest res (1600x1200), it holds 10-15 pic on an 8mb card. At 640x480 res, the card will hold around 80 pic. It has a 3x optical zoom and will even do Quicktime movies. It's the same size as my 35mm film camera too. Nice and compact, pretty light too. I paid $449 for it, including an 8mb memory card & long life Lithium batteries. I love it, it rocks.

-- Anonymous, June 01, 2001

I own a Kodak DC3200 and i am very much in love with it. It isn't too spectacular at night shots, but i've heard that few digital cameras are. At the highest resolution i get insanely huge pictures but i can only hold roughly 8 or 9. I can get about 25 or 26 at the lowest setting and frankly those are usually good enough for me.

At the highest setting i even took some photos for a local rap group and they used a few of them on their new album cover, so the quality is pretty decent.

It cost me $285 Canadian which means it wouldn't cost you much in US dollars. The only drawback relates to what Curtis said - it's a serial port connection so if you're transfering 25 pictures it will take a little while. It doesn't bother me much though seeing as how i rarely need to dump pictures quickly, but it would be nice to not have to go get a cup of coffee to pass the time.

The biggest annoyance that i have with this camera is that some dingbat at Kodak decided they didn't need to make a freakin' LENS CAP for the camera. I want to try to find a lens cap for another camera that will fit on this one because i'm frequently worried that it will get scratched.

If you go to my website and check out the photo album, any of the most recent pictures in there have been taken with my digital camera and at the lower settings. The moon shot (that would be a moon in the sky, not a moon of my ass, sorry) was the only one taken at highest quality just because it was so dark out. That should give you an idea of the quality of the camera.

Batteries last for a decent amount of time if you avoid using the LCD screen to shoot. To be honest, i hate shooting from the LCD anyway, i just use it to preview the shot i have taken.

Hope that helps!

-- Anonymous, June 04, 2001

The Kodak 240 is not being made anymore but is still being sold in a few Office Max's - I bought it a year ago for work use for about $400-450 and now it's clearance at $175 if you can find it. We've used it in the office for a year and adore it - batteries last a long time, there are plenty of options, and it holds 72 photos at an average resolution. Check CNET.com for digital camera reviews - pretty helpful and can compare them.

We just bought a Kodak 3400 for work use (needed another camera 'cause everyone loved the first one!) and it's based on the Kodak 240/280 model, very similar...cost us around $400. Can't speak highly enough of either of these cameras.

If you wanna save some money, hunt down a Kodak 240!

-- Anonymous, June 07, 2001

Oh yeah - word to that one. I own a Kodak DC240i (one of the cameras that came out in IMac colors - I have blueberry) and it's beauteous, even though I haven't learned, quite, how to take advantage of all its features. It's light, easy to use and takes excellent photos - you can take them in color, black and white or sepia. It uses those flash memory cards and comes with rechargeable batteries and a recharger - I even got a nice camera bag with mine.

Yay Kodak.

-- Anonymous, June 07, 2001

Okay, so what about delay between pressing the shutter release and seeing the picture appear / having the picture taken? I find it terribly annoying when I press the button and have to hold everyone still and hold the camera still for a long 3 seconds while the camera taaaaakkkkeeeesssss the picture. Frustrating, even.

-- Anonymous, June 12, 2001

The delay takes a while to getting used to. But a lot of camera's offer you the possibility to get all adjustement right beforehand by pressing the shutter halfway. That way the delay won't take that long anymore.

-- Anonymous, June 12, 2001

I also have a a Kodak DC3200. I'm pretty sure that these are about to be superceeded, because I've seen them on sale for a hundred bucks lately. The other comments are spot on, but I would mention that if you buy a 32M compact flash card then you have room for tons of images, even at the highest quality setting.

I have written a full review for epinions, it's at: < a href="http://www.epinions.com/elec-review-1210-394BBB2E-3A501247- prod5/tk_~CB005.1.7"> http://www.epinions.com/elec-review-1210-394BBB2E-3A501247- prod5/tk_~CB005.1.7

-- Anonymous, June 13, 2001