Re: [vox-tech] digital camera recommendation?

[Rod Roark <MAPSrod@sunsetsystems.com>]

Wow, that's a nice looking camera.  A google search turns
up this review:

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2001_reviews/qv4000.html

By the way I've been playing with Gallery 
(http://gallery.jacko.com/index.php) which is a nice tool
for orgainzing and showing your photos online.

-- Rod
   http://www.sunsetsystems.com/

On Monday 01 July 2002 11:46 am, Henry House wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2002 at 03:40:06PM -0700, nbs wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 19, 2002 at 09:25:43PM -0700, Henry House wrote:
> > > Can anyone recommend a digital camera for use with Linux? My goals (in
> > > no particular order):
> > >
> > > * Good image quality
> >
> > YMMV. :)  More megapixels help, at least when you want GIANT resolution
> > (like, 1600x1200).  Check for good zoom, good indoor and outdoor
> > capabilities, and flash.  Also good if you can adjust exposure.
> >
> > > * Uses compact flash (the little wafers, each as large as an air-mail
> > > stamp)
> >
> > Those aren't compact flash.  CF are the big squarish ones.  (They also
> > come in micro-hard-drive flavors of up to 1GB, as well as other devices
> > like ethernet, modem, bluetooth, wireless, etc.)
>
> I meant airmail-stamp size, which is rather larger than a first-class stamp
> ;-). Anyway, I am sure that CompactFlash is what I have; I prefer it to the
> other standard because I have a Sandisk CompactFlash reader that works
> great under kernel 2.4.18 and a few flash cards. The smaller size of the
> SmartMedia cards is appealing, but then they seem to be more expensive at
> large capacities, easier to lose, and likely less durable.
>
> Sorry for the confusion :-).
>
> Anyway, I am now leaning to a Casio QV4000 camera, which appears to be
> supported by a USB mass storage kernel driver:
>
> 	http://www.harald-schreiber.de/
>
> as documented above. No word on the above page about Casio's
> Linux-friendliness, but there are no complains from the developers posted
> there either.
>
> I also like the Casio because it is an unobtrusive black, rather than an
> eye-grabbing silver, like most of the rest. Silly, I know ;-).

_______________________________________________
vox-tech mailing list
vox-tech@lists.lugod.org
http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech