"Dave Oddie" <DaveOddie_at_mailandnews.com> wrote in message
news:nv5f105ghl5ahp5vhcc3bddkvmh3vjr1c9_at_4ax.com...
> On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:42:26 -0400, "Linda_N"
> <this-is-not-my_at_email-address.com> wrote:
> I am not convinced by the "combo cameras" that do good video and good
stills if
> that is what you are referring to. The main reason is storage. How much
solid
> state storage do you need to match a high quality digital video 1 hour
tape?
Up until recently that was a definite consideration. Now, on better models
you get both high load tape and smart media card storage (type depends on
manufacturer). The most sensible option is to save the stills to CF/SD
whatever the equipment takes just like you would a digital still camera, and
save movies to digi-tape. New technology will possibly make use of devices
like Nikon's pre-PMA announced CoolWalker MSV-01.
> I am off to Florida with the kids (and wife!) to do the Disney thing in
two
> weeks. That forced the issue of camera purchase or I may too have waited.
I envy you! Have a wonderful time to you and your family, and I hope you
post the images for all of us to see. I will view them in front of the
woodstove so I can pretend I am on the hot beach hahaha.
> I still would not be able to afford the newly announced Nikon D70 (which
has a
> better specced "kit" lens than the 300D) so the only things on the horizon
in
> my price range would be 8mp prosumers.
I am not sure if this would help, but don't forget the cameras almost always
sell for a hundred or more below the manufacturer's suggested retail price.
I would not be surprised if it sells for $899 or slightly less. Thing is
though it probably won't be out until April 2004 anyway (guessing) too late
for your trip anyway.
> The fact the 8700 looks like an upgrade to the 5700 means it is of no
interest
> to me and would not have been had it been available now. It is ISO 50 at
the
> best quality end of the ISO range which is also useless IMO so of the two
8mp
> prosumers out there so far neither tempt me. The Sony 828 is more than I
can
> afford and likely the 8700 would be too.
That is all the 8700 is so it appears. It fixes all the flaws of the 5700
(poor in low light and too slow for sports) plus tacs on a few megs (nice
though!). Depending on the price (which I assume will be at least a few
hundred less than the D70, it will probably be the camera of choice for
serious amatuers who do not want to go dSLR yet. This of course is all
speculation and only time will tell since others might be putting out some
excellent stuff at PMA too :-) 2004 is going to be a stellar year for
consumers I bet.
> Who does that leave? Canon with a pro-90 upgrade type? Could be and would
be a
> great camera I am sure but then there is the price. Or a Minolta A2?
Price
> again.
Olympus is putting out some good stuff at reasonable prices so I would not
rule them out yet. I have no idea why Canon dropped the Pro-90 10x optical
zoom development (ie did not make a next model), but I bet it is because of
fears that such technology will cut into the sale of consumer dSLR lenses.
Companies like Olympus and Panasonic do not have to worry about loosing
business in the lens department so they may come out with even better huge
optical zoom cameras with built in stabilization at low (or very reasonable)
prices. lalala, can't wait for PMA, and the sun of course!
Linda.
| 
