A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Equipment » 35mm Photo Equipment
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Reviews of Disposable Cameras



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 17th 06, 05:53 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Reviews of Disposable Cameras

Is there a good source that discusses disposable cameras? Like shutter
speed and aperture, repeatability of shutter speed, lens quality, any
color filtering (underwater cameras?), and whatever else there might be
to say about them?

  #2  
Old May 17th 06, 06:44 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Reviews of Disposable Cameras

Is there a good source that discusses disposable cameras?

I had a very good article about disposable cameras but I threw it away.

  #3  
Old May 17th 06, 06:52 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Reviews of Disposable Cameras


"Annika1980" wrote in message
ups.com...
Is there a good source that discusses disposable cameras?


I had a very good article about disposable cameras but I threw it away.


How long have you been waiting to use this pun?


  #4  
Old May 17th 06, 07:11 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Reviews of Disposable Cameras


"Greg Hansen" wrote in message
...
Is there a good source that discusses disposable cameras? Like shutter
speed and aperture, repeatability of shutter speed, lens quality, any
color filtering (underwater cameras?), and whatever else there might be to
say about them?


You can simply apply the word "mediocre" to all of them, and there'll be not
much need to do multiple reviews.

Honestly, who would bother studying reviews of low-end stuff like that?


  #5  
Old May 17th 06, 07:48 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Reviews of Disposable Cameras

You can simply apply the word "mediocre" to all of them, and there'll be
not
much need to do multiple reviews.


I have used disposables, there are times when having a 'valueless' camera is
a major plus, sure the image quality with all of them is weak, but that
doesn't mean they have no uses or cannot produce interesting photographs, I
have submitted a few images to the Shoot-in that were made using Kodak
disposables.

"Jeremy" wrote in message
news[email protected]

"Greg Hansen" wrote in message
...
Is there a good source that discusses disposable cameras? Like shutter
speed and aperture, repeatability of shutter speed, lens quality, any
color filtering (underwater cameras?), and whatever else there might be

to
say about them?


You can simply apply the word "mediocre" to all of them, and there'll be

not
much need to do multiple reviews.

Honestly, who would bother studying reviews of low-end stuff like that?




  #6  
Old May 17th 06, 10:26 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Reviews of Disposable Cameras


Joseph Kewfi wrote:

I have submitted a few images to the Shoot-in that were made using Kodak disposables.


Obviously.

  #7  
Old May 18th 06, 12:20 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Reviews of Disposable Cameras

Obviously.

Yes, they're more interesting than your "sharp, technically correct"
digi-snaps.

"Annika1980" wrote in message
ups.com...

Joseph Kewfi wrote:

I have submitted a few images to the Shoot-in that were made using Kodak

disposables.

Obviously.



  #8  
Old May 18th 06, 01:39 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Reviews of Disposable Cameras

Joseph Kewfi wrote:
You can simply apply the word "mediocre" to all of them, and there'll be

not
much need to do multiple reviews.


I have used disposables, there are times when having a 'valueless' camera is
a major plus, sure the image quality with all of them is weak, but that
doesn't mean they have no uses or cannot produce interesting photographs, I
have submitted a few images to the Shoot-in that were made using Kodak
disposables.


Indeed. A friend of mine buys a bunch of them and throws them in a plastic
bag. He takes them tubing down the Apple River in Somerset, WI. If anybody
has been there, you would know why he wants to take pictures.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1

  #9  
Old May 19th 06, 10:27 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Reviews of Disposable Cameras


Jeremy wrote:

You can simply apply the word "mediocre" to all of them, and there'll be not
much need to do multiple reviews.

Honestly, who would bother studying reviews of low-end stuff like that?


I agree. And since most of them out-perform the cameras used by Louis
Daguerre let's agree all his images were worthless ****e too. Why
anyone used cameras before multicoating was perfected beggars belief!

  #10  
Old May 20th 06, 01:05 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Reviews of Disposable Cameras


" wrote in message
oups.com...

Jeremy wrote:

You can simply apply the word "mediocre" to all of them, and there'll be
not
much need to do multiple reviews.

Honestly, who would bother studying reviews of low-end stuff like that?


I agree. And since most of them out-perform the cameras used by Louis
Daguerre let's agree all his images were worthless ****e too. Why
anyone used cameras before multicoating was perfected beggars belief!


Why are you comparing apples to oranges? Disposable cameras may be
utilitarian, but they do not represent the level of quality that would be
considered even barely adequate for a serious shooter. They serve a purpose
for use by the Great Unwashed, but nobody would read comparative reviews of
cameras in that class.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why digital cameras are no good Scott W Digital Photography 0 April 7th 05 02:00 AM
How to Buy a Digital Camera [email protected] Digital Photography 0 January 18th 05 03:39 PM
Best Price on Digital Cameras. Joe Walsh Darkroom Equipment For Sale 0 August 18th 04 09:52 AM
Fuji S2 and Metz 44 Mz-2 Flash elchief In The Darkroom 3 April 7th 04 10:20 AM
Fuji S2 and Metz 44 Mz-2 Flash elchief Photographing People 3 April 7th 04 10:20 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.