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. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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 newsHJag.13834$Nw6.2548@trnddc03... "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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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 | |
|
|
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 |