Dream list

[Carrie]

First of all, I don't have much money, but... I've been thinking maybe
somewhere/sometime I could find something like a grant to apply for to get
better stuff. Maybe it's not true, but on another group someone said her son
applied for grants (using Matthew Lesko's book about them- which I have as
an efile and felt was totally useless (LOL) and got $600,000 in grant money
to start a tree cutting business!

Seems like if he could get $600,000 he could live off that the rest of his
life and not have to start the business...

Anyway, what would go on a dream list of GOOD stuff? To do graphic arts,
desktop publishing, photography, making prints, etc.

I know MAC computers used to be the best (and going by what I've seen
this was true) but I only know PCs, and with PhotoShop, etc. I think they
are now comparable. I can probably figure out what kind and size computer to
get. With a large, flat screen monitor.

Aside from a bigger, better computer, what is a good digitial camera and
printer? Scanner?

Right now I have a (used) EPSON Z750, which (I think) takes good
pictures, and, from what I've seen takes better pictures than a lot of
newer, more megapixel ones. I think maybe the lens (quality) also is a
factor? I know people who have Kodak EasyShare (for example) that cost $300
and have 5 megapixels, but the pictures don't enlarge good and don't seem as
big and clear as what my camera takes.

The Sony Mavica? This is supposedly one of the best. They can be $500 and
up.

I guess the printer would be the most important, and when I was looking a
few months ago, I found so many of them, it was confusing.

I don't need something that costs a fortune (I don't plan on $600,000
for this) just something that works good. Does a good job. When I want to do
something, it will do it, and I don't have to fight with it or find out it's
not good enough.

Just thought it might be good to make a "dream list" and find out what
people who really know would recommend.

I know, the most important part of this is me knowing about it and
learning and practicing. Which I can (usually) do, at no cost and with just
basics.

Thanks,

Carrie

 

[Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)]

Carrie

Look at Nikon or Canon digital SLRs.. nothing else gets close to them..
megapixels relate to image density and resolution, but it is still the lens
that transports the light information to the receptors.. it does not follow
that a 5 megapixel compact type will outperform a 3 megapixel SLR type.. the
megapixel number is used as a 'this is better than that' sales pitch, but
there is more to it than just a number..

My preference is with Nikon.. Canon have had a problem with the 'flock'
inside the viewfinder breaking away and depositing 'bits' in the line of
view.. very irritating.. and Nikon have essentially used the same lens
mount since 1959, so virtually all Nikon lenses will mount on all Nikon
bodies.. Canon, Minolta, and Pentax have made at least one change each, and
in some case more than one.. not good when you want to upgrade a camera body
and realise that the lens collection has to be changed too.. professional
photographers use all of the top makes, but Nikon and Canon mostly..
performance by all is very good.. compact type cameras are ok too, but maybe
not for serious work..

Re. printers and scanners, HP colour laser printers take some beating..

A scanner is only as good as the software included.. Canon scanners win
hands down over the opposition..

Of course, you can pay $$$$$$$ for 'professional' equipment designed for
huge output runs, but the above will more than suffice for a small
business..

When choosing, take into account 'output' figures.. if a printer claims 3000
sheets per month, and your requirement is for 5000, keep looking..

--
Mike Hall
MVP - Windows Shell/user

 

[Carrie]

Carrie

Look at Nikon or Canon digital SLRs.. nothing else gets close to them..
megapixels relate to image density and resolution, but it is still the lens
that transports the light information to the receptors.. it does not follow
that a 5 megapixel compact type will outperform a 3 megapixel SLR type.. the
megapixel number is used as a 'this is better than that' sales pitch, but
there is more to it than just a number..

My preference is with Nikon.. Canon have had a problem with the 'flock'
inside the viewfinder breaking away and depositing 'bits' in the line of
view.. very irritating.. and Nikon have essentially used the same lens
mount since 1959, so virtually all Nikon lenses will mount on all Nikon
bodies.. Canon, Minolta, and Pentax have made at least one change each, and
in some case more than one.. not good when you want to upgrade a camera body
and realise that the lens collection has to be changed too.. professional
photographers use all of the top makes, but Nikon and Canon mostly..
performance by all is very good.. compact type cameras are ok too, but maybe
not for serious work..

Re. printers and scanners, HP colour laser printers take some beating..

A scanner is only as good as the software included.. Canon scanners win
hands down over the opposition..

Of course, you can pay $$$$$$$ for 'professional' equipment designed for
huge output runs, but the above will more than suffice for a small
business..

When choosing, take into account 'output' figures.. if a printer claims 3000
sheets per month, and your requirement is for 5000, keep looking..

Thanks, I will print this out to save.

Before digital cameras, I was interested in 35 mm SLRs and have had some
that were fairly good (Pentex and Minolta). Couldn't keep up with film and
processing most of the time.

Nikon is the BEST, I would think. I don't usually think of those because
of the cost, (and SLR digitals!) but this is my "dream list".

That's what I thought about the megapixels. "my camera has more
megapixels than yours does!" I've seen that so much on groups and lists. I
once asked a question on a computer group about my (previous) Epson PhotoPC
650 (I had first but wanted a zoom so got a 750Z) and someone wrote "you
will never get anything but crummy pictures with a 1 mp camera!" I think it
has 1.9 mp, and I only get what I can afford at the time. The camera I have
were $300 or so when they were new.

Many years ago, I had the best camera I have ever had, it was a WW2
Exacta. It took the most awesome (detailed) pictures (film camera, of
course) Someone gave it to me- he won it in a poker game in the navy and
couldn't figure out how it worked. Years later when I had it, it broke
(inside somehow) and I figured I could never get it fixed so donated it to a
Salvation Army place. After, I was so sorry, I could have kept the
removable (SLR) lens.

If nothing else it was probably an antiuque.

~ Carrie

 

[Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)]

Carrie

Lens design is so important.. the old Exacta (Exakta) cameras has lenses
made for them by the absolute best, Zeiss and Angenieux amongst them..
Contax and Leica were, and still are fantastic.. the only condition stopping
these cameras from taking perfect pictures is the operator.. 25 or 50 asa
film stock and one of the oldies can still show the best digital camera what
photography really is..


--
Mike Hall
MVP - Windows Shell/user

 

[Carrie]

Carrie

Lens design is so important.. the old Exacta (Exakta) cameras has lenses
made for them by the absolute best, Zeiss and Angenieux amongst them..
Contax and Leica were, and still are fantastic.. the only condition stopping
these cameras from taking perfect pictures is the operator.. 25 or 50 asa
film stock and one of the oldies can still show the best digital camera what
photography really is..

I believe it.

I've noticed that some who have Kodak EasyShare cameras (or other Kodak
digital cameras for that matter) even with more megapixels and costing more
(than mine) don't take as good pictures. Not sure if there are more models
of Easy Share, maybe more expensive ones are different (and don't mean to
pick on Kodak, but it's an example and has a "name" that is known). But one
I know (one of my daughters) bought one because of the megapixels and she'd
heard the more the better. She paid $250 for it, I think. She sends me
pictures, and I can't make them big enough to use as a full screen
Screensaver.

Another daughter has a $500 Sony Mavica (because I told her I thought they
were good- but something I couldn't afford) and it takes good, clear,
detailed pictures. Took her awhile to learn how to use it though.

I love having a digital camera (and recharable batteries)- and being
able to see what I'm taking and what I've got.

Not having a good/expensive one has just given me more incentive to
learn PhotoShop. I think my current Epson one, though old and not
mega-megapixel takes good pictures. I got the previous one (PhotoPC 650)
because I had seen pictures taken with it. But, I needed a zoom.

~ Carrie

 

[Carrie]

I have to disagree, Mike. I have read several reviews in digital photography
magazines that the 350D beats the Nikon D80 into a cocked hat in terms of
picture quality and ease of use. I've had no trouble with lenses, either.

And to state that "a scanner is only as good as the software included" -
really, Mike, I expected better from you! I would take an Epson scanner that
came with nothing than a Canon that came with a free copy of Photoshop CS.
Epson make the best scanners in this or any other universe. Currently, the
Perfection 4870 and 4990 (which I have) are the only two flatbeds to scan
negatives and 35mm film. You obviously don't scan for professional
reproduction! I do, and I'd only purchase Epson (though Canon have just
released the 9900F)

Below are two reviews by Vincent Oliver, a professional graphics artist and
photographer: -

Epson Perfection 4990
http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Epson 4990/Page 1.htm

Canon 9900F
http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Epson 4990/Page 1.htm

Look which he prefers - he hates the software bundled with the Canon.

As for printers, depends how much you want to spend - the Epson Stylus Pro
4000 is superb (but then it would be for a shade under £1500) but you'd need
to take out a second mortgage for the extension needed to house it!

Canon i9950
http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Menus/reviews_frame.htm

Epson R800
http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Menus/reviews_frame.htm

HP 8450
http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/printers/HP 8450/page-1.htm

Unfortunately, Vince hasn't reviewed many cameras (the only review on his
site is for the Canon 1DMkII - bit out of the price range of most at £5000).


Personally, I'd go with either the HP or the Epson (even though I have an
i9950, i don't use it much) and the Perfection 4990. I have an EOS 350D and
I'm very happy with it (though I will agree that I could use more than one
lens and they're not cheap!)

Lots of good info.

I'm getting some notes for my dream list.

btw, I like your name. Is there a story behind it?

~ Carrie

 

[Mike Koewler]

This being a dream list, check out http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/ for
cameras. Yep, some of them run into the thousands of dollars and
multiple digit megapixels.

Mike

 

[Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)]

S

I was careful not to mention model numbers..

I dumped an entire Minolta system because they changed the mount when going
autofocus.. I had been looking at getting newer camera bodies, and could not
believe that none of my lens stock would fit and work properly.. Canon
dumped the excellent breech lock which demonstrated the same attitude as
Minolta, still have the 'flock' problem, but their lens systems are very
good.. Olympus was all but about to disappear without trace, and Nikon have
not changed the mount other than to add full aperture metering many years
ago.. the bayonet remained the same because the device was external.. Nikon
rule..

Your camera is known as a RebelXT in North America..

http://www.digitalreview.ca/cams/NikonD70vsRebelXT_pg3.shtml

I presently use an F70 having let the FM2 and F90S go, but will change to a
D70 if I go digital.. I really just don't use a camera enough any more to
warrant anything else, but if somebody would like to pass on a hardly used
D2S as a birthday pressie, I would not turn it down..

The scanner tests were interesting.. in the Canon scanner test, it
outperformed the Epson in many areas and yet was marked down.. views on
Scangear software were a little contradictory, and one is left wondering
that if the Canon was outperforming the Epson, then the software really
can't be that bad..

In the same way that the guy likes Epson scanners. I like HP printers, and
sure enough, the HP wins.. I am not sure that I would use an inkjet printer
for professional output though.. I would have thought that a colour laser
would be a better option..


--
Mike Hall
MVP - Windows Shell/user

 

[Mike Koewler]

Sarah,

I think it depends on the printer. There are great inkjet printers that
can be used for press-ready color proofs, but there are also color
lasers that can do the same. I doubt either one will can be bought with
less that a $1,000 bill.

Mike

 

[Carrie]

Ah, Caroline, I was wondering how long it would be before you asked... ;o)
Hopefully I can sucker you into the world of my favourite author Mr Terrance
D.J. Pratchett OBE. Miss Perspicacia Tick is a witch. She may have an entry
in www.lspace.org, but I can't find it. She has appeared in two of his
infamous Discworld novels so far (The Wee Free Men and Hat Full of Sky);
whilst these books were aimed at children (they were particularly enjoyed by
my best friend's 7½ year old daughter) they appeal to adults as well (Lauren
wasn't allowed to read them before her mother had!)

She is, as her name would suggest, possessed of Second Sight (and Third
Thoughts) and she is the mentor of Tiffany Aching - a nine year old with
delusions that she knows more than she really does (and it gets her into the
inevitable trouble).

For a review see
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060012366/ref=ase_shopping2-21/026-4404517-6580466.

Whilst Pterry is British, I strongly recommend that you read him - I think
Jo has (though she's never said whether she likes him or not). Some
Americans get the jokes, some don't... There are 31 books in the Discworld
series thus far (and two animated films - Wyrd Sisters - his take on that
play actors don't mention, and Soul Music, his look at the rise of rock
music from the '50s onwards, Discworld-style. It's called Music With Rocks
In, as played by The Band With Rocks in (as played by a troll, called
Cliff). The lead singer is Imp y Celyn (from Llamedos "it means 'bud of the
holly'").

Sorry, didn't mean to ramble... ;o)

Sounds wonderful.

Sort of lower key and earlier "Harry Potter" (LOL)

I love those kind of books, where fantasy seems real.

What I thought of (with your name) was the movie that was recently out,
and from a series- Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events. I didn't
realize it was a book series till I saw them on ebay (now at inflated prices
of course).

I am always on the lookout for book titles to put on my list. I usually
buy a book or two (used, from online) every month. I don't feel like buying
books is a waste of money or luxury. Before I lived in such a rural area,
and had a way to get around, I used to go to yardsales and booksales and
used bookstores. Now I have online, but need to know a title to find
something.

If I were more organized, I would write books of my own.

Ramble on, if people don't like it they can skip it (LOL)

~ Carrie

 

[Carrie]

Oh, Miss Tick...

Did you ever read a book "Momo" by Michael Ende?

http://www.generationterrorists.com/quotes/momo.html

(I don't know why that url says generationterrorists for a name. I found
it in google, about the book Momo)

Fascinating and different.

I used to get it from the library, never owned it.

Just thought of it again.

~ Carrie

 

[Ed Bennett]

The lead singer is Imp y Celyn
(from Llamedos "it means 'bud of the holly'").

*TRIM*

And that is so much more appreciable if you
a) are from Wales, or
b) have experience with those from Wales or with Wales itself

 

[Ed Bennett]

You simply don't get the
range of colours with a laser (and you wouldn't - toner only comes in
four)

So does ink in many (especially older) photo inkject printers

Sarah, PLEASE trim Thanks!

I'm saving up for a Heidelberg DI press )

 

[Mike Koewler]

Sarah,

A company I worked for in the late '80s - early '90s did "advertorials"
in magazines across the US. (Today, they are better known as Reader
Ads." The person in charge of production sent the articles - printed via
a DaisyWriter printer to someone to prepare for print. Five years later,
I got into a contest to supply one local magazine with the ads. By then,
the company I had worked for was supplying laser proofs, I offered to
supply film. I won.

I can remember that back in the early '80s, printers used cold type or a
Verityper to create "pages" that could be printed. I actually produced a
4-page newspaper for my grandfather's 84th birthday. The printer typed
everything up on a machine that spit out the text in columns - on
special paper. That was pasted on a mark-up sheet. If an error was
found, a new piece was output that was cut, using an exacto knife, and
pasted over the wrong text.

It's amazing - the other day, a lady gave me a newspaper that was
printed in 1961. Part of it was a reproduction of the front page of a
paper that was published in the early 1800s. It's too large to attach in
this NG, but perhaps I can scan it and post it on my web site. Pretty
amazing stuff what they used to be able to do without software that
automatically justified lines of text.

Mike

 

[Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)]

S

I cut my teeth on Acorns. BBC A/B and Vic-20s.. my first IBM was a 5160
which I picked up in 1985.. 1986 saw a BBC Master 512 join the collection,
but alas no Amstrads.. I did look at getting a 1640, but Amstrad quality was
not so good.. the Amstrad 2386 and 3286 almost all found their way to a
major rectification department in Kirkcaldy Scotland, never to re-surface..
friends had Amiga's, Atari, Dragon 32, Commodore 64s et al, so I got to play
with quite an assortment.. John (an old friend) and I spent much time
programming, and I did all of the technical hardware support.. halcyon
days..

Something I heard, but not sure how much truth is in it.. William Gates in
his early years visited the Acorn plant and was amazed by Econet, and the
way in which the BBC computers could connect to a whole host of devices..
there was a module on sale in the UK not so long ago that enabled the BBC
Micro to run an alarm/heating system for domestic use.. the National
Vegetable Research Station in Wellesbourne used them for all kinds of
things, including heat control in all of the greenhouses..

--
Mike Hall
MVP - Windows Shell/user

 

[Jim]

Pretty

amazing stuff what they used to be able to do without software that
automatically justified lines of text.

Aw, c'mon, Mike - I can remember when I was a "genius" 'cuz I could
fully justify text on the fly, without those annoying "rivers" of
white space. You just had to know your page or column width. Alas, all
that changed when I got that little Epson PS80 in the mid-80's (you
don't remember that one, Sarah!) and fell victim to the allure of
Portable Wordstar...


Blessed be, for sure...

 

[Ed Bennett]

Not at all - I'm sure those with non-Celtic experience would also
appreciate the joke...

Bet they couldn't pronounce it though )

 

[Ed Bennett]

It's not meant to be 'pronounced'. Spell it backwards... ;o)

It's still more appreciable if you have Celtic experience )