Ross and Clare's purchase now has me lusting after a digital camera of my own. I know, I know -- they're not that expensive. For some reason I have a block when it comes to getting off my rear and buying any kind of electronic equipment. It took me eons to get a cell phone. I never know which brand is best, or how much I should be paying. I always just want to buy the cutest thing, and that doesn't really seem like good decision making when it comes to technology. If they made a pink digital camera, I probably would have had one two years ago. Part of my problem is that electronic gadgets never seem totally essential to me. I feel like there's always a touch of frivolity in making such purchases. But, I'm running into more and more situations where it would be handy to have a digital camera. The great blogging that a digital camera would enable is enough of a reason to get one.
I also wish I wouldn't have spent four thousand dollars this afternoon at J Crew. I didn't mean to. They tricked me into it with their demonically cute sweaters. If I had a digital camera, I could show you how cute they are.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
J-Dub recommends the Nikon Coolpix 3100. It is easy to use, small, and although it does not yet come in pink, you can always put 'hello kitty' stickers on it. How can you go wrong with stickers?
Johnny D really likes his Nikon D70. I'm still paying the credit card after 3 months of ownership, but the total bliss this camera has lent me is worth it. I took about 150 +/- at the SF bike race on sunday. A feat I never would have attempted with my film equipment. The photos will be up on my Flickr page when I get time to put it up. A digital camera is well worth the purchase.
BTW, I can understand the sweater purchases. $4k is a bit more than I would spend on a sweater. I am putting together a nice collection of argyle myself.
I just got a Nikon Coolpix 4200. I have previously had a 4100 and I think a 3100. Nikon has very good overall quality. I got the 4200 thinking that it was the same as the 4100, but with a different battery that allowed it to be a bit smaller, which is a plus. Unfortunately, I didn't look deeply enough into it because it turns out it lacks a decent chunk of the functionality that the 4100 had. The new one don't take no B&W pics, so I would have to convert stuff on my computer after the fact, which defeats the point of having a digital camera in the first place. It also only allows you to set the exposure to +1 or -1, while the 4100 let you go from like +8 to -8. So that sucks. It does take movies with sound, which I really like for some reason, despite the fact that I don't know how to blog them and they're too big to email to people unless they are extremely good. But it doesn't take black and white movies either. I definitely recommend the Nikons though. Good cameras and good prices. The Canons are great looking, but ridiculously expensive.
Hey Hip, why'd you get a new camera? you lose the other two? weird.
Hip - I also have the 4200 and it does take b&w pics. It also takes sephia and Cyanotype (a sort of blue/green and white pic).
ok I was wrong. I am stupid. I have a 4100.
Post a Comment