Launch Pics!! (and other)
09-03-2002, 08:33 AM
#21
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 445
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
alexf20c, Why do you need to take 1600x1200 photos if you are an amateur? with those sized photos wouldn't you be better off with around 4.5 megapixels? but then again i don't know if you can get it under $500. I think Sony's are pretty decent. Sure you can find better with the same money, but they are user-friendly, etc so it's not too bad.
09-03-2002, 08:41 AM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Come see me after class.
Posts: 20,840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
realthing,
well, i dont need such hi-res pics, but i would think that if the camera is capable of that resolution, it should be able to create some clear pics at said res. i mean, it's there for a reason... i think.
but the sony is very user-friendly, one of the main reasons i got it is because i have a vaio desktop... and i didn't really know what else to get... us amateurs
well, i dont need such hi-res pics, but i would think that if the camera is capable of that resolution, it should be able to create some clear pics at said res. i mean, it's there for a reason... i think.
but the sony is very user-friendly, one of the main reasons i got it is because i have a vaio desktop... and i didn't really know what else to get... us amateurs
09-03-2002, 03:18 PM
#26
Hey, I use a Kodak KC 3200, the cheapest "name brand" camera you can buy. I got it for the sole purpose of taking pictures for this forum. It's adequate for it's intended use. I'm not bucking for a prize in a photo contest, only to add a pic or two to a post.
Ludatic, those pics didn't suck at all. They got the point across just fine. And NO, you don't get a prize.
Ludatic, those pics didn't suck at all. They got the point across just fine. And NO, you don't get a prize.
09-03-2002, 08:34 PM
#27
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey All!
xviper -- The stock clutch is NOTRIOUSLY weak, and will NOT hold up to that kind of launch -- at least not in my experience with it! But with the Spoon clutch + flywheel, it grips nicely, there is no clutch burn and the car just takes off! 
docofmind -- yup! The car (and/or its parts) are for sale as we speak!
realthing -- I'm running on 94oct gas. We can get that from the pump here in Vancouver. Ideally, I'd like to use higher, but with 94, I don't get any knock/ping even with the hi-comp engine.
xviper -- The stock clutch is NOTRIOUSLY weak, and will NOT hold up to that kind of launch -- at least not in my experience with it! But with the Spoon clutch + flywheel, it grips nicely, there is no clutch burn and the car just takes off!
docofmind -- yup! The car (and/or its parts) are for sale as we speak!
realthing -- I'm running on 94oct gas. We can get that from the pump here in Vancouver. Ideally, I'd like to use higher, but with 94, I don't get any knock/ping even with the hi-comp engine.
09-03-2002, 09:15 PM
#28
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Orlando
Posts: 1,157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE]Originally posted by alexf20c
[B]OT, but do NOT get a Sony P-71! It's a decent 3.2-megapixel camera (for the price - ~$400), but at full res (1600x1200) the pics are so gosh darn blurry! It's not because I can't hold it still; even when it's on the tripod and set on timer, it's blurry as hell!
I even returned my first P-71 thinking it was a lemon 
, but it's the same with my 2nd one! Arrghh! 
[B]OT, but do NOT get a Sony P-71! It's a decent 3.2-megapixel camera (for the price - ~$400), but at full res (1600x1200) the pics are so gosh darn blurry! It's not because I can't hold it still; even when it's on the tripod and set on timer, it's blurry as hell!
I even returned my first P-71 thinking it was a lemon , but it's the same with my 2nd one! Arrghh!
