Re: [Leica] Kodak DC260

["JeffS" <segawa@netone.com>]

I'll admit that the thing's handling is sluggish, as most controls are
handled by means of two crummy multimode pushbuttons, and that probably,
that protective front glass could stand to be coated, as it flares really
easily, but what's significantly better in it's already high price range? It
offers one of the largest CCDs around, has both TTL and optical finders,
great connectivity, good Windows software (weak Mac software though, and it
only works via USB--forget the Belkin USB card and buy the Keyspan) and the
whole is fairly small and very portable. Sony Mavica? Well, I don't think
those are rated for use in temperatures below about 7 C, maybe out of fear
of moisture condensing in the floppy drive.

15 second delay? Not in V1.04 of the software, and V1.06 is supposed to be
faster still. I won't claim that it's a "decisive moment" camera, but the
first couple of shots go pretty quickly, then it seems to run out of cache,
and THEN you have to wait awhile. It's appetite for batteries is fearsome,
too.

On an absolute scale, I'd agree that it's a pretty sorry camera, but if a
person "needs" digital today, I dunno what else to recommend, unless the
budget allows for ongoing film processing costs and a good scanner.

As a really-off-topic ramble, my concern of digital is that it'll take over,
not because it's better, but because eventually, maybe it'll be cheap and
"good enough" for 98% of the population, that maybe environmental concerns
will eventually make film production impossible or costly. The fun future,
of course, would be one in which digital is so good that no one in their
right mind wouild *want* to use film anymore!

- -----Original Message-----
From: David Morton <dmorton@journalist.co.uk>
>I reviewed the Kodak DC260 for a UK publication and *HATED* the thing. The
>handling was truly dreadful. Fifteen seconds from pushing the on button to
>being able to take a picture (there's a software patch which improves
>this, but my colleague found it made only a tiny difference). Neither of
>the viewfinders is adequate. A horrible machine.