Slashdot Mirror

If for some reason you don't or can't remove the HDD, there are a variety of floppy adapters - as in, things that actually *plug in* to the floppy disk slot itself. Something like this: http://www.amazon.com/Olympus-... Is relatively inexpensive. It only lists compatibility there back to Windows 95, but the website ( http://www.olympusamerica.com/... ) has software for Windows 3.1. The main difference seems to be that you can only use memory cards up to 32 megabytes. Don't just buy that link I posted without researching, though; you may have to buy an older model for proper 3.1 compatibility. I can't find any evidence of this but I'm also CERTAIN that there are crazy specialty devices that are basically floppy disks with cables coming out of the back of them that you can plug into a floppy drive and use them as an adapter to some other kind of interface. I really wish someone else could help back me up on that, because I really think it exists but I can't find anything, anywhere!

Their "old" models (1-2 years old) E-PL1 or E-PL2 are dirt cheap - the E-PL1 can be found for as little as 400 with an additional zoom lens and its image quality is superb. Their newer E-P3, flagship model, might be too much, but you can get the E-PL3 which is basically the same camera in a different form factor with less contol buttons, OR the E-PM1 which is even more simplified.

Olympus uses the same sensor on all their EVIL cameras so they're all pretty much paired regarding image quality. Newer models will give you a much faster autofocus, increased shutter speed, newer "art filters" and HD video. All Oly cams are renewed for their great JPEGs right out of the camera, though they all shoot raw if required.

I've recently bought a E-PM1 with the kit 14-42 lens and a 14-150 zoom lens for about $600. The camera is small (almost pocketable), lightweight and takes stunning pictures, rivaling entry and mid-level DSLRs. It has few buttons and a scroll wheel, but it is very controlable. It's a ridiculosly good bargain - i couldn't be happier.

Their "old" models (1-2 years old) E-PL1 or E-PL2 are dirt cheap - the E-PL1 can be found for as little as 400 with an additional zoom lens and its image quality is superb. Their newer E-P3, flagship model, might be too much, but you can get the E-PL3 which is basically the same camera in a different form factor with less contol buttons, OR the E-PM1 which is even more simplified.

Olympus uses the same sensor on all their EVIL cameras so they're all pretty much paired regarding image quality. Newer models will give you a much faster autofocus, increased shutter speed, newer "art filters" and HD video. All Oly cams are renewed for their great JPEGs right out of the camera, though they all shoot raw if required.

I've recently bought a E-PM1 with the kit 14-42 lens and a 14-150 zoom lens for about $600. The camera is small (almost pocketable), lightweight and takes stunning pictures, rivaling entry and mid-level DSLRs. It has few buttons and a scroll wheel, but it is very controlable. It's a ridiculosly good bargain - i couldn't be happier.

Their "old" models (1-2 years old) E-PL1 or E-PL2 are dirt cheap - the E-PL1 can be found for as little as 400 with an additional zoom lens and its image quality is superb. Their newer E-P3, flagship model, might be too much, but you can get the E-PL3 which is basically the same camera in a different form factor with less contol buttons, OR the E-PM1 which is even more simplified.

Olympus uses the same sensor on all their EVIL cameras so they're all pretty much paired regarding image quality. Newer models will give you a much faster autofocus, increased shutter speed, newer "art filters" and HD video. All Oly cams are renewed for their great JPEGs right out of the camera, though they all shoot raw if required.

I've recently bought a E-PM1 with the kit 14-42 lens and a 14-150 zoom lens for about $600. The camera is small (almost pocketable), lightweight and takes stunning pictures, rivaling entry and mid-level DSLRs. It has few buttons and a scroll wheel, but it is very controlable. It's a ridiculosly good bargain - i couldn't be happier.

Their "old" models (1-2 years old) E-PL1 or E-PL2 are dirt cheap - the E-PL1 can be found for as little as 400 with an additional zoom lens and its image quality is superb. Their newer E-P3, flagship model, might be too much, but you can get the E-PL3 which is basically the same camera in a different form factor with less contol buttons, OR the E-PM1 which is even more simplified.

Olympus uses the same sensor on all their EVIL cameras so they're all pretty much paired regarding image quality. Newer models will give you a much faster autofocus, increased shutter speed, newer "art filters" and HD video. All Oly cams are renewed for their great JPEGs right out of the camera, though they all shoot raw if required.

I've recently bought a E-PM1 with the kit 14-42 lens and a 14-150 zoom lens for about $600. The camera is small (almost pocketable), lightweight and takes stunning pictures, rivaling entry and mid-level DSLRs. It has few buttons and a scroll wheel, but it is very controlable. It's a ridiculosly good bargain - i couldn't be happier.

Their "old" models (1-2 years old) E-PL1 or E-PL2 are dirt cheap - the E-PL1 can be found for as little as 400 with an additional zoom lens and its image quality is superb. Their newer E-P3, flagship model, might be too much, but you can get the E-PL3 which is basically the same camera in a different form factor with less contol buttons, OR the E-PM1 which is even more simplified.

Olympus uses the same sensor on all their EVIL cameras so they're all pretty much paired regarding image quality. Newer models will give you a much faster autofocus, increased shutter speed, newer "art filters" and HD video. All Oly cams are renewed for their great JPEGs right out of the camera, though they all shoot raw if required.

I've recently bought a E-PM1 with the kit 14-42 lens and a 14-150 zoom lens for about $600. The camera is small (almost pocketable), lightweight and takes stunning pictures, rivaling entry and mid-level DSLRs. It has few buttons and a scroll wheel, but it is very controlable. It's a ridiculosly good bargain - i couldn't be happier.

http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/cpg_digital_pen.asp

I love the retro look of these.

The Olympus SW cameras are really great to take everywhere you go. You should check them out.

I was thinking about this recently, and I think what we need is a digital camera which can somehow take multiple short exposure shots one after the other and then combine them into a single photo. The algorithm would have to be smart enough to detect movement of both the camera and the scenery in-between frames, so we're talking advanced software, but it does seem possible.

They have small digital recorders. I have one, which I used to use to record lectures and (during a period when I couldn't type due to RSI) do dictation.

I have one made by Olympus, and it's OK. Not wonderful, but OK. It uses some strange proprietary way of talking to the recorder (it's not Mass Storage class), so you have to use their software to get the files off of it, but luckily they have software for Mac and it doesn't suck too hard. It records things into an odd format as well, called DSS (Digital Speech "Standard," I suspect it's patented eight ways from Sunday). However their software will happily convert to AIFF if you tell it to. The upside is that you can get something like 5 hours of low quality (ok for dictation) recording on a machine that only has about 16MB of storage. Mine also has a 1/8" minijack for attaching an external microphone, so you can use it to get fairly high-quality recordings of lectures if you use a directional microphone and set it to high quality.

Mine's several years old (it's the DS-330) so I don't know how much they've improved or degraded the newer ones; it seems like they now use xD cards, which is an improvment over fixed memory but it's still unfortunate they they didn't go with CF or MMC/SD cards. And they still use that bizarro DSS format.

I'm not sure what the legality of wiring yourself up with a recorder continuously would be (I thought you only had to have one party's permission?), but the technology to do it is certainly available. If you can get 5 hours of low quality on a 16MB recorder, than you can defintely record for longer than your batteries will hold out by using a big xD card on the modern ones. Get a mini lapel mic and hide it under your tie ('speak directly into the flower...'), put the recorder in the small of your back, and you're ready to be the next Linda Tripp.

Olympus' Digital Recorders
The now obsolete DS-330 that I've used

They have small digital recorders. I have one, which I used to use to record lectures and (during a period when I couldn't type due to RSI) do dictation.

I have one made by Olympus, and it's OK. Not wonderful, but OK. It uses some strange proprietary way of talking to the recorder (it's not Mass Storage class), so you have to use their software to get the files off of it, but luckily they have software for Mac and it doesn't suck too hard. It records things into an odd format as well, called DSS (Digital Speech "Standard," I suspect it's patented eight ways from Sunday). However their software will happily convert to AIFF if you tell it to. The upside is that you can get something like 5 hours of low quality (ok for dictation) recording on a machine that only has about 16MB of storage. Mine also has a 1/8" minijack for attaching an external microphone, so you can use it to get fairly high-quality recordings of lectures if you use a directional microphone and set it to high quality.

Mine's several years old (it's the DS-330) so I don't know how much they've improved or degraded the newer ones; it seems like they now use xD cards, which is an improvment over fixed memory but it's still unfortunate they they didn't go with CF or MMC/SD cards. And they still use that bizarro DSS format.

I'm not sure what the legality of wiring yourself up with a recorder continuously would be (I thought you only had to have one party's permission?), but the technology to do it is certainly available. If you can get 5 hours of low quality on a 16MB recorder, than you can defintely record for longer than your batteries will hold out by using a big xD card on the modern ones. Get a mini lapel mic and hide it under your tie ('speak directly into the flower...'), put the recorder in the small of your back, and you're ready to be the next Linda Tripp.

Olympus' Digital Recorders
The now obsolete DS-330 that I've used

That's a totally valid point/question. I used to use a cassette recorder, pre-Olympus, and in fact I still own several of them, ranging from a very nice Dictaphone (uses full size cassettes, all metal construction, probably cost a fortune when it was new -- glad I bought it used) to some cheapie RadioShack micros. I actually have a thing for analog recorders and electronics, particularly analog tape, so it would satisfy a certain part of me to use one. (Actually I'd love to bring my Sony 1/4" open-reel deck in with some Quantegy 456...)

I have a few reasons for preferring the Olympus: first is storage and archiving. It's a lot easier for me to have everything stored inside my computer than in shoe-boxes of loose cassettes. It only takes one move -- and I seem to be making those about once every 18 months -- to lose or misplace a tape, and it's gone forever. I'm pretty unlikely to misplace my computer, and I'm reasonably careful about backing up the data that's on it (it's mirrored to a remote machine). My father laments the fact that he had recordings of Carl Sagan lectures that got lost somewhere along his way; I want to make sure the same thing doesn't happen to anything of mine.

The second is physical robustness. I can beat the living bejesus out of the Olympus because it doesn't have any moving parts. No little tape doors to break off, and I don't have to worry about getting it full of dirt and crud if I leave it in the bottom of my backpack, briefcase, or laptop bag for a while. It's also tiny, not too much bigger in terms of volume than one of those big (15 stick?) packs of gum, although it's longer and skinnier. I can put it in my front shirt pocket without noticing it, most of the time. (Mine is an Olympus DS-330 -- no longer in production, and it seems as though prices on used ones have spiked a bit.)

The major reasons why I like it, though, are because I can listen to the recordings on my iPod and through my big stereo on demand. I could do that with an analog recorder, I suppose, but it would require an extra set of patch cables, and digging out and connecting up the recorder when I want to listen. Not to mention queuing up the tape; with a digital recording it's easy to just open it up, jump 5 minutes in, listen for a while, move 20 minutes more, etc.

So the inconvenience of having to use the Olympus program to download and convert the recorded files to AIFF, and then drag them onto iTunes to make them into MP3s, is worthwhile, IMO. I have a balance between archival storage (assuming I maintain good integrity of my data going forwards) and accessibility that I'm not sure I'd be able to replicate with tape. (I suppose really the most obsessive thing to do would be to record on tape, then digitize the tapes and also storing the originals, as I do with videos...but that might be more effort than I'm looking to put into the project, given the volume of recordings I've made at times.)

For someone in a different situation, or with different requirements, I wouldn't hesitate to recommend tapes. (Particularly a standard cassette recorder, if you can manage it, since I think they'll be easier to find in 10 years than the micros will.) The Olympus has a lot of shortcomings, but for my purposes I think it works out better than tape would. Would I be happier if the Olympus recorded to MP3 and used SD cards and appeared to be a Mass Storage Class device, while still being the size of a pack of gum? Definitely; but it still does the trick even with its obnoxious shortcomings.

Then, when I search for "digital voice recorder", the first 2,000,000 results will be lame ass "coming soon" pages, or pages that suck so much nobody has ever felt like linking to them. Usefull sites, like this one would be near the bottom so as to ensure that "the rich are robbed".

Hell, while we're at it, why not make roads that way too! Let's rob the "population rich" metropolitan areas and focus our road building on the isolated rocky passes passes which have been deprived of people and infrastructure for far too long.

Maybe we could do elections that way too... oh wait. That actually could be an improvement.

It uses some proprietary recording format, but the software will convert it to AIFF as you download it to the computer. Although they now have ones with a lot more recording time, I see no reason to replace it. I suppose if I didn't already own one, I'd probably just get the $30 recording add-on for my iPod instead of a standalone device, although the Olympus is significantly smaller and lighter.

If Duke had distributed these to everyone, I suppose we'd be having the same issues. My point is just that the iPod isn't the first device since the analog mini-cassette recorder to give students the capability to record and share a lecture. And as I said in a post further up, in an environment where laptops were ubiquitous, there are programs that do audio recording and note-taking at the same time, and produce a single document that you can share with others.

Oh yeah, a 2 inch screen and a "click wheel" is much better than this. OK...

http://www.olympusamerica.com/mrobe/

It depends on: your camera and that media that you use. I use the Olympus E-10 with a SanDisk Compact Flash 128 Card and it works wonderfully. The transfer speeds are what you need to look out for. If you are taking 2280x1024 TIFF quality pictures, don't expect to be snapping them off at any high rate of speed. So it's like regular photography. Don't be a shutterbug and just click away, you need to set your sets up, and maybe snap 1 or 3 pictures, but don't try making a still frame movie either. Good Luck.

...a more robust setup. I would recommend a monochrome laser printer for text operations, paired with a dye sublimation printer for color.

I use two Kodak 8650 printers (pick one up for a couple grand on ebay) for a commercial application that is probably beyond the scope of the submitter, but the quality (indistinguishable from a lab print), reliability (over 800 9x14" prints/week at times), and durability (light-fast for more than 20 years)

Olympus, Kodak, Sony, and others have items at more reasonable price points.

No doubt; for color, go dye-sub. Then again, I own an Epson 1280 photo that does really nice work as well. I have installed an Epson 2200 for a couple of clients and they are even better.

The Olympus 300 claims to be weather resistant, if the scuba rig is too much for you.

I haven't used one, but my old 170 has been great.

No major manufacturer except for Sony endorses memory stick.

http://www.konica.co.jp/global/press/020924_8e.htm l
http://www.konica.com/products/digital/cameras/kd4 00z_features.htm
http://www.konica.com/products/digital/cameras/kd3 10z_features.htm
http://www.samsungelectronics.com/news/digital_med ia/com_news_1042258148609_001300.html
http://www.samsungelectronics.com/news/digital_med ia/com_news_1042258779765_001300.html
http://www.samsungelectronics.com/camcorder/digita l_camcorder/b_scd590.html
http://www.samsungelectronics.com/camcorder/digita l_camcorder/g_scd87.html
http://www.brother.com/usa/fax/info/mfc5200c/mfc52 00c_ove.html
http://h30015.www3.hp.com/products/detail.php?prod num=Q3000A
http://h30015.www3.hp.com/products/detail.php?prod num=C8443A
http://h30015.www3.hp.com/products/detail.php?prod num=Q1605A
http://www.lexmark.com/US/products/overview/0,1224 ,MzM1NHwx,00.html
http://www.i-love-epson.co.jp/products/printer/ink jet/pm860pt/pm860pt1.htm
http://www.i-love-epson.co.jp/products/printer/ink jet/pm850pt/pm850pt1.htm
http://www.kenwood.com/j/products/home_audio/digit al_avino/sj_7ms/index.html
http://www.pioneer.co.jp/catalog/sys/x-sv7dv.php
http://www.pioneer.co.jp/av-sys/hd1/index.html
http://www.sun-denshi.co.jp/scc/bb/index.htm
http://www.sharp.co.jp/sc/eihon/wahp1/text/index.h tml
http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/Pioneer/CDA/CarP roducts/CarProductDetails/0,1429,21417,00.html
http://www.mitsubishielectric.co.jp/mobile/mova/d2 51is/index.html
http://www.sharp.co.jp/products/sh712m/
http://global.acer.com/products/pda/s60.htm
http://global.acer.com/products/pda/s50.htm
http://www.global.acer.com/products/pda/n20w.htm
http://www.global.acer.com/products/pda/s15.htm
http://www.clevo.com.tw/products/images/8880.pdf
http://pr.fujitsu.com/jp/news/2002/10/8-2.html
http://www.nec.co.jp/press/ja/0210/1004-30.html
http://121ware.com/product/pc/lavie/200205/pro/spe c01.pdf
http://www.alpine.co.jp/alpine/navi02/n02.html
http://www.datatec.co.jp/sr/index.html
http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/cpg_prod uct_lobbypage.asp?product=847

Shall I go on?

And yes, the memory stick format is much more expensive

I just paid $30 for 128 MB MS. Show me a better price for CF or SD/MMC.

not to mention has various confusing variations (e.g. magic gate)

You mean 2? Magic gate, non-Magic gate? Boy, that is confusing.

and is still proprietary

"Proprietary", eh? Guess what? All of the major formats are proprietary. Want to sell a CF device? You can if you ante up to the CF org. Sony has released quite a few specifications (http://www.memorystick.org/topics/eng/aboutms/for mat.html).

You might find prices on Amazon.com come close to CF or SD/MMC but I can walk into any camera shop and be offered compact flash cards by 3 or 4 manufactures where I'd be lucky if could find 2 for memory stick.

I count 6 manufacturers of Memory Stick: Lexar, SanDisk, Sony, I-O Data, Apacer Tech.

How about a 62" display, seen as from 6 1/2' distance (Olympus EyeTrek)

The FMD-700 works with PC, Mac, DVD, Tv, and VCR, also has surround sound. Because it is face mounted (FMD = Face Mounted Display), it moves with the head. No VR, as I don't see that it feeds back movement to the device, but I am willing to wait for that...

Some point-and-shoot film cameras in some situations can take photos that are technically excellent (resolution, contrast, color accuracy), but point-and-shoot digital cameras are limited to small photosites in their CCDs (noise or poor sensitivity) and 2-5 megapixels (poor resolution).

The trick is to get a good lens. It's hard to build a small, cheap, light and fast zoom lens, but a fixed focal length lens like the f/2.8 on the US$100 Olympus Stylus Epic plus good light and good film (Kodak Gold 100 is OK) and a subject wearing a striped shirt (or a UPC tatoo near the eyes- even better) so the autofocus really works has given me really nice photographs.

If you go to ASA 400, you're going to get grain, but you'll do better than the noise of a cheap CCD with that much gain.

Digital point-and-shoots are likely to get better, but to take advantage of the developments, you have to buy a new camera. To take advantage of chemical photo developments (we've come a long way in ~100 years & over 50 years of 35mm), just get a new roll of film.

This is the kind of gear I consider essential. Except I don't go for the pda thing - I would rather use a dead tree pad and use the laptop when I want (full) computer functionality.

I work during the day and go to school at night, so I have reverted to using a backpack for my textbooks. In it, I also carry:

checkbook, pens, mechanical pencils, eraser, stamps, toothpaste, toothbrush, miniature philips screwdriver, business card holder, notepad, hand towel, batteries, Olympus digital voice recorder, cell phone, pager and the laptop is in my trunk if I need it :)

>It would be pretty cool if they could build a decent screen into a pair of glasses though.

Done and done and done.

One day I'll have enough throw away money to buy a pair...

Olympus issued a press release about their new xD-Picture Card. Will be offered with capacities of up to 256MB this year, and 2 GB the next. It's only the size of a postage stamp and has adaptors for PC Cards and Compact Flash.

Which is great, assuming you don't swallow the expensive little bugger. Or need to write on it.

While I agree that relatively high-capacity solid-state flash media is the obvious choice to replace the venerable floppy (and the unreliable Zip), I have to take issue with A) The price and B) The physical size.

Firstly, floppies were great because you could just give them to people. Didn't need a computer with you or anything. Email has replaced floppies most of the really obvious matters, but the need for such media does come up every now and then, and burning CDs is a pain (not to mention non-reusable, another floppy advantage). But if they aren't dirt cheap, you're not going to be giving them away.

Secondly, these little cards are getting too damn small. Anything smaller than a stick of gum has no room to write on or read off, can't be held well with just your fingers, and is just begging to be lost. (From a design point of view, I think Sony's memory stick is superior to the alternatives). Olympus has been using the wafer-thin smartmedia cards for a while, and they have a marked tendency to break. Wonder how this new one will be .

Olympus issued a press release about their new xD-Picture Card. Will be offered with capacities of up to 256MB this year, and 2 GB the next. It's only the size of a postage stamp and has adaptors for PC Cards and Compact Flash.

Which is great, assuming you don't swallow the expensive little bugger. Or need to write on it.

While I agree that relatively high-capacity solid-state flash media is the obvious choice to replace the venerable floppy (and the unreliable Zip), I have to take issue with A) The price and B) The physical size.

Firstly, floppies were great because you could just give them to people. Didn't need a computer with you or anything. Email has replaced floppies most of the really obvious matters, but the need for such media does come up every now and then, and burning CDs is a pain (not to mention non-reusable, another floppy advantage). But if they aren't dirt cheap, you're not going to be giving them away.

Secondly, these little cards are getting too damn small. Anything smaller than a stick of gum has no room to write on or read off, can't be held well with just your fingers, and is just begging to be lost. (From a design point of view, I think Sony's memory stick is superior to the alternatives). Olympus has been using the wafer-thin smartmedia cards for a while, and they have a marked tendency to break. Wonder how this new one will be .

Other than the hands free viewing of pr0n, 800x600 on a 13 inch display at 24 inches probably WOULD make you go blind. Would it even be possible to read characters on the screen? Especially when it seems it would be more like a HUD than a monitor (i.e., look through, not look at).

I have been holding out for the olympus Eye-Trek

One of these days...

It's the Olympus C-211, review here, Olympus product page here.

It takes Polaroid 500 film.

By the way, the digital->polaroid printers sort of screw up that "evidence" advantage of Polaroids don't they?

For your short term needs in voice recording, I would recommend dumping the tapes and going with something like the Olympus DS1000. I have a DS150, but wish I would have gotten the DS1000 (it was not quite out when I needed it). It accepts SmartMedia (which I have cause of the digital camera), so essentially the amount of voice you can store is unlimited. USB interface to put on your laptop. I archive the old recordings on CDs. The format is very well compressed so you can fit a lot on, etc.

Anyway, it works for me.

This is a library and a command-line frontend to manipulate digital
still cameras based on Fujitsu chipset and Sierra Imaging firmware. The
program is known to work with Agfa, Epson, Olympus, Sanyo and Nikon (at
least CoolPix 900, but not CoolPix 600!) cameras.

Sony sells NTSC printers and so does Olympus.

This is certainly not intended as a flame, but I don't know why people always insist on crying if something is posted here more than a day or so after the original story broke. There are a lot of us who don't regularly read the Mac sites but would still be interested in this. Personally, this article couldn't have come at a better time for me. I have a Mac that I use only for music recording/editing, but I just bought a digital camera that can take short Quicktime movies. Now with iMovie, I can edit those movies and add a few nifty enhancements, all for free! I'm very glad this was posted to slashdot, even if it was "old news."

...there is always a class of people (i.e. professionals) who will always need _real_ film.

While some may not consider photojournalists "real" professionals, that is where I see professionals going completely to digital.

For photo journalists, it makes good sense with digital cameras: short processing time is important, pictures are anyhow uses in "low quality" (i.e. rasterized grossly) and the main layout work is done electronically anyways. Hence in that field it is "speed over quality" any day.

I don't even dare to think about what the Nikon/Kodak-D1 costs (without any lenses), while The best camera in the world is well within reach of the serious amateurs and pros, as are lenses and other acessories.

Most digital cameras do a decent job as replacement for compact cameras / APS-cameras, but they do mostly aim for the auto-focus, auto-everything situations - and are ill equiped for most anything else (very few have manual focus / exposure in a way that is easy to use, very few offer spot metering etc). Yes, I am a dedicated Zuikoholic and swear to manual focus and such. However should I go out and buy a digital camera, the one which comes closest to what I expect from a camera would be Olympus C3030 zoom. I would not replace any 35mm film camera with thatone, but it is imho the "least bad" of the affordable digital cameras. It has no good manual focus facilities, but it does feature spot metering and manual as well as auto exposure.

...there is always a class of people (i.e. professionals) who will always need _real_ film.

While some may not consider photojournalists "real" professionals, that is where I see professionals going completely to digital.

For photo journalists, it makes good sense with digital cameras: short processing time is important, pictures are anyhow uses in "low quality" (i.e. rasterized grossly) and the main layout work is done electronically anyways. Hence in that field it is "speed over quality" any day.

I don't even dare to think about what the Nikon/Kodak-D1 costs (without any lenses), while The best camera in the world is well within reach of the serious amateurs and pros, as are lenses and other acessories.

Most digital cameras do a decent job as replacement for compact cameras / APS-cameras, but they do mostly aim for the auto-focus, auto-everything situations - and are ill equiped for most anything else (very few have manual focus / exposure in a way that is easy to use, very few offer spot metering etc). Yes, I am a dedicated Zuikoholic and swear to manual focus and such. However should I go out and buy a digital camera, the one which comes closest to what I expect from a camera would be Olympus C3030 zoom. I would not replace any 35mm film camera with thatone, but it is imho the "least bad" of the affordable digital cameras. It has no good manual focus facilities, but it does feature spot metering and manual as well as auto exposure.

Quality of the unit is above average, MUCH better that the Sony (floppy disk) camera that I've used at work.

It comes with a proprietary 8 meg Smart Media card, but generic cards work without the "Panorama" feature. I also bought a generic 32 meg Smart Card and a generic PCMCIA adapter. A bonus is that I can use the Smart Media card for my Rio MP3 player.

I can also stick the adapter into any computer with a PCMICA slot and have a quick and easy way to grab files. Windows 95,98, and NT all auto detect the adapter and Smart Media as a standard hard disk drive. I'm not sure if it works with Linux but I know that the cards use standard Windows style FAT, so Linux should be able to see it....

Except for one.
The Olympus C2500L captures not only in jpeg compressed format allowing for a large number of photos, but is also capable of capturing uncompressed images which are saved in TIF format. It will also capture a small amount of quicktime video.
The camera will capture images in resolutions up to 1712x1368 and is easily upgradeable to 96+MB of storage.
* SHQ-Tiff for uncompressed 1712 X 1368 pixel images--for true photo quality images

* SHQ-JPEG with low 1:2.3 compression 1712 X 1368 pixel images--for true photo quality images

* HQ-JPEG with low 1:8 compression 1712 X 1368 pixel images--ideal for high quality photo printing

* SQ-JPEG SVGA 1280 X 1024 pixel images--photo-realistic 8 X 10 inch prints from a photo-quality printer or high quality email photos

* SQ-JPEG VGA 640 X 512 pixel images--perfect for Internet use or to email friends and family.

The camera carries a weighty pricetag but for my purposes, there is no alternative. This camera sells for between $1300-$1500US. I often do photo editing/manipulations and uncompressed is the only way to go.

LW

It uses SmartMedia, which is a tiny plastic card with a smart chip on it. The camera only comes with an 8MB card, but I bought an additional 32MB card for less than $50. I also bought a USB SanDisk SmartMedia reader for $25.

All in all, you can't go wrong with this camera. It's small and light, and my Renewal rechargable batteries last for 100s of pictures. The price may be a bit high for some people, but I easily found some coupons for Accompany.com that gave me 20% off, lowering the price to under $500. A friend just recently bought the same camera from mobshop.com with a 20% off coupon. It also was under $500.

Olympus C2020 Zoom Page
C Net Review

yep. buy an Olympus -- they make much better digital cameras. They're the only SLR digital cameras I know that don't cost $15K+. I have a 620L and it kicks ass. 3x Zoom, 1280x1024 resolution, and a five frame memory buffer means you can take 3.3 shots/sec! sure beats waiting for those Mavicas to write to floppy! certainly my choice ok hardware for putting images on the web.

sure, it's great to get as much hardware support for Linux as possible but if it came down to lobbying for a particular camera -- why not "a sk olympus" for a little linux support?