Which digital camera... with link.

[silverwex]

Which digital camera should I go for on this site?

Id like it to have at least 4MP and be rechargable.

Thanks for the help.

 

[Giovanni Casanova]

I don't see a link... haha.

Anyway, I got an Olympus D540 a while back. It's only 3.2 MP with 3x optical zoom and 3.3x digital zoom (10x overall). But I'm telling you, that camera packs a punch that even some higher end cameras don't.

Especially if you take extreme close-up pictures of things... you cannot beat the macro system on this camera. It's unbelievable. I took a picture of a bee inside a sunflower this past summer and it's so close you can see even the tiniest details of the veins in the bee's wings.

Inexpensive, too.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B0001DKQWS/ref=pd_rate_rs/002-4399468-4247251?v=glance

 

[check_mate_kid_uk]

Originally posted by Giovanni Casanova
It's only 3.2 MP with 3x optical zoom and 3.3x digital zoom (10x overall).

or for those of us that pay attention to detail its 9.9x zoom over all.

 

[Giovanni Casanova]

Originally posted by check_mate_kid_uk
or for those of us that pay attention to detail its 9.9x zoom over all.

It actually comes out to 10x... the 3.3 is actually 3.3333333333333333333333333333333.

 

[Ice Cold]

What do you intend to use it for?
How much $$$ are you willing to spend?

 

[silverwex]

Crap sorry guys forgot the link...

here we go: http://www.spectraphoto.ie/site/www/asp/default.asp?magpage=2&prodtype=21&PT_MasterCategory=y

or: http://www.fujifilm.ie/digital/f_index.htm

this looks good: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0402/04020203kodakdx7630.asp

Id spend about 350-400 euro on one.

Preferbly id like a fujifilm camera. Altho the olympus look great.

Is there much of a difference between a 3.2MP and 6MP camera?

What else you gotta look for in a good camera?

Thanks

 

[check_mate_kid_uk]

Originally posted by Giovanni Casanova
It actually comes out to 10x... the 3.3 is actually 3.3333333333333333333333333333333.

geo you just cant win, bcause thats like 9.9999999999999999999999999999999x zoom and although it is almost 10 and most people would call it 10, at the end of the day 9.9999999999999999999999999999999 < 10 and how ever many 9's you have after the decimal places its still smaller then 10

looks like you have been checkmated by the check mate kid

 

[Giovanni Casanova]

Originally posted by check_mate_kid_uk
geo you just cant win, bcause thats like 9.9999999999999999999999999999999x zoom and although it is almost 10 and most people would call it 10, at the end of the day 9.9999999999999999999999999999999 < 10 and how ever many 9's you have after the decimal places its still smaller then 10

looks like you have been checkmated by the check mate kid

Checkmate, you are anal retentive.

 

[Panda 2000]

9.9999999~ (recurring) equals EXACTLY 10. Mathematical fact.
9.9999~ = 10

I guess I get the checkmate.

 

[check_mate_kid_uk]

Originally posted by Panda 2000
9.9999999~ (recurring) equals EXACTLY 10. Mathematical fact.
9.9999~ = 10

I guess I get the checkmate.

not it does not, it is practicly 10 but even 9.9 recuring is still an infeinitly small amount smaller then 10

 

[Panda 2000]

Nope. It is equal to the smallest number. Fact. Here's proof http://www.mathsisfun.com/9recurring.html .
But enough about maths, I don't want to hijack the man's topic.

 

[Omega]

Originally posted by Panda 2000
9.9999999~ (recurring) equals EXACTLY 10. Mathematical fact.
9.9999~ = 10

I guess I get the checkmate.

If you round it to 10, but otherwise its infinite.

 

[check_mate_kid_uk]

Originally posted by Panda 2000
Nope. It is equal to the smallest number. Fact. Here's proof http://www.mathsisfun.com/9recurring.html .
But enough about maths, I don't want to hijack the man's topic.

LOL i proved the website wrong, try it yourself the website is wrong. want to no why, well for 9.9 recuring for are calulation we will use 9.999, he says call it X if you multiply it by X and subtract X you get 9X=9 but he made a mistake, for him to be correct 0.999 times 10 would have to be 9.999 because he forgot that you are moving the deimal place to the right loosing 1 decimal place.

so 0.999 times 10 subtract 0.999 is actuly 8.991 NOT 9 so x =0.999

did you seriously think you could change the value of X like that, i new somthing was wrong because it was against all the algebra i had learnt you can not change the value of x in this kind of way otherwise how would simultanious and quadratic equations work which rely on the fact X is constant.

 

[Panda 2000]

Nope, the proof from the site is a really well accepted mathematic proof and is correct.
Also try this. 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1 right? 1/3 can also be represented and is 0.333~. So 0.333~ * 3 = 0.999~ and from the first calculation we get that 0.999~ = 1.

 

[check_mate_kid_uk]

Originally posted by Panda 2000
Nope, the proof from the site is a really well accepted mathematic proof and is correct.
Also try this. 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1 right? 1/3 can also be represented and is 0.333~. So 0.333~ * 3 = 0.999~ and from the first calculation we get that 0.999~ = 1.

but thas only because 1/3 is not exactly 0.333 recuring.

you have not proved it yet, but i have proved it does nto work, go on try it on your calculator using 0.999.

if you say, oh but they say 0.999 recurring well its exactly the same because even if it has an infintie number of 9's on the end once you multiply it by 10 the number of 9's after the decimal place will be infinite minu 1.

just try it on your calculator you will see it does not work out.

and how do you explain that although X can have more then 1 value in an exuation ed a quadratic equation, you can not change the value of X by multiplying subtracting and division. Explain that

 

[Ice Cold]

Originally posted by check_mate_kid_uk
but thas only because 1/3 is not exactly 0.333 recuring.

Uh? What is 1/3 then?

 

[check_mate_kid_uk]

1/3 goes in to 1, 3 times, so it is 1 third of one.


0.333 is one third of 0.999 not 1/3 of 1

1/3 of 1 can not be displayed EXAXCTLY as a decimal number.

 

[Crusader]

you guys have too much time

 

[jakeyboy]

haha yeah, there goes this guy's topic. -shakes head-

 

[Ice Cold]

Originally posted by check_mate_kid_uk
1/3 goes in to 1, 3 times, so it is 1 third of one.


0.333 is one third of 0.999 not 1/3 of 1

1/3 of 1 can not be displayed EXAXCTLY as a decimal number.

Why is this relevant?

Doesn't fukkin matter what "zoom" it has.


You have look at mm anyways when determining focal legth.