Anybody recommend a good camera that I can use with Win98?

Can't you just access the photos by treating the camera as a USB Memory stick? I do that with my Fuji Finepix S5200, and I've done it with several other digital cameras. On some cameras the photos are three to five folders deep, but they can be viewed, copied or erased. I power up the camera, inset the USB cable and wait for the computer to recognize the device. Then I drill down to what I want.

Thanks, I didn't think to just 'try' it!

Damned thing makes NOISE! After fussing several times, took a picture. connected via USB cable and saw nothing. Empty file structure. Then tried again and this time found a single image, downloaded image and it seems small at 156kB, but ok. Camera said memory full insert SD card, but have no card. Memory shows up empty, and will not show any new picture.

After that experience, no more pictures and no more images, the files are blank on the USB port ?! Don't know what's going on.

May have to remove batteries and start again. But kind of works, and got ONE picture only? But now that picture doesn't even show up.

Memory said 978KB available, all empty, picture takes 156kB, perhaps that's bits and bytes to get one picture in that memory. nothing is adding up. Plus, no more pictures.

Got it!

The protocol was to 'delete' the images and/or folders in the camera then one more picture could be taken.

So, does work - after a fashion. Now need a good SD card to plug in.

I use a Novatech 4Meg via USB and win98SE using its Windows Explorer , no trouble, compared with all the impossible proprietary crap that came with the camera

It sounds as though you definitely need to add memory capacity.

You may find worthwhile info regarding which specific SD or SDHC cards are recommended by the manufacturer, or possibly at various camera forums.

There are numerous classes of SD/HC, and some equipment doesn't work well with the latest releases of the cards (C6 or higher). I've been trying C2,4, 6 and 8 recently in several of my audio/video DVR/camera devices and some units won't record/save files reliably on some classes of SD/HC, but work fine with others. It appears that the newest/fastest write speed SD/HC cards don't work well with equipment that may only be 2 to 4 years old. Apparently the timing cycle requirements are different. Most packaging is marked with a number inside a 'C', but it may not be easy to see.

Unlike many devices/components which are "backward compatible", the newer SD/HC (and maybe other formats) are not.

Also be aware that the manufacturer may release firmware updates after the equipment has been on the market for a while, permitting the use of updated memory devices and/or other features.

-- Cheers, WB .............

ra

Wish I'd known that cameras work straight through, I would have bought that $10 4M Pixel camera when I saw it.

Oh well, 16.1 MPixels are 'adjustable' in the control settings and this only cost $49.95

I almost expunged Explorer off my system in favor of Opera 9.64; but had to keep it for some website(s) that are 'fussy'

Use Irfanview 4.25 and am EXTREMELY happy with their software.

sy

ed

Thank you for THAT heads up! I have no idea how to make certain the two work together, but 'unreliable'? arrrggg! That's the WORST kind of failure mode.

Without the manual, [which is NOT available I guess for two more weeks] I have no idea what SD card will work. Perhaps there's a section just for Vivitar. I'll make certain they're returnable just in case.

It's a bit pointless having 16MPixels if it is looking through a $1 plastic lens.

Get the camera with the good lens.

Gareth.

On Nov 26, 2:07 pm, "Gareth Magennis" wrote:

ic

True. I'm still kicking myself for passing up the $10 4MPixel camera, which would have sufficed for my needs.

Don't underestimate lensing in 'cheap' systems: Years ago, a consultant told Logitec that they needed to redesign the lense system for their Scanman Plus [manually operated hendheld scanner], because his ray tracing sw showed how bad the cheap lensing was, all distortion and blurry, and Logitec must hire him to do the redesign. The Project Mgr was technically sharp enough to believe his own eyes and to not listen to experts looking for work and hired me to evaluate the lensing system as 'proof' to back up his conclusions to his bosses. I found that that cheap little handheld scanner was better than Ricoh's $5,000 flatbed scanner. Better focus, better flatness of illumination across the field of view, less backlash/jitter, etc. Fun project, because I got to also test out scan targets I had designed [carryover from another camera design project] to automate such tests during Production. The specs and resolution on the 8.5 by 11 sheets were so severe that the sheets had to be printed in Switzerland by people who also make money printers. Cost only $300 a sheet of 'paper' [paper also special material for stability] at the time I could only afford 10 sheets. I had expected the Scanman Plus system to be a bit of cheap garbage what with plastic lensing and mouse-like optical wheels for position sensors, but learned a lesson there - System Blocks only need to MEET spec, not EXCEED spec, for evrything to work well. As in, lense focus only needs to get the image onto each pixel and not be better than that.Oddly, images were easier to postprocess for OCR *IF* the lensing is a bit poor. I have a proof of that written up somewhere. NDA, not allowed to present it.

HA, I have the opposite problem. I've been keeping this old scanner around waiting for either a Win98 machine or drivers to run it on XP. It's a Visio neer 6100B and though it was not expensive, it's one of the best scanners I 've seen.

Might not be so hot on the criteria you used in testing, but it has plenty of depth. What I mean is that something doesn't have to be flat. I've scann ed guns, car parts, people's faces etc. There is something about it's light beam I think. It must be almost as coherent as a laser for something liter ally 4" away to still be in focus. This of course comes in handy when you s can a book without cutting out the pages or breaking the binder.

About the OCR software, can I just use any propgram even though I don't hav e the hardware it came with ? Reason I ask is I have some already scannned images I would like to convert. They're 800 pixels wide because I wanted th em readable in an internet browser (though I am pretty sure I have higher r esolution copies around somewhere). I could simply string them together by writing a few simple lines of HTML. Here's an example of one:

Never did write that page..... Anyway, the only OCR software I have right n ow came with the Visioneer and it requires MAX files. Irfanview IIRC report ed that these are TIF files "misnamed". I imagine there is something differ ent about the compression, which makes me wonder if reconverting them will work. I mean convert from JPG to TIF and then rename to MAX.

That assumes the OCR software will even install in XP.

As far as your USB situation, I remember my 98SE required software to recog nize those thumbdrives. I got it from Lexar's website. This makes me wonder if the machine is reading your device correctly, can you try it in a newer PC just to see if you get the same results ? What's more, I wonder if you can find an SD card reader that is compatible with Win98. It seems they cer tainly do not want you using 98 anymore. (BTW you do know about olderversio n.com right ?)

Believe me, I was dragged kicking and screaming into XP. Know why I got XP ? I couldn't get 98SE to work with my router. Grrrr.

were so severe that the sheets had to be printed in Switzerland by people who also make money printers. Cost only $300 a sheet of 'paper' [paper also special material for stability] "

Sounds like they're doing a pretty good job of printing money.........

Most cameras with a USB port are supported by Linux. You plug the camera into the usb, and a box pops up and says "A camera has been detected, do you want to download pictures?" It is that simple. Most cameras just export the USB memory device, and the Linux system knows how to handle that natively.

All of our cameras were supported as generic, with no drivers or special settings needed at all.

This whole custom driver business with Windows is a crock, it is all there to sell you extra services, like directing you to Wal-Mart or Walgreens for photo printing.

Jon

I forgot to mention another option, which is a USB port universal memory card reader to plug into a computer (cheap ones are available for ~$10 or less). These readers typically accept several types of storage devices.

When the memory card is removed from the camera it's inserted into the reader and the computer will see the card as an external storage device.. the pics can be copied, deleted, renamed etc with the computer just like handling files.

Be sure to check the computer specs for USB 2.0 or newer, a reader may not be able to operate with USB1.1 or whatever the older standard was named.

Many newer computers (and TVs) have card slots built in, and memory cards can be used directly with the TV or other multi-media equipment (if the saved image format (pictures, video audio) can be read by the equipment, which it normally can).

It's frustrating/disgusting that many manufacturers are rushing products out into the market when support isn't available.

around waiting for either a Win98 machine or drivers to run it on XP. It's a Visioneer 6100B and though it was not expensive, it's one of the best scanners I've seen.

plenty of depth. What I mean is that something doesn't have to be flat. I've scanned guns, car parts, people's faces etc. There is something about it's light beam I think. It must be almost as coherent as a laser for something literally 4" away to still be in focus. This of course comes in handy when you scan a book without cutting out the pages or breaking the binder.

have the hardware it came with ? Reason I ask is I have some already scannned images I would like to convert. They're 800 pixels wide because I wanted them readable in an internet browser (though I am pretty sure I have higher resolution copies around somewhere). I could simply string them together by writing a few simple lines of HTML. Here's an example of one:

right now came with the Visioneer and it requires MAX files. Irfanview IIRC reported that these are TIF files "misnamed". I imagine there is something different about the compression, which makes me wonder if reconverting them will work. I mean convert from JPG to TIF and then rename to MAX.

recognize those thumbdrives. I got it from Lexar's website. This makes me wonder if the machine is reading your device correctly, can you try it in a newer PC just to see if you get the same results ? What's more, I wonder if you can find an SD card reader that is compatible with Win98. It seems they certainly do not want you using 98 anymore. (BTW you do know about olderversion.com right ?)

XP ? I couldn't get 98SE to work with my router. Grrrr.

I have an old slot A machine that i never use any more. I would have to fire it up to make sure it still runs, has a 10BaseTX nic.

?-)