postcard
Now, they are still doing the same thing... sort of. Instead of trying to compete in the camera realm, they are now making portable film quality printers under a proprietary process engine.
Same trick, different input mechanism (USB).
I've owned both. The pictures mediocre and didn't have resolution anywhere as good as a 110.
exposed frame=20
bad.
It is not my fault that you could not focus the cameras. I have enough=20 evidence to the contrary in my old photo collection.
frame
A Polaroid camera could also be loaded with fairly fast negative film and conventional enlargements made from the relatively high quality large sized negatives that resulted. The main problem with them was that a lot of people did not follow the instructions for use properly. And the original process was a bit messy in practice but still magical.
A Polaroid camera used correctly would blow a 110 out of the water.
In its day the Polaroid was extremely useful for taking irreplaceable pictures that you were certain showed the required details.
Regards, Martin Brown
Yep, I didn't think about that. I rarely use my DV-Cam, or the movie mode on my digital cameras. The D90 for example boasts a movie resolution of 1280x720, which is still better than the analog NTSC DVD of old. (480i)
For just assumed the output would be 12MP, the same as an image using the shutter. Now I know better, and this helps explain why such systems are more expensive.
As a test, I guess I can video a cookbook page using the D90, then do a frame capture in Premier Elements (or ?), and see if it's legible. That will at least answer the video resolution issue.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.