+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Tips and Deals (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Thread: Canon's cheapest R100 MILC $479 has better specs than the camera I used at the 2002 Winter Olympics (/showthread.php?tid=278870)
Canon's cheapest R100 MILC $479 has better specs than the camera I used at the 2002 Winter Olympics - pRICE cUBE - 07-24-2023
Canon R100 $479
24.1 Megapixel CMOS (APS-C) sensor
6.5 fps Continuous shooting
4K (cropped) movie at up to 24 fps and Full HD movie at up to 60 fps
Nikon D3H $5000 in 2002
3mp aps-c sensor
5 fps Continuous shooting
No video mode
Re: Canon's cheapest R100 MILC $479 has better specs than the camera I used at the 2001 Winter Olympics - jdc - 07-24-2023
LOL., I would hope so, since that was 22 years ago...
However, a 300 DPI photo for print is still the same size in MBs.
Re: Canon's cheapest R100 MILC $479 has better specs than the camera I used at the 2001 Winter Olympics - hal - 07-24-2023
HA! Trick question - you didn't use a camera for the 2001 Olympics - there were no Olympics in 2001 :-)
Re: Canon's cheapest R100 MILC $479 has better specs than the camera I used at the 2001 Winter Olympics - gadje - 07-24-2023
hal wrote:
HA! Trick question - you didn't use a camera for the 2001 Olympics - there were no Olympics in 2001 :-)
I think he meant 2002, Salt Lake City. Maybe he bought the camera in 2001 to prepare for 2002
Re: Canon's cheapest R100 MILC $479 has better specs than the camera I used at the 2001 Winter Olympics - pRICE cUBE - 07-24-2023
gadje wrote:
[quote=hal]
HA! Trick question - you didn't use a camera for the 2001 Olympics - there were no Olympics in 2001 :-)
I think he meant 2002, Salt Lake City. Maybe he bought the camera in 2001 to prepare for 2002
LOL, my mistake. We bought the cameras in November of 2001 to use in Feb 2002. I had months to relearn the zoom direction muscle memory from Canon to Nikon.
Re: Canon's cheapest R100 MILC $479 has better specs than the camera I used at the 2002 Winter Olympics - AllGold - 07-24-2023
The Nikon D3H was only $5000 at the time?
I'm not sure why you guys switched when the 4.1Mpx, 8fps Canon 1D came out in November 2001. I suppose maybe the 1D would have been hard to get your hands on before the Olympics.
Re: Canon's cheapest R100 MILC $479 has better specs than the camera I used at the 2002 Winter Olympics - Ombligo - 07-24-2023
How about the N2000e I was using in 1997 with a 1.8mp chip that cost $15,000! I still have it (the paper told me to keep it as they were just throwing them out after we got Nikon D1's a couple of years later)
Re: Canon's cheapest R100 MILC $479 has better specs than the camera I used at the 2002 Winter Olympics - AllGold - 07-24-2023
Ombligo wrote:
How about the N2000e I was using in 1997 with a 1.8mp chip that cost $15,000! I still have it (the paper told me to keep it as they were just throwing them out after we got Nikon D1's a couple of years later)
Right. Except you were too generous on the NC2000e resolution. It was only 1.3Mp.
Re: Canon's cheapest R100 MILC $479 has better specs than the camera I used at the 2002 Winter Olympics - Buzz - 07-24-2023
IIRC, it was around 2004-05 that digital gear became usable by the masses.
Before then, it seemed to be mostly pros and hobbyists that were dig'ed up.
I dabbled w/ digital from ~'98 - '04(ish) until the Canon S1 IS started to put film in abeyance.
Since then, digital tech has gotten awesomer and awesomer, and now film is once again the shiny new kid on the block.
Bring back our Kodachrome...... PLEASE ! ! !
==