chillzatl

For quality the s20 is better, naturally. But it's a bigger camera so it's not as handy to carry around all day. THe s100 takes great pics and will fit in a shirt pocket, it's great. THe s20 isn't huge or anything, but it's just not as portable as the s100. One knock on the s20. It doesn't come with a rechargable battery, you ahve to buy the canon battery kit which = another $100. I recommend you check out www.dcresource.com. They have practically every camera made in their reviews section. Always a good place to compare.

Rennen

Actually, the S100 doesn't accept a Type 2 compact flash so will not work with the Microdrive

ttquattro4

is responsible for this? Does this relate to the nbr of pixels, size of picture, other factors, camera type or only the speed of my internet connection-which for me, unfortunately is the phone line at this time? Yhanks

chillzatl

most pics on the net these days are going to be JPG. The size of the picture is determined by the size/resolution and the color quality/compression used. Higher resolution and lower compression make for larger files.

Rennen

The factors influencing download time to the same client include photo properties (resolution, color depth, compression format) which directly impact file size, as well as current server and network load between the server and the client.

jgriff

easily, takes good photos (2.1 mega) I got a 487 meg card that holds 50 pictures at large size and resolution.

TTinGables

and can also shoot up to 6 minutes of video with a 64mb card.

It also has a digital zoom inaddition to the regular zoom, macro, built in flash, a tripod pount screw, and a usb port. I can download a full 64mb card in a minute or two.

It is also tiny, about 4" high, by 3" wide, and about 1-1/2" thick.

Nothing beats shooting with 2400 X 1800 res.!

RobbyTT

I did a lot of research before deciding on the G1, at <a href="http://www.dpreview.com">digital photography review</a>. I went with this camera because Canon seemed to have the newest technology when it came to a digital camera. Also, I didn't even consider companies that don't make SLR 35mm cameras, ie. Fuji, HP, Sony, because I wanted a good optical lens. I love my Nikon SLR camera but I felt that the CoolPix (990, 880) were lacking digicam technology (recharable battery, this is huge IMO, Compact Flash Type II slot.) I also wanted fully manual capabilities in my digical camera that I use on my SLR camera, (custom white balance, exposure compensation, aperature pro., shutter speed pro. full manual, manual focus, etc.)

This is all I can think of right now, but you can definitly <a href="mailto:r-fiely@northwestern.edu">e-mail</a> me to find out the rest of my reasons. I took my camera out this weekend for a first photoshoot with my TT and here is how they came out. I'm very impressed with the colors and sharpness and I shot these on the smallest mode/normal compression -- <a href="https://www.audiworld.com/forum/m.new/tt/msgs/180283.phtml">TT at the Beach</a>

Oh yeah, the range on this camera as far as resolutions and compressions was extremely vast.

BZ

Thanks! Are you using a Microdrive? How big is it?

RobbyTT

but I don't use it all the time, sometimes I like the speed of the 16MB cf type I card that it came with. I got the gig drive for $400.

Do you do any 35mm or other camera work? if so, spend the money and get this camera because it will reward your knowledge with unbelievable pictures. However, if you don't know anything about cameras, but are interested, get it also because you have to learn/start somewhere. But, if you main concern is size, go with something else. I would probably get a the s10.