Have been reading your page with great interest--trying to decide on a digital camera. Question--why no review or sample photos of the Mavica 91 (or any of the Sony line) I am trying to decide on the 91 or the Kodak 260 and would love to do a side by side of these two but there is no listing for any of the Sony cameras--any special reason?

-- John Bush (jbush@bedford.net), November 29, 1998

Answers

Have been using the FD-91 for about 2 weeks. The 14x Zoom (28-500 equivalent in 35mm format!!) with SteadyShot image stabilization is really tough to beat. I've yet to see any digital camera even come close. The macro ability of the lense is equally impressive. I've taken full-frame images of a dime! The floppy disk storage is convenient for me, allowing me to quickly change disks for various projects and allowing in-camera copying to another disk. The camera has excellent creative control with apeture-priority and shutter-priority controls as well as spot metering. The voice memo and MPEG movie features works as advertised if you need something like that. The flash exposure indoors is great.

Negatives?: The flash range is only about 8-10 feet. The camera has difficulty focusing in low-light and/or low-contrast. The camera is not water/weather proof. All of these negatives probably apply to most digital cameras under $1500 or so. Also, the low-operating temperature is 32 degrees F according to Sony - this would seem to limit usefulness outdoors in the northern half of the US.

-- Curt Egerer (cegerer@hotmail.com), November 29, 1998.

I would like to know your opinion abaout the resolution of mavica fd 91 in comparision to olympus d620l, and kodak dc260?. Do you know something abaout the sony d700?

Thank you.

-- carlos higashida (chigashi@df1.telmex.net.mx), November 30, 1998.