<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Minox digital camera?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://kindlereview.ca/177/minox-digital-camera/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://kindlereview.ca/177/minox-digital-camera/</link>
	<description>Kindle and Other Electronic book readers</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Jan 2012 16:29:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: OMG, I ♥ PONIES!!1</title>
		<link>http://kindlereview.ca/177/minox-digital-camera/comment-page-1/#comment-1012</link>
		<dc:creator>OMG, I ♥ PONIES!!1</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Jan 2010 22:00:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kindlereview.ca/readercases/minox-digital-camera/#comment-1012</guid>
		<description>Just by reading the specs you&#039;ve provided, I can tell you this camera is garbage.
First of all, it doesn&#039;t have 6 megapixels. The word interpolated, which they so conveniently put in parenthesis, means that it has less. The specs don&#039;t say how many megapixels this camera actually has - just that it will create as much padding as it needs to make it seem like 6. It&#039;s like a lazy student handing in a 6 page assignment, when in fact he has 2 pages of text that he double spaced and put in an insanely large font. Heck, if you make the margins a bit bigger and include some gratuitous pages for an index and bibliography, you can turn 2 pages worth of text into a 10 page report. With cameras, that called interpolation.
Also, this camera only has digital zoom. Digital zoom is bad for image quality. Reputable brands offer digital zoom as a gimmick, on top of optical zoom. Optical zoom is the good kind.
And if you can&#039;t find reviews for a camera, that&#039;s another bad sign.
Stick to name brands like Canon, Olympus, Panasonic, etc. If you&#039;re shopping and you see something you like, here are two great review sites:
http://www.steves-digicams.com/hardware_reviews.html
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/default.asp?view=alpha</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just by reading the specs you&#8217;ve provided, I can tell you this camera is garbage.<br />
First of all, it doesn&#8217;t have 6 megapixels. The word interpolated, which they so conveniently put in parenthesis, means that it has less. The specs don&#8217;t say how many megapixels this camera actually has &#8211; just that it will create as much padding as it needs to make it seem like 6. It&#8217;s like a lazy student handing in a 6 page assignment, when in fact he has 2 pages of text that he double spaced and put in an insanely large font. Heck, if you make the margins a bit bigger and include some gratuitous pages for an index and bibliography, you can turn 2 pages worth of text into a 10 page report. With cameras, that called interpolation.<br />
Also, this camera only has digital zoom. Digital zoom is bad for image quality. Reputable brands offer digital zoom as a gimmick, on top of optical zoom. Optical zoom is the good kind.<br />
And if you can&#8217;t find reviews for a camera, that&#8217;s another bad sign.<br />
Stick to name brands like Canon, Olympus, Panasonic, etc. If you&#8217;re shopping and you see something you like, here are two great review sites:<br />
<a href="http://www.steves-digicams.com/hardware_reviews.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.steves-digicams.com/hardware_reviews.html</a><br />
<a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/default.asp?view=alpha" rel="nofollow">http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/default.asp?view=alpha</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

