A Taste of Things That Weren't to Be.

[Uhooru]

<p>The image quality looks great. What a little gem.</p>

[michael_chuang1]

<p>According to the information in a old B+H advert from 2000 the Fujifilm 1000ix is 3.3 x 2.1 x 1.1 inches and weighs 4.9 oz*. The Nuvis S2000 per its instruction manual (thank you M. Butkus!) is 4.3 x 2.5 x 1.3 inches and 6 oz, so the 1000ix is <em>amazingly</em> small. I never managed to acquire an S2000, but here's the Nuvis S next to an Olympus Stylus Epic (Mju II). Although marginally longer, the Stylus has the virtue of maintaining its dimensions even when "deployed" while the Nuvises (Nuvi?) expand. Oh, the closed Nuvis S is 3.7 x 2.6 x 1.3 and 8.1 oz, per the same B+H ad.</p>

<p>James, glad to hear you will be sticking around CMC.</p>

<p>*Sorry, rest of the world, I'm using 'Merkun units because I can't be arsed** to figure out metric equivalents this time of night. <br /> ** Sorry again, probably off-color, but I just learned the phrase from an Irish colleague and am inordinately amused by it. MC: lowering the tone since [way too long].</p><div></div>

[michael_chuang1]

<p>I have no idea what "Preston Road" is. This Nuvis S came in a box of mostly junk I acquired at a camera show.</p>

<p>Re caption: in the interest of accuracy, actually the Nuvis S is not ready to shoot, as it has no battery in it. With battery the lens protrudes a bit even at wide angle. The thing is that you have to open the camera to remove the battery. The trick is to close the cover slightly before actually taking out the battery; this causes the lens to retract, but the bottom-access battery compartment cover remains accessible. If you do this you can remove the battery then close the camera. Otherwise the lens stays out and you can't close the cover. I've seen several at thrift stores with the lens damaged because the donor couldn't close the camera after removing the battery.</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p><strong>James</strong>, thanks for the kind words, pleased to see you on this Forum. Yes, the APS film was commercially scanned but not printed, and the scans from the Fuji Frontier were pretty good, requiring only a little adjustment for levels and contrast, and cropping. My apologies for the total lack of peeling paint and ramshackle barns, but I reserve those subjects for the CMC forum. Our nearest city is the capital, Wellington, but if you Google Earth "Featherston" you will find my nearest town. And yes, our plant and animal species are quite different from those in Australia, though the people are pretty similar. As for the Nuvis, it has the addition of a zoom lens, but it's definitely a larger camera. You should be able to hand-hold it quite satisfactorily, in good light.</p>

<p>Great stuff <strong>Michael</strong>, interesting comparisons. The Irish certainly have a great way with words...You're right, <strong>Barry</strong>, it's the sort of camera that's just as much decoration as a photographic tool.</p>

[marc_bergman1]

<p>Rick,</p>

<p>Another wonderful job with a camera format we are not use to seeing. The APS era just sort of past me by. I wasn't a snob I just never got around to trying an APS camera. I do see that my local film developer will do APS film.</p>

<p>By the way, if you are going back to 1995, I have 2 words for you. Ebay and Google. Watch for their public offerings. You will be able to buy any camera you could ever want.</p>

<p> </p>

[andrewg_ny]

<p>Thanks for sharing, that's a cute camera, nice images. I guess as APS-C the 24mm lens has field of view more like a 35mm lens on 135 film. Surprised that little pinprick of a viewfinder ends up being usable.</p>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>Thanks, <strong>Marc</strong> and <strong>Andrew</strong>, APS is foreign territory to me, also. The viewfinder seems surprisingly large and bright, and shows masks for the image format selected. It doesn't show fingertips in front of the lens, though...</p>

[howardstanbury]

<p>A nice piece, Rick, and you certainly do justice to a fine little camera. As I recall the thing has no more area than a credit card, though it is certainly somewhat thicker!</p>

<p>Do I remember you posting a teaser picture of this camera a couple of years ago? It certainly caught my eye and I went and bought one - just a few pounds on eBay, as I recall. At the time I had only some outdated APS film and the scans that came from the processor were thin. Nevertheless here's one of an Oxford landmark, the Ashmolean museum in 2010.</p>

<p><a title="Ashmolean Museum | Oxford by FlickrDelusions, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4107/5045659526_f88736f7ab_z.jpg" alt="Ashmolean Museum | Oxford" width="640" height="374" /></a></p>

[User_276104]

<p>I got into photography in 1997, buying a camera from my younger brother. My older brother had been computer savvy since the '80s and told me about chat group comments about APS taking over in the mid-to-late '90s. At the time, there were apparently Nikon F5 users concerned that they'd wasted $2,800 on a camera body that was going out of style.</p>

<p>Which of course, it was. But not because of APS.</p>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>You're right, <strong>Howard</strong>, I did post a pic of the camera some time ago, in response to some sort of "show your favourite cameras" kind of post. That pic of the Ashmolean is very nice and sharp; it's certainly a pretty good lens, considering it's simple construction.</p>