(NewsTarget) Samsung recently launched three New Vision (NV) digital cameras that feature 2.5-inch LCD screens, thin metal bodies, and text recognition that allows users to shoot text and then process it using Samsung's Digimax Reader software.
The first of the cameras -- the NV3 -- offers consumers a resolution of 7.3 megapixels, and a thin aluminum body. The NV3 also features Advanced Shake Reduction (ASR), 5x digital zoom and an SD slot to expand the 15MB internal storage, and can play back MP3 files and MPEG-4 content. It has an MSRP of $349.
Next, Samsung offers the NV7, a slimlined 7.2 megapixel camera with a large 7x zoom lens. The NV7 features ASR as well as mechanical Optical Picture Stabilization to control camera shake and shoot clear images. It also comes with 30 FPS VGA movie mode and an SD slot to expand its 19 MB of internal memory. The NV7 has an MSRP of $449.
The last of the NV cameras is the 10MP NV10, which has a brushed aluminum body. The NV10 features ASR, 30 FPS VGA movie mode, a Schneider 3x zoom lens and an SD slot to add to its 19 MB of internal storage. The NV10 has an MSRP of $399. All three cameras should be available this fall.
http://www.newstarget.com/019585.html
Saturday, May 19, 2007
Consumer Alert: Prestige Camera generates customer complaints from questionable business practices
NewsTarget) Complaints against Prestige Camera are cropping up all over the internet at sites such as the Better Business Bureau, Digital Photography Review, and RipOff.com. Customers allege shady practices such as trying to up-sell substandard warranties, chargers and camera cases for more than their standard market price. A UV filter, for example, was offered to one customer for $29 when it is available at BHPhotoVideo.com for just $8.95. The company has also allegedly removed included parts from cameras and tried to sell them to customers. Consumer advocate Mike Adams placed an order with Prestige Camera, and said that when he tried to cancel the order, the staff hung up on him.
According to one review by Matt Knowles, a Prestige Camera customer reporting at Aesthetic Design and Photography, the company has a host of techniques they use to squeeze money out of consumers. Knowles himself came across Prestige Camera while looking for a Pentax Optio W10 digital camera. He ordered the model from a seemingly unattached site called DigitalSaver.com, and soon received an email asking him to call them and verify his address.
When Knowles called the number, he quickly realized that it was just a technique for the company to up-sell when the man on the other end of the line offered him an extra battery. The man claimed it was a Pentex brand battery with twice the life of the battery that came standard with the camera, at a seemingly bargain price.
The camera arrived with a non-Pentex battery that was rated with less life than the battery included with his camera, and cost more than three times for what it should have retailed. Knowles contacted Prestige Camera and discovered he could only return the battery for a fee that totaled slightly less than what he had paid for the battery in the first place.
For all the complaints against Prestige Camera, their ratings at consumer sites such as ePinions, Shopper.com and DigitalSaver.com are stellar. Their entry at Reseller Ratings, however, suggests that the company is padding their reputation through false positive reviews. A note on the site says that reviews for Prestige Camera have been disabled because more than 50 false positive reviews from the company had been detected and repeatedly submitted.
Knowles noted that DigitalSaver.com gave the company a five star rating, but further research revealed no way to actually participate in the rating system, nor any explanation as to how they were compiled. Additionally, all the listed businesses were owned by the same company, suggesting the web site is not an independent reseller.
Adams and Knowles agree that it pays to be skeptical of a company's ratings and search the internet for real-world experiences with a company before purchasing consumer electronics. If you feel you have been the victim of fraudulent practices of Prestige Camera or any other business, contact the FTC and the Better Business Bureau to register a complaint.
Be aware that Prestige Camera may also does business under the following names:
A&M Photo World
Broadway Photo
Cameratopia
Digital Liquidators LLC
Ghu, LLC
Preferred Photo
Regal Camera
Tronicity
Adams recommends consumers consider J & R electronics at www.JandR.com and www.BHPhotoVideo.com as reputable and safe sources for consumer electronics. NewsTarget) Complaints against Prestige Camera are cropping up all over the internet at sites such as the Better Business Bureau, Digital Photography Review, and RipOff.com. Customers allege shady practices such as trying to up-sell substandard warranties, chargers and camera cases for more than their standard market price. A UV filter, for example, was offered to one customer for $29 when it is available at BHPhotoVideo.com for just $8.95. The company has also allegedly removed included parts from cameras and tried to sell them to customers. Consumer advocate Mike Adams placed an order with Prestige Camera, and said that when he tried to cancel the order, the staff hung up on him.
According to one review by Matt Knowles, a Prestige Camera customer reporting at Aesthetic Design and Photography, the company has a host of techniques they use to squeeze money out of consumers. Knowles himself came across Prestige Camera while looking for a Pentax Optio W10 digital camera. He ordered the model from a seemingly unattached site called DigitalSaver.com, and soon received an email asking him to call them and verify his address.
When Knowles called the number, he quickly realized that it was just a technique for the company to up-sell when the man on the other end of the line offered him an extra battery. The man claimed it was a Pentex brand battery with twice the life of the battery that came standard with the camera, at a seemingly bargain price.
The camera arrived with a non-Pentex battery that was rated with less life than the battery included with his camera, and cost more than three times for what it should have retailed. Knowles contacted Prestige Camera and discovered he could only return the battery for a fee that totaled slightly less than what he had paid for the battery in the first place.
For all the complaints against Prestige Camera, their ratings at consumer sites such as ePinions, Shopper.com and DigitalSaver.com are stellar. Their entry at Reseller Ratings, however, suggests that the company is padding their reputation through false positive reviews. A note on the site says that reviews for Prestige Camera have been disabled because more than 50 false positive reviews from the company had been detected and repeatedly submitted.
Knowles noted that DigitalSaver.com gave the company a five star rating, but further research revealed no way to actually participate in the rating system, nor any explanation as to how they were compiled. Additionally, all the listed businesses were owned by the same company, suggesting the web site is not an independent reseller.
Adams and Knowles agree that it pays to be skeptical of a company's ratings and search the internet for real-world experiences with a company before purchasing consumer electronics. If you feel you have been the victim of fraudulent practices of Prestige Camera or any other business, contact the FTC and the Better Business Bureau to register a complaint.
Be aware that Prestige Camera may also does business under the following names:
A&M Photo World
Broadway Photo
Cameratopia
Digital Liquidators LLC
Ghu, LLC
Preferred Photo
Regal Camera
Tronicity
Adams recommends consumers consider J & R electronics at www.JandR.com and www.BHPhotoVideo.com as reputable and safe sources for consumer electronics.
http://www.newstarget.com/020780.html
According to one review by Matt Knowles, a Prestige Camera customer reporting at Aesthetic Design and Photography, the company has a host of techniques they use to squeeze money out of consumers. Knowles himself came across Prestige Camera while looking for a Pentax Optio W10 digital camera. He ordered the model from a seemingly unattached site called DigitalSaver.com, and soon received an email asking him to call them and verify his address.
When Knowles called the number, he quickly realized that it was just a technique for the company to up-sell when the man on the other end of the line offered him an extra battery. The man claimed it was a Pentex brand battery with twice the life of the battery that came standard with the camera, at a seemingly bargain price.
The camera arrived with a non-Pentex battery that was rated with less life than the battery included with his camera, and cost more than three times for what it should have retailed. Knowles contacted Prestige Camera and discovered he could only return the battery for a fee that totaled slightly less than what he had paid for the battery in the first place.
For all the complaints against Prestige Camera, their ratings at consumer sites such as ePinions, Shopper.com and DigitalSaver.com are stellar. Their entry at Reseller Ratings, however, suggests that the company is padding their reputation through false positive reviews. A note on the site says that reviews for Prestige Camera have been disabled because more than 50 false positive reviews from the company had been detected and repeatedly submitted.
Knowles noted that DigitalSaver.com gave the company a five star rating, but further research revealed no way to actually participate in the rating system, nor any explanation as to how they were compiled. Additionally, all the listed businesses were owned by the same company, suggesting the web site is not an independent reseller.
Adams and Knowles agree that it pays to be skeptical of a company's ratings and search the internet for real-world experiences with a company before purchasing consumer electronics. If you feel you have been the victim of fraudulent practices of Prestige Camera or any other business, contact the FTC and the Better Business Bureau to register a complaint.
Be aware that Prestige Camera may also does business under the following names:
A&M Photo World
Broadway Photo
Cameratopia
Digital Liquidators LLC
Ghu, LLC
Preferred Photo
Regal Camera
Tronicity
Adams recommends consumers consider J & R electronics at www.JandR.com and www.BHPhotoVideo.com as reputable and safe sources for consumer electronics. NewsTarget) Complaints against Prestige Camera are cropping up all over the internet at sites such as the Better Business Bureau, Digital Photography Review, and RipOff.com. Customers allege shady practices such as trying to up-sell substandard warranties, chargers and camera cases for more than their standard market price. A UV filter, for example, was offered to one customer for $29 when it is available at BHPhotoVideo.com for just $8.95. The company has also allegedly removed included parts from cameras and tried to sell them to customers. Consumer advocate Mike Adams placed an order with Prestige Camera, and said that when he tried to cancel the order, the staff hung up on him.
According to one review by Matt Knowles, a Prestige Camera customer reporting at Aesthetic Design and Photography, the company has a host of techniques they use to squeeze money out of consumers. Knowles himself came across Prestige Camera while looking for a Pentax Optio W10 digital camera. He ordered the model from a seemingly unattached site called DigitalSaver.com, and soon received an email asking him to call them and verify his address.
When Knowles called the number, he quickly realized that it was just a technique for the company to up-sell when the man on the other end of the line offered him an extra battery. The man claimed it was a Pentex brand battery with twice the life of the battery that came standard with the camera, at a seemingly bargain price.
The camera arrived with a non-Pentex battery that was rated with less life than the battery included with his camera, and cost more than three times for what it should have retailed. Knowles contacted Prestige Camera and discovered he could only return the battery for a fee that totaled slightly less than what he had paid for the battery in the first place.
For all the complaints against Prestige Camera, their ratings at consumer sites such as ePinions, Shopper.com and DigitalSaver.com are stellar. Their entry at Reseller Ratings, however, suggests that the company is padding their reputation through false positive reviews. A note on the site says that reviews for Prestige Camera have been disabled because more than 50 false positive reviews from the company had been detected and repeatedly submitted.
Knowles noted that DigitalSaver.com gave the company a five star rating, but further research revealed no way to actually participate in the rating system, nor any explanation as to how they were compiled. Additionally, all the listed businesses were owned by the same company, suggesting the web site is not an independent reseller.
Adams and Knowles agree that it pays to be skeptical of a company's ratings and search the internet for real-world experiences with a company before purchasing consumer electronics. If you feel you have been the victim of fraudulent practices of Prestige Camera or any other business, contact the FTC and the Better Business Bureau to register a complaint.
Be aware that Prestige Camera may also does business under the following names:
A&M Photo World
Broadway Photo
Cameratopia
Digital Liquidators LLC
Ghu, LLC
Preferred Photo
Regal Camera
Tronicity
Adams recommends consumers consider J & R electronics at www.JandR.com and www.BHPhotoVideo.com as reputable and safe sources for consumer electronics.
http://www.newstarget.com/020780.html
Police using helmet cameras to record, reduce violent crime
(NewsTarget) Police in the British city of Plymouth have announced that affixing small digital cameras to the side of officers' helmets has drastically increased officers' ability to arrest and prosecute perpetrators of violent crime.
During the first 10 weeks of the pilot project, arrests for violent crime in the test area increased by 85 percent. This includes a 40 percent increase in the detection of such crimes and a 20 percent increase in the arrest and prosecution of suspects. Police also noted an 8 percent drop in the incidence of violent crime in the test area.
According to detective superintendent Richard Wood, head of a similar pilot program in London, the cameras' primary value is in making it easier for officers to prosecute those they observe committing crimes.
"Should anyone commit any offenses," he said, "the officers will instantly have the evidence to ... pursue criminal charges."
The small color cameras, similar in size to an AA battery are attached to the side of officers' helmets and record both audio and video footage of what is going on around them. The cameras being used in the London program, including a special utility belt to store the data, cost about £1,800 ($3,500) per officer.
The Plymouth trial involves approximately 250 officers wearing the cameras for six months and is scheduled to finish in March. Some of the video footage gathered in the first 10 weeks has been released to the public and is available online.
Both the Plymouth and London police departments hope to determine if the cameras would prove useful in other parts of the country.
These new surveillance programs are part of a wider effort in the United Kingdom to monitor citizens more effectively. London police are also experimenting with automated license plate recognition software, increased patrol visibility and airport-style weapons searches.
http://www.newstarget.com/021563.html
During the first 10 weeks of the pilot project, arrests for violent crime in the test area increased by 85 percent. This includes a 40 percent increase in the detection of such crimes and a 20 percent increase in the arrest and prosecution of suspects. Police also noted an 8 percent drop in the incidence of violent crime in the test area.
According to detective superintendent Richard Wood, head of a similar pilot program in London, the cameras' primary value is in making it easier for officers to prosecute those they observe committing crimes.
"Should anyone commit any offenses," he said, "the officers will instantly have the evidence to ... pursue criminal charges."
The small color cameras, similar in size to an AA battery are attached to the side of officers' helmets and record both audio and video footage of what is going on around them. The cameras being used in the London program, including a special utility belt to store the data, cost about £1,800 ($3,500) per officer.
The Plymouth trial involves approximately 250 officers wearing the cameras for six months and is scheduled to finish in March. Some of the video footage gathered in the first 10 weeks has been released to the public and is available online.
Both the Plymouth and London police departments hope to determine if the cameras would prove useful in other parts of the country.
These new surveillance programs are part of a wider effort in the United Kingdom to monitor citizens more effectively. London police are also experimenting with automated license plate recognition software, increased patrol visibility and airport-style weapons searches.
http://www.newstarget.com/021563.html
Some analysts predict decline in digital camera sales
Highlight:
The price and complexity of digital cameras, combined with competition from cell phone cameras, have some analysts predicting sales for digital cameras will drop significantly by 2007. Christopher Chute, an analyst at IDC in Framingham, Mass. says digital camera companies aimed their product at affluent households, and never looked for the next segment of users. Chute estimates only 55 percent of American households will ever own a digital camera. Also, it was expected that digital cameras would kill film, but this is not the case, analysts say, largely due to digital's inability to live up to its promise of simplicity and economy. Some analysts disagree, however, saying a digital camera's ability to replace video cameras is fueling sales, and will continue to do so. These proponents also add that, while both digital cameras and camera phones race to increase the megapixel quality of their wares, the two products are more complementary than competitive, since camera phones often turn users on to digital cameras.
Original source:
http://www.startribune.com/stories/535/5426001.html
Summary:
* The prospect of digital cameras completely replacing their film counterparts, once taken for granted, may be fading fast.
* The price and complexity of digital cameras, and competition from cell-phone cameras, have some predicting that unit sales of digital cameras will begin to decline as soon as 2007 and that future digital camera purchases will be largely to replace existing models.
* The flaw in the digital-replaces-film scenario was the marketing campaigns waged by the digital camera manufacturers, Chute said.
* Still, when the dollar value of digital camera sales surpassed the sales of film cameras three years ago, the question was inevitably asked: Is film dead?
* Apparently not, and analysts point to several reasons why digital cameras haven't lived up to their initial promise.
* For starters, they are too difficult for many people to use, particularly when it comes to printing pictures.
* Digital cameras cost too much -- $140 to $947 last year, according to research firm IDC, with the average selling price $354.
* And stand-alone digital cameras face competition from improved cell-phone cameras that soon will offer 5-megapixel picture quality, up from today's 2 or 3 megapixels.
* "People walk into a Best Buy store every day with a camera memory card and say, 'What do I do with this?'
* Besides these two new approaches, manufacturers are continuing to ratchet up the megapixels in their stand-alone digital cameras in order to compete with the growing picture-taking quality of camera phones, even though analysts say that adding more megapixels won't help the average photographer.
* Camera phones are good for spur-of-the-moment shots but are limited in their ability to share photos because users typically must pay to use the cell-phone network in order to transmit photos to other wireless phones or to conventional e-mail addresses, Chute said.
See more articles and news on digital camera
Stay informed
Receive the NewsTarget Natural Health Newsletter for free!
* Stay informed on breaking news about natural health, renewable energy and more.
* 100% free of charge. Unsubscribe anytime.
* Absolutely no spam. We respect your privacy.
* Receive a free instant download of our $29 Secret Sources guide that reveals top sources for little-known health and diet solutions.
http://www.newstarget.com/005027.html
The price and complexity of digital cameras, combined with competition from cell phone cameras, have some analysts predicting sales for digital cameras will drop significantly by 2007. Christopher Chute, an analyst at IDC in Framingham, Mass. says digital camera companies aimed their product at affluent households, and never looked for the next segment of users. Chute estimates only 55 percent of American households will ever own a digital camera. Also, it was expected that digital cameras would kill film, but this is not the case, analysts say, largely due to digital's inability to live up to its promise of simplicity and economy. Some analysts disagree, however, saying a digital camera's ability to replace video cameras is fueling sales, and will continue to do so. These proponents also add that, while both digital cameras and camera phones race to increase the megapixel quality of their wares, the two products are more complementary than competitive, since camera phones often turn users on to digital cameras.
Original source:
http://www.startribune.com/stories/535/5426001.html
Summary:
* The prospect of digital cameras completely replacing their film counterparts, once taken for granted, may be fading fast.
* The price and complexity of digital cameras, and competition from cell-phone cameras, have some predicting that unit sales of digital cameras will begin to decline as soon as 2007 and that future digital camera purchases will be largely to replace existing models.
* The flaw in the digital-replaces-film scenario was the marketing campaigns waged by the digital camera manufacturers, Chute said.
* Still, when the dollar value of digital camera sales surpassed the sales of film cameras three years ago, the question was inevitably asked: Is film dead?
* Apparently not, and analysts point to several reasons why digital cameras haven't lived up to their initial promise.
* For starters, they are too difficult for many people to use, particularly when it comes to printing pictures.
* Digital cameras cost too much -- $140 to $947 last year, according to research firm IDC, with the average selling price $354.
* And stand-alone digital cameras face competition from improved cell-phone cameras that soon will offer 5-megapixel picture quality, up from today's 2 or 3 megapixels.
* "People walk into a Best Buy store every day with a camera memory card and say, 'What do I do with this?'
* Besides these two new approaches, manufacturers are continuing to ratchet up the megapixels in their stand-alone digital cameras in order to compete with the growing picture-taking quality of camera phones, even though analysts say that adding more megapixels won't help the average photographer.
* Camera phones are good for spur-of-the-moment shots but are limited in their ability to share photos because users typically must pay to use the cell-phone network in order to transmit photos to other wireless phones or to conventional e-mail addresses, Chute said.
See more articles and news on digital camera
Stay informed
Receive the NewsTarget Natural Health Newsletter for free!
* Stay informed on breaking news about natural health, renewable energy and more.
* 100% free of charge. Unsubscribe anytime.
* Absolutely no spam. We respect your privacy.
* Receive a free instant download of our $29 Secret Sources guide that reveals top sources for little-known health and diet solutions.
http://www.newstarget.com/005027.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)