Re: [photo-3d] Re: Nishika Vs. Nimslo

[Linda Nygren <lnygren@xxxxxxx>]

To be fair, despite the "scam" component of the Nishika, I have heard
that its plastic lenses aren't actually all that bad. Although I
personally only have experience with a Nimslo which has the better glass
lenses, and I would agree that a Nimslo is well worth the $40-50 price
tag (approximate ebay prices, with flash) and a much better investment
IMO than a Nishika, or a Loreo/Argus for that matter, as inexpensive
stereo cameras go. If you buy a Nimslo on ebay make sure to verify that
it is working, or get a return option since there are many dead Nimslos
out there masquarading as "new in box" and you need batteries in it
(three 386's from the watch battery department, which most sellers do
not have) to determine whether it is working. -Linda

King3ddd@xxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 00-12-28 09:33:50 EST, Danny Vint writes
> 
> << This will probably start a bit of a war, but which of these 2 cameras are
>  considered the "better" camera - reader to supply their definition of
>  better. Note I just got a new Nishika with flash off of eBay already - is
>  $30 a good price?>>
> 
> The two should not even be compared, as it is an insult to the Nimslo to even
> be in the company of a Nishika.  The Nishika is a fake, phony, fraud!!  It
> has a lead weight to make it feel substantial, a fake LCD readout, fake flash
> contacts, and I could go on and on.  The camera is a scam and is a blight to
> the good name of 3D. > Sheldon Aronowitz