On Fri, 14 Mar 2003 07:01:52 +0800, Bjorn Vang Jensen
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>I absolve myself of all blame :-)
>
>I'm sure I documented,  way back, my experience testing the Reefmaster
>(analogue) in Cozumel, and my conclusion that, while the design was nice,
>the camera is a POS.

I wish I had known that before buying the POS.  :-)  It is definitely
a POS, and it floats too.


I have no reason to believe that the digital version is
>any better. I have never advocated the cheap end of the UW camera market,
>mostly because the lenses are inferior, sometimes, as in the case of the
>Reefmaster, to the point of being useless except under the most amazingly
>benign conditions!

Yeah, but when it comes to UW photo, we (Sue's camera) are definitely
the bottom-dwellers who go for the bottom-of-the-line equipment.  The
MX-10 was one such, but it worked sufficiently well for non-photog
type of photogs.  Can't say that about the ReefMaster digital.


>Better spend the money on a brand-name digital camera.

If I did that, I would have gone for the top of the line, and would
have been broke by now.  :)


>However, nice guy that I am, I would invite you (Bob) to e-mail me any
>pictures you think might be remotely salvageable, and I will see what
>I can do.

Thanks for the offer.  But I have already pointed Sue to your article
for Photo Shop Dummies and she needs to practice what you wrote.  :)


But please do so BEFORE Sunday, as I will leave for your old motherland
>for 2 weeks, and Mao only knows what kind of connection I will get in
>Beijing :-)

Well, you'll have seen Beijing and the Great Wall before I do.
Have fun!

-- Bob.