I know someone mentioned it, but don't under estimate how many more pictures you'll take with a digital. Last year we took a trip to Colorado and snapped over 3000 pictures. There's no way I would have taken that many pictures with a film camera. I used a laptop to download to at night, just so I didn't have to worry about memory. It also was fun to be able to immediately email the day's pictures to your co-workers to let them know how much fun they were missing :) Jim -----Original Message----- From: geocaching-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:geocaching-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Greg Ponder Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2004 2:00 PM To: slaga Subject: [GeoStL] NGR: Ask The Experts First things first: I'm ignorant (in case you were not already convinced). With that out of the way...I am seriously considering purchasing a fairly high quality digital camera, probably in the 4-5 megapixel range. My concern is storage. I don't want to purchase a camera that "can" take hi-res pictures but then dummy it down to lo-res because my butt's on a butte in Utah and my memory card, stick or disc (or cards, sticks or discs) are full. I don't have a laptop, but I'm considering one. It would be my storage device so that I can take the quality of picture that I desire while on my adventures. Is that a feasible (albeit expensive) approach or are there better ways to shoot high quality digital photos without running into storage problems out in the field. Thank ye for your input, Greg Ponder...The Hairy Hillbilly ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!