Anybody own one of these? http://www.theflip.com/products_try.shtml Looks like some Krapp's Last Tape stylee and I'm tempted to buy if I get good feedback here.
― forksclovetofu, Tuesday, 25 March 2008 17:49 (eighteen years ago)
second hand feedback, but a bro of mine was given one recently when his wife had their first kid and he sez they're pretty rad
― johnny crunch, Tuesday, 25 March 2008 17:53 (eighteen years ago)
lol @ Krapp's Last Tape.
― fields of salmon, Tuesday, 25 March 2008 18:32 (eighteen years ago)
my sister got one of these for christmas, it seemed pretty cool presuming its incredibly cheap. its 100% barebones of course.
― deeznuts, Tuesday, 25 March 2008 18:35 (eighteen years ago)
180 for an hour of recording.
― forksclovetofu, Tuesday, 25 March 2008 18:47 (eighteen years ago)
alright that sounds ridiculous to me but then i know nothing about digital cameras
― deeznuts, Tuesday, 25 March 2008 19:10 (eighteen years ago)
Ridiculous good or...?
― forksclovetofu, Tuesday, 25 March 2008 19:12 (eighteen years ago)
ridiculous bad, but like i said
― deeznuts, Tuesday, 25 March 2008 19:12 (eighteen years ago)
what does? 180 for a videocamera?
it's not like you ONLY get an hour. you can record more if you dump your footage.
― s1ocki, Tuesday, 25 March 2008 19:16 (eighteen years ago)
How much better (if at all) are these than your average phone camera?
― Bodrick III, Tuesday, 25 March 2008 19:17 (eighteen years ago)
i just figured a typical digital camera could do the same shit & more for about the same price. i will say that when we hooked it up to the tv the quality was surprisingly impressive, but then thats when i figured the thing cost like 60 bucks. i dunno if the hook-up-camera-to-tv thing is fairly unique or not. im just going to shut up about this now.
im more curious than anything because ive been considering getting one (digital camera) for awhile now, but damn.
theyre waaay better than the phone cams ive seen bodrick
― deeznuts, Tuesday, 25 March 2008 19:21 (eighteen years ago)
I guess I'm not seeing how this is different than any inexpensive digital camera. Don't they all pretty much shoot movies now at 640 x 480 (not a great resolution, really) for as long as you want (depending on the size of your memory card)?
― Jeff LeVine, Tuesday, 25 March 2008 19:42 (eighteen years ago)
The main positive seems to be that's it's cheap. The main negatives seem to be it can't take higher resolution photos and that it only has a 1.5" diagonal screen (which is really small - the same size as the screen on the original ipod nano)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sS_vm6whRaI
― Jeff LeVine, Tuesday, 25 March 2008 19:56 (eighteen years ago)
got a 1/2 hour to tape for sixty bucks, this is pretty great.
― forksclovetofu, Monday, 15 September 2008 06:50 (seventeen years ago)