Digital depression?
Dallas
on the film vs. digital issue with my post about burnout, but it seems
that certain folks can't help themselves. I'm sorry about the afterburner
currently eating up bandwidth.
Thanks to those of you who responded with your own experiences of how you
approach digital now that we are a few years down the line.
I have decided that I won't be upgrading my D60 in a hurry. What's the
point? It does what it is supposed to and I'll use it whenever the urge
hits me.
There's a man with a Nikon F2 who's been very patient with me over the
past year though...
--
Dallas
www.imageunlimited.co.za
Drop pants for email addy
Mxsmanic
> There's a man with a Nikon F2 who's been very patient with me over the
> past year though...
Persuade him to board the digital bandwagon, and you can buy his F2 for
a song.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
Jim Waggener
> There's a man with a Nikon F2 who's been very patient with me over the
> past year though...
>
ahhhh the F2. I have a F2A that I use damn near daily. What a classic.
The "Rolls Royce" of manual camera's.. bar none
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
street shooter
film v. digital thing from so many light writing artisans. No matter
what your predisposition, now is the best time for BOTH technologies.
Hopefully, that will be the case for a long time. Digital may one day
take the lion's share of the imaging technology market, who knows?
But right now both camps are in high cotton. Digital keeps getting
better, and film is still in plentiful abundance. I'm happy to be
able to move effortlessly between shooting film and shooting digital.
Let's enjoy what we have and not worry about what we may or may not
someday lose.
BTW, my intention is not to single out the OP. Just wanted to weigh
in on the topic with my two cents.
Michael
"Dallas" <dal...@imageunlimitedpants.co.za> wrote in message news:<pan.2003.12.09....@imageunlimitedpants.co.za>...
Bob Monaghan
I use both digital (still/video) and film (35mm/MF..) too. But there is a
lot of hype pushing digital which hurts consumers and amateur
photographers who believe and act on it. For example, the average family
shoots only 100 photos per year as it is, so their "savings" from going
digital will never cover the cost of going digital, let alone their still
big problems with getting and printing out images etc.
Amateurs who are sold on "upgrading" to digital are going from a
relatively high quality film based medium (i.e., 25-150 megapixel equiv
for films from 800 ISO to 25 ISO) to digital cameras with 3-6+ MP, hence I
put "upgrading" in quotes. The usual upgrade path, to medium format, has
been abandoned in the blizzard of media articles which are promoting
digital uber alles ;-) Maybe digital is good enough, but then, so are
disposable cameras for 100 million users a year ;-)
finally, I disagree with your analysis. Film cameras are well established,
and you can get essentially the same quality from 35mm SLRs from the 1970s
to today, though convenience features may vary (AF etc.). But with
digital, nobody yet knows which sensor size/ratio will be adopted, lenses
are being changed and obsoleted almost yearly (IX, G, and so on), and
there are huge changes in technology and software.
All of this is reflected in the rather high cost of going digital,
including not just the rapid depreciation of digital cameras and printers
and scanners and computers and so on, but also software costs, time spent
learning skills etc., all taking time and $$ away from doing photography,
yes? ;-) By comparison, someone with a film camera can expect 10-20 years
of use and quality image making...
the better advice to me would seem to be to stick with film, for the
majority of current users, and wait for digital to adopt standards and get
volumes up so prices drop. We are told that 16 megapixel sensors costing
under $10 are in the wings (national semiconductor for foveon etc.). Who
will want a $6,000+ DSLR of today at 6 MP when a future 16 MP will be
disposable camera or under $100 in a few years? What is the necessity of
jumping onto the bandwagon for most users today, and suffering all that
depreciation and risk, when the market will soon sort out the winners and
losers in the pending market shakeout (happening now etc. ;-)?
digital is great news for the mfgers and magazines who want to sell ads
and our eyeballs to dealers and distributors. The mfgers had the problem
that their old cameras were too good, and the new ones could hardly lure
folks to abandon their old film cameras for new ones. Now the mfgers have
found the cure, with digital and rapid obsolescence of entire systems,
meaning continuous major sales of cameras, software, accessories,
supplies, and all the rest. All the while, the articles are telling us how
much we are "saving" by not having to pay for film and developing ;-)
grins bobm
--
***********************************************************************
* Robert Monaghan POB 752182 Southern Methodist Univ. Dallas Tx 75275 *
********************Standard Disclaimers Apply*************************
Michael Scarpitti
Surely you jest! Ever see an Alpa, Contarex, or Leicaflex?