[Leica] Summilux vs. Summicron

[jonathan at openhealth.org (Jonathan Borden)]

On Nov 9, 2004, at 10:16 AM, B. D. Colen wrote:

>  If you're not a Leicaphile,
> or someone who has a real need for film, or an artistic interest in it,
> why would you want film when you can have a $150 appliance at home that
> for $.29 a print cranks out 4x6s every bit as good or better than the
> 4x6s you got at the corner lab - that were often pretty crappy, dust
> covered, and scratched?

That would be SWMBO ... because she can take her film to the 1-hour lab 
in the mall, and get double prints made while she shops or has lunch.

Fooling around with a computer is a waste of either her or my time :-)

I tried to tell her that with digital she wouldn't have to print 
everything ... she wants to print everything, she's got no interest in 
looking at her photos on the screen or gasp on the TV. and she can send 
to copies to whomever for the price of a stamp. Someday she will see 
the light (of digital) but in the meantime I have been offering to buy 
her a digital P&S for years and she's not interested.

>
> As to shooting film and scanning - which I did for about five years,
> yes, it's a great way to go if you want to shoot film. I still do it on
> occasion, and I'm sure I will continue to do it for some time to come.
> It does not, however, offer many of the benefits of digital that go
> beyond cost and speed - but those sure are huge, important benefits of
> digital.

As a shooter and scanner, for me, the big advantage of digital is that 
I can retouch, change contrast, etc. to my hearts content, and then 
save it as a file to be rendered over and over.

If I'm not happy with inkjet printing, I can always get a conventional 
print made via a digital 'enlarger'.

Jonathan