Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/11/02

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Film vs. Digital [was Re: [Leica] Re:Leica D200]
From: dlridings at gmail.com (Daniel Ridings)
Date: Wed Nov 2 07:15:59 2005
References: <25229337.1130876375153.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <20051101222836.85761.qmail@web34013.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <9b678e0511011817t5259faafh22546ead6ce19f6f@mail.gmail.com> <22c93b290511011820w4d858415y5e29adb71240c186@mail.gmail.com> <4dccee3d0511011821l57442bdel966db4cbdcc3af9f@mail.gmail.com> <22c93b290511011955y25e7248dh558a7623e3450d29@mail.gmail.com> <003301c5df71$fca3aa10$1ae76c18@ted> <p0623090dbf8e81075c1a@131.142.12.152>

On 11/2/05, Richard S. Taylor <r.s.taylor@comcast.net> wrote:
> Ted wrote:
>
> >Well like I said, build the camera and lenses will come.... "if the
> >demand is large enough for prime lenses." And of course there's a
> >decent profit margin to be made. :-) If not? Well I suppose one has
> >a choice..... go back to film! :-)
> >ted
>
> There's another reason to go back to or stay with film.  Digital
> cameras today are where computers were ten years ago.  They're in a
> horsepower (MegaPixel, noise level)/Feature (e.g., LCD size) race.
> Buy one today and it's obsolete in a year or year and a half at most.

I don't really agree. My Nikon D100 is older than that, and I've never
felt that it is obsolete. On the contrary, I haven't even come close
to tapping in on its potential yet.

It cost me an arm and a leg back then, but has been worth every penny.

Sure, there are bigger and better things out there now, but since I
haven't outgrown it, it doesn't feel like a problem.


> I was seriously thinking of getting a Canon 20D, but then the 5D
> (full-frame, 2.5" LCD screen) was announced, so I waited.  I saw the
> same thing happen when the Pentax *istDS was replaced by the *istDL.
> The product cycle on both was about 15 months.

So you accept all the marketing arguments? Marketing wants that life
cycle, but we don't have to go for it.

> In the meantime I'm shooting 2-3 rolls of Fuji 400 every week with my
> M7 (and sometimes with my Olympus Stylus Epic) and having the film
> scanned to 6MP JPG files when it's processed.

I took Fuji 400 with me to Zimbabwe last month. When I went in June, I
had the D100 with me.

The D100 gave better results (for me). I'll probably never shoot a
roll of color film in my M's again (not that I am a large scale
consumer of color film anyway).

>  I also have the
> best archival backups in existence, my negatives.

Not your color negatives. You won't convince me of that.

Enjoy the cameras you have. Doesn't matter what kind they are.

Best,
Daniel


Replies: Reply from r.s.taylor at comcast.net (Richard S. Taylor) (Film vs. Digital [was Re: [Leica] Re:Leica D200])
In reply to: Message from feli2 at earthlink.net (feli) ([Leica] OT: Nikon D200)
Message from zoeica1 at yahoo.com (Chris Williams) ([Leica] Re:Leica D200)
Message from don.dory at gmail.com (Don Dory) ([Leica] Re:Leica D200)
Message from wooderson at gmail.com (Matt Powell) ([Leica] Re:Leica D200)
Message from dcm at pobox.com (David C. Mason) ([Leica] Re:Leica D200)
Message from wooderson at gmail.com (Matt Powell) ([Leica] Re:Leica D200)
Message from tedgrant at shaw.ca (Ted Grant) ([Leica] Re:Leica D200)