Most people don't realize how the quality of glass is so important in
photography. I worked for a newspaper, in the art department, and
shooting/developing/printing film, shooting photostats. If I was lucky,
they'd be printed in the glossy section instead of on newsprint.
One day one of the reporters was in a hurry and wanted to do the
photostat herself. She was in a bad mood. She slammed down the glass
cover over the photo. It cracked. She was billed for the replacement
glass. I think the size was around 20"x30". The vendor was in Germany.
The newspaper's discounted cost for the glass was $650, in 1988. Good
glass was expensive. Still is.
Is it important that the Nokia N-series phones' cameras have Zeiss
lenses? Does that make their photos any better? Of course, they're still
mobile phones, not dedicated cameras.
Betty
Please.
The D40 new is superior to a refurbished or new D70 (or D70s). The
Nikon 18~55mmVR lens is excellent. A DSLR one buys today is
overtaken swiftly by next models, certainly within 18 months. A
film-era camera, such as Hasselblad (I use them even now with great
reliability), was viable for 20+ years, results indistinguishable
from current models. Overnight, digital cameras become inferior
performers, eventual landfill (here, or in China), much as their
mobil phone brethren. Those who read Ken Rockwell's excellent
website, the best out there on subjects photography, know this.
Should you elect to go the DSLR route, you will learn there also that
your most important investment is in glass, not in ephemeral camera.
Thank you.
Chad
*************************************************************************
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ **
*************************************************************************
