At the risk of offering a dissenting view, may I suggest an alternative?
In the current issue, Popular Photography say that digital will equal the
quality of conventional 35mm film cameras when they are capable of storing 6
million pixels. That is way, way more than is captured by the current crop of
digital cameras priced at about $800 (USD). (At that price range, they
capture about 3.3 million pixels.)
For the same $800, you could get an outrageously great 35mm SLR like the Nikon
N80 with a genuine Nikon zoom lens. This baby will Auto focus with an amazing
amount of flexibility. It's either a super snapshot camera or a pro tool,
depending on how you use it.
Amazingly, it will do fill-flash without attachments. (Get this- the Nikon
"D" series lens "tells" the camera where it's focused. If the camera doesn't
'see' light _in the foreground_ it turns on the fill flash and works with a
sublety impossible just a few years ago.)
If you like wide-angle shots like "Leslie and David" or "Kakki in Paz's
backyard" at http://www.jmdl.com/jonifest/jfno2000.cfm, you really should
consider a 35 film camera. Neither of these two would have been possible with
a presently available $800 digital camera- they don't go wide enough. (I used
28mm lens on 35mm camera.) What I'm saying is that a $800 SLR comes with a
wider zoom than a $800 digital. And with a 35 SLR, you can always buy extra
lenses.
Sure, you'll have to buy film. But if you go on a trip, you can easily buy
extra 35mm film. What are you gonna do if you're traveling and you need more
digital memory sticks? At $80 each?
And film cameras don't chew up batteries like digitals. (Again, if you're
traveling and you run out of juice, are you gonna find a wall outlet in the
Vatican and wait for your battery charger? Or are you gonna tour Roma,
looking for the special batteries for digital cameras? Some don't use AA
batteries.)
Admitedly, you can't post pictures from a JoniFest using a film camera, but
the pictures that you end up with make cool enlargements. It's easy to scan
snapshots. I've read that film has it all over digital in very low light
(without flash) settings too. (I'm not too sure this is true though. JJ
posted some very nice digital shots from the BSN tour after all.)
As with most decisions, there are tradeoffs to be considered.
Just my 2 cents. Thanks for the bandwidth.
Jim L'Hommedieu
