Precisely. I have taken over 600 shots in my istD in the last month. I would never have taken that many on film unless there was a special occasion or something. I have gotten some shots of the family which are absolutely stunning and which I would have missed were I using film because I would not have had the camera in my hand so often. Working this way you can capture moments you would have missed using your normal film techniques, but you have to be much more determined to throw away shots which don't work. With film I tended to keep even slightly blurred shots of the kids because they were records of a moment/mood/expression.
Some of these shots alone mean the camera has already paid for itself to me. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 13 October 2003 12:23 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Has Pentax missed again? > > > This is not true because it ignores the difference between > price and value. > Price is established when you sell something. Value is what > it is worth to > you. A computer or DSLR may have a low resale price, but > still be perfectly > capable of producing perfectly adequate work. A 6mp DSLR that > produces > excellent images today, will still do so 5 years from now. > > BR > > From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Bottom line is if you buy a DSLR, you better use it > and use it alot. It will not be worth much in say > 5 yrs, even MINT. Sorta like computers in that > respect..... > >
