Boris Liberman wrote: > I am probably in different league than you're, Malcolm. It is > because I use only 35 mm gear. > > However it occurred to me that with finally getting my ME > Super fully and perfectly (knock on wood of my head <g>) > operational, my ZX-L has become just a backup camera.
I think we are all in the same league of image taking; it's just that we all have different methods of collecting them and varying degrees of talent and skill. I'm fighting to keep out of the relegation zone! > I get the same pleasure from using my ME Super as I get from > driving my '92 Golf. It is something that is simple, that I > know won't fail me, that would get the job done, that would > bring me enjoyable result. I think the same of my Land-Rover. > (In case of car, it means that I would safely arrive from A > to B with little hassle, and that the car would just work.) > > Naturally it is a matter of getting used to... > > Could be, if I could get *istD, I would have so gotten used > to seeing the outcome right away and to that innumerable > number of segments and AF zones - I couldn't use anything but... > > But to me, *istD is not a __turning__ point, though it is a > serious __landmark__. Just count the number of posts related > to it now... > Darn, I am writing one right here right now... And here's another.... I see the *ist D as a turning point for me, as I am rarely at the cutting edge of technology. I do now have enough reason to believe that now is the time to join the digital age but not to the exclusion of film. Having followed Shels' string on candid street photography (and enjoyed Frank T's excellent examples for years) I want to give it a go myself and the best combination I could use for speed and accuracy would be an MX and 40mm 'pancake' lens. At the moment, I see digital as a colour print replacement, but give me a month and I'll post again to see if I have changed my tune..... Malcolm
