Tom, I agree with you in certain respects. In particular, I agree that DSLRs will not last forever, and will probably not have the lifespan of, say, an MX or your Crown Graphic.
My point (and the one that Mr. Desjardins is also making, I think) is that if you look at the sole tangible product of a camera - a picture - there is a certain level of quality, a combination of objective and subjective factors, that, once reached, will not go away until the camera fails utterly. This is the issue which JCO raised and with which I quarrel - takes the position that build quality is irrelevant for a digital camera because they have the approximate lifespan of a nematode, something I simply reject. I expect my *istD to last me for many years, first as a primary body, perhaps later as a back-up. As someone else pointed out, new technology is nice to use, which is why I kept Z1ps as well as LXs on the go at the same time. If Pentax brings out a new DSLR with substantially improved image quality (nothing else would be enough to coax me), I'll probably buy it. ----begin really OT editorial part--- I'm still a little miffed at Pentax for being so slow - I bought a P&S because I got tired of waiting for Pentax to get their shit together and give me a digital product that I could use my lenses with. The P&S produces amazing pictures, no doubt about it, but the motor skills involved in getting the most out of it are entirely different and I found that I had to alter my shooting habits substantially to get good results. Also, I can't seem to think photographically without me eye to a proper eyecup - looking at a screen doesn't seem to work well for me. Add to that the fact that you're stuck with a narrow range of focal lengths, and it just doesn't tally to a good tool for my needs. It's not that I didn't like film, but that I simply have not got the time anymore to shoot, process, scan, catalogue and photoshop slides, with the result that my shooting trailed off to a trickle in the several months leading up to the *ist-D's release. Digital fits my needs and my time constraints so much better that I am willing to out up with the difficulties - for me, they are far outweighed by the benefits. If Pentax had waited much longer, you'd have seen a whack of Pentax FA* glass for sale on eBay and I'd be gone to Canon. Quoting graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > You are aware that you are talking to a guy whose favorite picture taker is a > > 50+ year old Pacemaker Crown Graphic, right? > > OTOH you are right, the problem with using the old laptop is it won't run > newer > software. But that is analogic to using an old film camera for which film is > no > longer available such as a 116 Kodak folder. So they do compare. ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
