Tom C.
From: "Mark Cassino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Future Practicality of Film Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 14:37:10 -0400
One of the most interesting aspects about photography at present is that all of the current options have limited future practicality. So if your criteria is that you want to buy a camera now that will still be of value in 5 years - no matter what you do, it won't succeed.
No matter what digital camera you purchase, a better one will be coming along. Today's 6 megapixel DSLR's a nice, but digital will only get better and, if other digital revolutions can be used as a guide, they will get a LOT better a LOT faster. If a few years, our *ist-D's will look like silly toys.
Film of course will be eclipsed. I don't think it will completely disappear in the next few years, but it seems pretty certain that it will be more expensive and there will be fewer choices in the future. Oddly, since starting with the *ist-D I find myself shooting more B&W film and doing more experimentation in the darkroom to coax out a certain look. I also purchased a 6x7 system because for some subjects that need lots of resolution, medium format is still better than 6 mp digital. Using film make sense in some applications in the short term - and MF prices are dropping fast enough that you can buy a setup at a price that can justifiably be written off in 5 years. But in a few years I will probably use either a MF digital back or a higher resolution DSLR for what I use the 6x7 for now.
So, live for the moment!
- MCC
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Photography Kalamazoo, MI http://www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 2:55 AM Subject: Future Practicality of Film
> I realize this list has a number of clairvoyants and unlicensed
> psychologists (hahaa), but I'm still interested in a general opinion.
>
> I have planned to buy a 67II for a number of years. I am now trying to
> determine the practicality of that course.
>
> What if in five years most photography is being done digitally as opposed
to
> film? What if it's impractical for amateurs, even pros, to use MF/LF
> photography for any but the most eliteist of applications?
>
> Even considering the potential quality of MF over 135, it seems history
may
> tell us that potential quality is not the sole factor in longevity and
> success. Both 620 and 828 saw their demise, even though they were a
larger
> format than 135. If major players (camera and film manufacturers)
are/were
> to move away from 135 film, how long is it until they move away from
larger
> film formats which currently represent a smaller portion of the market
than
> 135?
>
> For a fraction of the price of the price of a decent/complete MF system,
> there are other things... hot tub, SCT telescope for astrophotography... a
> surgery my wife has always wanted...
>
> I'm curious, what people think... is it possibly throwing money down the
> drain to 'invest' in additional film equipment? I'm not making a case for
> this, just wondering. The world is currently changing at a faster pace
than
> most imagined was possible.
>
> Tom C.
>
>
>
