i've pretty much made up my mind that i'm about to spend more than JCO's $10K on a Canon system to overcome the limitations of *istD. i don't see Pentax making a DSLR body that will suit the my needs for high responsiveness with acceptable image resolution within the next 4 or 5 years. i would prefer to go Nikon for a variety of reasons, but they are, if anything, more uncertain about their future than Pentax despite having a relatively safe and significant portion of the DSLR market. however, 8 megapixels speaks loudly too. a 1D Mk 2 with a set of fast long lenses will easily cost more than the digital 4x5 system that JCO talks about, but like you, i am not in the slightest bit interested in the larger format.
Herb.... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2004 8:56 PM Subject: RE: It's over (was Re: Ilford in trouble? and digi snappers) > On 25 Aug 2004 at 20:44, J. C. O'Connell wrote: > > > No, > > > > Cant Take away the cost issue, because it is possible to match > > 4x5 film quality with special digital backs that cost $10,000 and > > up. Can you afford that? I doubt. > > Herein lies your problem. > > > So IN THE AFFORDABLE domain, > > 4x5 film blows away digital..... > > Maybe for yourself and you still don't seem to be taking into account the > relatively limited scope of 4x5 equipment. Sharpness and absolute print size > isn't all that makes a photograph.
