Shel, A former Univac salesman I worked for always insisted that computers did not become 'obsolete', but that they were superceded by new technology. I think the same is true for digital cameras. That old Sony Mavica still shoots the exact same 640x480 jpegs that we marveled at, but we expect a whole lot more today. Better performance & cheaper price...
Come on in to the digital SLR world. I am a reluctant convert, but have shot 900+ jegs on my *ist DS in 80 days. Bill Robb & Paul Stenquist have it right - it may not be film, but it is good enough to be very entertaining! Regards, Bob S. On 8/23/05, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As the time approaches for my purchasing a DSLR, the comments about these > cameras becoming obsolete keep running through my mind. As a user of older > film bodies, which don't become obsolete and which continue to make good > pictures and use a wide variety of lenses, it's hard to consider that in > six months or a year a new DSLR will have become "history." > > It seems that, unless there's a camera malfunction, these new > techno-marvels should continue to make decent pics for years to come, yet I > keep hearing about how models just a few years old (or less) are dated and > need to be upgraded. Am I missing something? Is it just the techno-buffs > who are saying this - those who must have the latest and greatest, or are > there hidden issues, like software compatibility, lack of peripheral > equipment (such as a memory card type being discontinued), and things of > that sort? Maybe I've answered my own question. > > What's the reality of getting 10 years of use from now current Pentax DSLR? > > Shel > > >
