Lab quality was a big motivator for me as well. I was an "old film fart"and had labeled the *istD "a useless toy" when it was announced, but I switched to digital about 20 months ago. At the time I was regularly getting scratched negs from the lab that had always done a good job on my color neg processing, and the pro lab that did my transparencies kept kinking the 120 film. A local pro then showed me the results he could get shooting RAW with a 6 megapixel camera and converting in PSCS. That clinched it. Going digital was one of the best photography decisions I've ever made.
Congratulations Shel. I'm sure you'll enjoy the camera in whatever manner you ultimately decide to employ it. Paul > > Actually, the decline in the quality of the work done by many color labs > > has also contributed to the decision. > > This is also an annoying factor for me, too. I stopped going to the lab > that I've used the most the past few years (although the lousy attitude of > the owner towards this faithful customer on a couple of occasions did not > help), but I am not overly happy with the output of what used to be my > second choice - it's closer and it's a bit cheaper, but it's even more > erratic. Maybe I'll just give up and go to the local drugstore photo > department - the quality will stink, but at least it will be cheap... > > Fred (giving up?) >
