----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Apilado <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2001 10:17 PM
Subject: Re: Converted to digital photography !
> Finally, perhaps a new Pentax list should be developed for those who want
> to talk digitally. I prefer the Pentax list only in the conventional
> photographic way.
Sorry, digital isn't going away, and there are fewer and fewer clear cut
boundries when it comes to conventional/digital processes. Most of my "good"
images are printed digitally these days even though they were captured on
film. If you are involved with photography in any way, digital will come
up...
Isaac
>
> Jim A.
>
>
> > From: "Cyril MARION" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:06:18 +0100
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: Converted to digital photography !
> >
> > Hello the list.
> >
> > Fist of all, forgive me for this long post. But I wanted to shere these
> > thoughts with you. I just bought for my Club (an old-timer Car club) a
new
> > compact digital camera. Not a reflex, no. Just a standard 4 megapixel
> > camera. A Casio QV4000.
> >
> > To tell you the truth, I'm totally. surprised. Astonished. Converted !
> >
> > First of all, I like and practice photography since the late 70's. My
first
> > SLR was a PRAKTIKA MTL3 with a 50mm and a 135mm. Then my first PENTAX
was a
> > Me SUPER, bought new in 1981. I stayed with PENTAX since then (do not
ask me
> > why, it's just like this.) and I used several Program A and SUPER A (I
still
> > have a SUPER A now), one Z-1 (that I still have), several Zoom 70 R and
X (I
> > have a 70-X). On the lens side, my jewel collection is made of a 17mm
f/4,
> > an A 24mm f/2,8, two A 50mm f/1,4 and f/1,7, one A zoom 35-105 f/3,5 and
one
> > A 70-210 f/4.
> >
> > Like everyone of us I think, I started with black and white, easily
> > developed in a quickly transformed bathroom. Then I tasted slide
photography
> > (with a number of bad photos far more important !). Now 90% of my
pictures
> > are colour prints. Since 1996, I scan the best of my prints, to use them
for
> > web or to duplicate 10x15cm prints on colour printer. The scanning
operation
> > being quite long (with my HP 6300C scanner) I often ask my lab to give
me my
> > photos on CD. The offered resolution of 1500 x 1000 pixel is (for my own
> > use) sufficient. Well, for some years now, I practice "digital"
photography,
> > but with "classic" equipment.
> >
> > And then came the day when I used an "all digital camera". and then for
me,
> > everything changed !
> >
> > But what is so different from a 35mm SLR to an all digital camera ?
> >
> > One big only answer : instantaneity ! By viewing the pictures just after
> > taking them, one feel about the same magic as with a Polaroid, but with
even
> > faster response, and above that, without the feeling of wasting a print
if
> > the shot is not good. What a pleasure to have the possibility to judge a
> > shot immediately. The focus is not good ? One erase the picture and do
it
> > again. This part of the picture is too dark ? One re do several shots
while
> > overexposing until the right exposure is found. The subject moved or did
not
> > keep the pose ? One just has to ask a new second of attention and shoot
> > again. All the tricky photographical situations can be approached
without
> > any fear; the photographer is reinsured and never comes back home
without a
> > couple of good photos !
> >
> > Now that I am CERTAIN that digital photography will totally overpass
> > chemical photography in a very short period of time, what an attitude to
> > adopt ? At the date of today, my choice is very basic : either I buy for
my
> > personal use, one of these digital cameras, with a more or less futurist
> > look, not often cute (the Casio QV 4000 is ugly!) and I try to resell
all my
> > old equipment, either I wait. But to wait for what ? To wait for a
solution
> > allowing me to reuse all, or part of my existing equipment. To wait for
the
> > successor of the e-film in 24x36mm size for instance, to be able to
reuse my
> > SUPER A and my Z-1 and theur accessories. To wait for PENTAX to
manufacture
> > 24x36mm digital backs for my SUPER A and my Z-1. Or to wait for PENTAX
to
> > make a true 24x36mm digital SLR to be able to reuse all my lenses.
Today, to
> > wait corresponds better to my photographer's aspirations.
> >
> > I think I'm not alone in my case ! And in front of such a situation,
what do
> > the camera manufacturers think ? Why a so genius idea like the e-film
has
> > not given birth to a sellable product ? Have they received pressures
from
> > camera manufacturers ? Why the big manufacturers offer expensive
equipment
> > without any real interest for the amateurs ? Do they think they will
push us
> > to throw away all our ancient equipment, and buy one of their non
finished
> > digital mutants ? When will they offer us the digital equipment we are
all
> > waiting for ?
> > A solution which should allow to "digitalise" all the existing park of
SLR
> > (like the e-film) would give to its promoters a significant amount of
> > profits for years. An intermediate solution consisting of supplying
24x36mm
> > digital backs, would be very widely acceptable. While the solution
> > consisting of providing 24x36mm digital SLR cameras, where our existing
> > lenses could be used would be acceptable as well.
> >
> > So what do they wait for ?
> > -
> > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
> > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
> > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
> -
> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
> visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
