I can only speculate that 35mm APS never came out for the following reasons:
For most 35MM users, APS solved problems no one ever had. What kind of second-rate lamers can't either load a film or count the frame numbers on the negatives properly? APS would also dilute the market for 35MM meaning a likelyhood of manufacturers having to build both regular and APS versions of their cameras. Films like Kodacrome 64 could still outperform anything on APS and the archival quality of Kodachrome is I think second-to-none if carefully stored. The basic principles of taking pictures is essentially still the same as it was in Fox Talbot's days; we're still exposing a light sensitive emulsion to capture images; people like Kodak have unfortunately been trying to reinvent that for years. It would make more sense to me to standardise on 35MM and look at enhacing that. Kev. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Apilado" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 5:05 AM Subject: Re: Why I Love the APS Format > When APS was introduced in 1997, I recall Popular Photography magazine > speculating on whether a 35mm APS system could have come out. I wonder why > the camera makers and film manufacturers did not come out with a 35mm APS > system instead of the APS format? Technology has improved 35mm film > offerings over the years. Except for the DX feature, 35mm cartridges, are > still the same as when I started photography back in the early 1960's with > an Argus C3 "brick". > The main regret I have with APS is that Kodak and Fuji never introduced > slide APS film into the U.S. I would enjoy my Nikon Pronea (the original > one) more had slide film been introduced. > Jim A. - 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 .
