Rob wrote: > http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/digital-class.shtml > > This is almost exactly how I have been feeling for some time now. I > veer from being willing to pay �6K for a full frame DSLR to wanting to > stick with film forever!
I haven't read the essay above. However, what you write rings true for me too. A year ago I though digital was the answer and that film is doomed. Now I'm not so sure. The power consumption make the current crop of digital cameras (I'm talking digital slr's here with interchangeable lenses. I keep repeting this to be ahead of the nitpickers) unaceptable for my use. Often I'm not near a power outlet and even my MZ-S is borderline when it comes to power consumption. Then there's memory cards etc. Neither do I have the film consumption that make the current digital slr make sense from an economic perspective. Also, they aren't (yet) better than film. Not to mention medium format. Film also give me a hard copy; a physical entity that exist and can be touched and that can be viewed without any external means. I can digitize any piece of film when it's needed. The instant gratification aspect of digital is nice by\ut not mandatory for my photography. After all, I never cared much for Polaroid. Sure, if film get better than digital, both in resolution and dynamic range, and cost significantly less, I'll switch if only for economical reasons. Lastly, I couldn't possible handle thousands of image files. I barely manages the slide storage. Incidentally, companies like Fuji have recently stated that they don't expecty much decrease in film sales and that they will continue developing new films. Canon have changed their party line from "we will not develop high-end film slr's any further" to "we will continue to further develop high-end film slr's as long as the market demands it". I believe we will see a happy coexcisting of film and digital. P�l
