Hey Paul, Wow, you are replying to an *old* email. I barely remember writing it since I've written quite a few. You have rehashed the same debates some others have, so I won't get into that. You don't have to understand my reasoning, only I do. :) One small thing, I didn't buy the MZ-S to shoot film, I bought it to shoot pictures.
Regards, Brad Dobo ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2002 6:00 PM Subject: Re: SMC Pentax F* Zoom 5,6/250-600 > I don't get your reasoning. You bought an MZ-S because you wanted to > shoot film, right? So now you can't buy a high-end digital because you > spent your money. So what? Have fun shooting film. > I don't have an MZ-S or any other high end autofocus camera. (And I > don't want one.) But I have a lot of fun taking pictures. And, while > it's not my real job, I sometimes make some money doing it. I don't > think I need any more equipment to do what I do. I have an LX, an MX, a > 6x7, and a brace of Spotmatics. They all take outstanding photographs > when I do my job correctly. And some people are willing to pay for those > photographs. They wouldn't pay me any more if I was shooting with a 15 > megapixel multisynch wondercam. But based on some of the comments I've > seen on the list, I guess that I might get more satisfaction from the > wondercam. Somehow, I don't think that's the case. But I guess I'm just > old fashioned and nieve. > Paul Stenquist > > Brad Dobo wrote: > > > > Wow, some long and passionate emails. This isn't geared towards any one > > person. I see my position simply. I do photography as a hobby, and like > > using the best. I dropped a wad of cash for the MZ-S, grips, cables, 360FGZ > > flash, couple prime lenses. If they come out with a digital....I don't > > really care. Why? Because I cannot now afford it due to the above > > purchases. If a Pentax DSLR comes along, I'll be pissed...natually. They > > are really f**king over everyone that went out and got a MZ-S kit IMHO. So > > I'll have my little digital P&S, and otherwise shoot film until they no > > longer make it. (or I win the lottery) > > > > Brad Dobo > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Keith Whaley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 10:50 AM > > Subject: Re: SMC Pentax F* Zoom 5,6/250-600 > > > > > > > > > > > Rob Studdert wrote: > > > > > > > > On 24 Sep 2002 at 3:21, Keith Whaley wrote: > > > > > > > > > I do get tired of folks wanting digital instead of glass. > > > > > No, that's not true. I am weary of those who want digital knocking > > > > > glass to the ground! > > > > > Both can exist. Why is a world beater digital any better than a world > > > > > beater glass camera? > > > > > You do use them for different things, they serve different markets... > > > > > > > > Hi Keith, > > > > > > > > Its these types of comments that I don't understand. As a photographer I > > expect > > > > to have the choices of the current (digital is current, it's not up and > > coming, > > > > it's here) image capture medium available to me. I expect to be able to > > have > > > > film bodies and a digital body in the same bag sharing all my excellent > > Pentax > > > > glass, I don't believe it's too much to ask for. > > > > > > No, but it's the 'sharing' bit that is NOT here yet. Not with Pentax. > > > I know, that's what everybody's looking for, hoping for. > > > But you see, you are not praising digital to the _exclusion_ of glass. > > > It's those who get my goat. > > > Our hope is that we WILL be able to share, to have a digital body and > > > a film body, and use all the same lenses for whichever. > > > > > > > Obviously I can dump all my Pentax kit and go off a by a couple of the > > new > > > > Kodak 14MP bodies and a heap of Nikon glass but I really don't wish to > > do that. > > > > Aside from the hassle and potential financial losses I really like my > > kit of > > > > lenses, I know them and I would like to keep them. But I need a digital > > body > > > > too. > > > > > > I do understand that. > > > What I find troubling is those who say, in effect, if Pentax doesn't > > > bring out a digital back that will take all the lenses we have, > > > there's a strong possiblility we'll just _have_ to switch to another > > platform. > > > Is digital really all that important at this point in time, in that it > > > has overtaken and supplanted film? > > > > > > Maybe I'm missing something here. Is there actually an in-process > > > switch from film to digital going on? > > > How many of us are professional photographers -- actually make a > > > living at it? > > > Is that where the drive comes from? > > > As a serious amateur, I'd LIKE to have a Pentax back in digital, but > > > if they don't bring it out for another year, I'm certainly not running > > > off in a big huff, dumping all my Pentax gear and going to some other > > > make... > > > > > > So, I must assume it's all the professional photogs here that are > > > making all the threatening, doomsday noises? > > > I guess if this is just a PRO lament, I'll just quiet down, let 'em > > > lament and read the mail! ;^) > > > > > > keith whaley > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > Rob Studdert > > > > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > > > > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > > > > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html > > > >
