|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
> > Nice summary, Dave. > > Your point about storage is one that's often overlooked. > How will a digital camera fare on a three-week trek through > Nepal? For now, it's hard to beat the storage density of > plain-old film. > > As to longevity of the gear... it's great to still be > shooting with a 20-year old SLR, without the slightest > worry that next month's model will make mine obsolete. > > (Though I do occasionally wonder what it would be like > using a Nikon F5 or F100 instead of an FE.) > > What's interesting about digital photography is that > it seems to be making its major inroads at the extremes > of the market, leaving us "serious amateurs" in the lurch. > > Commercial studio photographers are already into it, in > a big way. Pro-sumer digicams are storming ahead at > breakneck speed. 2 million pixels today, maybe twice > that number a year from now... > > But in the meantime, those of us in the middle are left > with -- what? Film scanners, I guess. > > rafe b. Rafe: I sure hate to do this to you: You wondered how a digital camera would fare on a trip to Nepal. Well this isn't Nepal, but from what I see it can be just as rough. Go to www.sjphoto.com and see what is capable. This guy is really good. Jim Davis www.visual-artists.com/paper - Please: Stay on topic. Trim quoted messages. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.
[Photo] [Yosemite News] [Yosemite Photos] [Scanner] [Gimp] [Gimp] Users