Hi At the momnet, the only futuristic thing about digital photograohy is a "new" point & shoot market - people who didn't like P&S cameras buy diggies because it's easy, cheap to use and you can redo or delete bad shots at once - and it HIP - and of course PJ's like it. They are in ahurry all the time. When the digies reach 20-40 MP and much better battery economy, storing abilities etc. then you have "the digital future" comming. Untill then Leicas are still very durable and reliable cameras and the lenses are superb. Who would want to be in a thunderstorm, in a war zone or on a mountain for days with just a diggie, batteries, flash cards and a portable CD writer, a car battery and lot of CD's?
In ten or twenty years noone can read a CD or a DVD anymore - theese machines belong on a museum by then. The "photographs" are just useless files - like antique carvings in a stone - or you'll have to kopi them every five years to the current, new file media. The Leica user can just pick up his negs or slides! To me it makes sence to be able to shoot digital of you need to - with the nice gear you know like your own pocket. And you can still make negs for important work! Jens -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: whickersworld [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 27. juni 2003 14:09 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: Leica R9/R8 digital back Pål Jensen wrote: > >I believe the future is digital. Not film. >This Leicas only function is to convince >potential customers to buy into the dying >R system because theres a digital future >for it. Just like the *ist D's only function is to convince potential customers to buy into the Pentax FA* system because there's a digital future there too? >If this was something advanced users really >wanted, Nikon and Canon would have offered >it long time ago. Perhaps they will in the future? If not for the 'spoiling tactics' of Silicon Film, and their hold on certain key patents, I think we would have seen such offerings several years ago. >I wouldn't bet on it simply because the vast >majority buying into digital do it to avoid using >film You have made a statement here. Do you have any evidence whatsoever to back it up, or is it just another of your opinions presented as "fact"? >, so getting an old manual focus film slr in the > bargain and paying more than twice as much for > it than a DSLR doesn't seem like such a good idea > anymore Not to you, obviously! >But to each his own I guess. It is just my opinion ... Pål, it is *all* just your opinion, whether or not you try to present it as "fact". Your opinions are interesting, provocative and always well worth reading. So there is no need for you to try to give them (spurious) credibility by presenting them as "fact". Maybe that is just your style. Best regards, John (my apologies for not including this in my first reply to the same posting. I hit the return key by accident!)
