> Rob Studdert wrote: > > > I see there has been an avalanche of responses thus far.. > > > > Maybe you can enlighten us to the reasons for your feelings?
OK, reply as follows. There are many contradictions, but please allow this one off, as thinking out loud. I suppose the biggest thing you should take into consideration is that when people look at your picture, they're not looking at your darn camera. No-one will give a stuff about the camera that took the picture except the photographer. The *ist D isn't built to the same manufacture build as an LX, but then what would it have cost if it had? The *ist D isn't my favourite camera to use, but, aaargh!, it gets the results. I am not it's greatest fan, but it does the business. Camera shops are full of people buying digital cameras - but as an addition to their computer; not necessarily because of any interest in photography. Many are they who have left their (35mm) cameras to rot in a cupboard. The thing that concerns me is that my three children live in the world of now - and they, their friends and most of their parents exist in the world of digital photography. Everything is click, send you the picture tonight or show you the print tomorrow. I go into a shop now and regardless how I think, most of it is made over to digital photography. Much as I would like to say no to the loss of film, it's happening. Now, do I accept the fact that digital is the way (?), and start to sell my film gear on eBay (keeping at least a couple of film cameras), or do I accept that the cameras I really enjoy using myself will be collectors items or bookends? Malcolm
