All of these fall in the "new toy" category. If you are the kind of person that is happy with a 20 yr old film camera, then you can hang on to a DSLR for a while. The real difference here (and this is why the camera companies are so excited about this) is that DSLR's have something to improve. The film cameras have long since maxed out on features and the only real improvements were AF speed. Now the camera makers have a hook (resolution) to tempt folks who can spend $1000-2000/yr on equipment.
Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/14/04 02:28AM >>> Hi, Bucky! >Software has gotten more complex and bloated. The images I will want >to record with my camera will not (except that my friends seem to swell >as they age). > >The analogy between cameras and personal computers is fundamentally >inappropriate. I am afraid I have to disagree. Apart from swelling of your friends <g>, but really. Consider this - speed of auto focus, complexity of flash operation, suitability of matrix metering in wider set of cases - all this is basically pure software with very little addition of hardware. Let's say, in AF the stronger motor would be good, but decision as to where to turn it and when to stop is purely software. Now, notice, I haven't been talking of anything that belongs to digital only. All of the above is valid for film cameras... And unfortunately, it *is* software. Hence it requires more memory, faster processors, better programmers *duh!*, and so on... Naturally, none of these will change the scene you're shooting or your potential ability to click the shutter at the right time with the right speed at the right aperture for the right film/sensor. Cheers! Boris
