Not so far fetched actually. I didn't really get interested in photography until the first digitals came out. I bought one and thought it was cool. Then I happened to try a friends 35mm and realized this was much better. I even bought another 4Mb digital after that, but 35mm was still better at that time. They are more advanced now though and if I had bought something like the *ist D I doubt I would have ever gained an interest in film. However with the lower end to even decent 35mm costing less then many digicams, it leaves the door open for interest in the better features of the 35mm SLR. Real autofocus or manual, total exposure control, more then 2 or 3 apertures to choose from, a real viewfinder, powerful add on flash, less battery issues, not to mention the improved picture quality even now as compared to a digicam were all reasons my digicam to this day mostly collects dust. The price tag of a 35mm basic kit even as compared to a digital rebel with accessories is still much lower. It's even lower in many cases then a decent quality digicam. I would take a Walmart 35mm SLR kit(which is what I basically used for 35mm SLR pricing here) for a important shot any day before I would dust off the digicam.
I'm not putting down the quality of DSLR at all here. Just comparing available performance dollar for dollar as I know it. Although the very real risk of spending thousands of dollars on lenses could offset this, but they don't know that until they get the photo gear bug. Many might mention here that I did not consider the film and developing costs here. That's true, but I highly doubt most people will shoot as many photos as the folks shooting the *istD's on this list. > -----Original Message----- > From: Antonio Aparicio [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 2:53 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Film is Dying? (was Pentax is Dying?) > > > Also, an angle not mentioned is the renewed interest folks are having > in photography generally as a result of digital- perhaps it will be the > saviour of film and not the other way around... > > A. > >
