On 26/7/04, Frantisek Vlcek, discombobulated, offered: >I do not believe anybody here >has so much analyst background to prognose accurately which technology >will prevail in the future. And that's because that's not a technical >decision but a whole different matter. Like VHS/Beta and others. With >complex technologies and big corporations, everything can change. > >I do not think battery power makes the big difference now, the new >nikons can rung a long time on one battery, I think it's about the >same like yours D60, Cotty. At least these I shot with were. > >Personally, I don't care whether it's CMOS/CCD/LBCAST/ETC... but how >it shoots nad how it controls. I am not a prognosist, and frankly, I >totally don't care. If I were debating whatever is a little bit >better, I wouldn't shoot any pictures :-) I just shot some great shots >with Leica and its super-sharp lens on 10 years old HP5+, which >indeed is bit fogged. Did I mind :) ?
FYI, I was answering a question posted by John Forbes where he wanted to know why I chose a CMOS over a CCD and I gave my reasons. Technologies may have improved in certain areas, but there is no denying that a CMOS sensor uses less power than a CCD. But that is not to say that it is better, because the resolving power of the CMOS is less than the CCD (or so I am led to believe). There is no contest. I was simply explaining why I made a decision a couple of years ago :-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=====| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _____________________________
