At 07:38 PM 4/27/01 -0700, you wrote:
>There's nothing wrong with that from a corporate perspective, but it
>limits the choice that the consumer has. Slower speed film has a
>definite place in my equipment bag. It seems as though you don't
>understand the benefits of a slower emulsion, or why people may
>prefer it.
I've been actively involved in photography since 1969. I even spent some
time as a photography major when I was in college. I am fully aware that
slower speed film usually has finer grain. However, that seems to be
changing. If the film companies can duplicate, or even improve on, the
level of grain in an ISO 25 film and give it to me at ISO 100, that is a
good thing to me. I no longer need an ISO 25 film. Also, just because they
can produce an ISO 100 film with finer grain does not mean that they can
automatically improve on an ISO 25 film. Even if they could, eventually you
would run into the problem that even the best lenses wouldn't be able to
take advantage of the improvements. Ultra-fine grain and speed is better
than ultra-fine grain and no speed. If you want to limit depth of field,
there are other ways to do it besides cutting film speed.
Pax et bonum,
Gary J. Sibio, SFO
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
