Oh, c'mon Rob ... speaking as a lone voice crying in the wilderness of the digital landscape (my apologies to Edward Abbey), I'd not consider taking a DSLR (certainly not as the only choice) into some of the places and on some of the journeys I've been. But then the question was about harsh conditions, not remote and harsh conditions.
All the paraphernalia that people seem to carry with them when shooting digital (cards, batteries, downloading devices, sensor cleaning stuff, even computers) would really be a hindrance when travelling "close to the ground." In my mind a simple, strong mechanical camera that can be operated without batteries if necessary and a few lenses that lack "features" is the way to go. BTW, I read a lens review some time ago in which five or six lenses were compared, and one was given poor marks for not having a full range of features. For the longest time I couldn't figure out what features a lens needs, or could have, beyond the ability to focus. Shel > From: Rob Studdert > On 19 Jul 2005 at 8:29, mike wilson wrote: > > > Is digital the best option for harsh conditions? > > What else is there? > > > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
