G'day Bruce & John. You both raise good points. Maybe I'm looking at Digital SLRs from the wrong angle. What you both have said makes a lot of sense. Thanks.
Hooroo. Regards, Trevor. Grafton, Australia -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, 26 September 2005 3:25 AM To: John Forbes Subject: Re: anybody still shoot film? I concur. My two *istD bodies have a combined total of around 40,000 images. Neither one has had a hiccup through the entire time. That is about 1,100 rolls of film. Far more wear and tear than I ever put on my film bodies. You may ask why so many images - the ability to shoot speculation with digital has had a major impact for me. Basically, I can shoot events where I may or may not make money (kids sports, social events, etc). When shooting film, I couldn't even consider this venue because it would be way too costly. If you were to count the number of frames shot by these digital SLR's I think you would find that they are more durable than you might have imagined. Most film cameras don't have that much use put on them. If you think of all the reports of ZX-5 series cameras breaking, without nearly the amount of use, I would say that the film cameras are perhaps less robust than the digis. -- Best regards, Bruce Sunday, September 25, 2005, 5:33:33 AM, you wrote: JF> Trevor, JF> The majority of people on this list would now appear to be shooting JF> digital, so most reports of camera malfunctions will concern JF> digitals. JF> Furthermore, digital malfunctions are newsworthy, whilst film camera JF> malfunctions are not. I bet we've heard from every DSLR-owner whose JF> camera has malfunctioned, whilst film camera malfunctions go JF> unmentioned. JF> Furthermore, at least some of the reports about DSLR problems can be JF> traced to misunderstandings about how the things work, or bad JF> batteries. JF> I think you'll find that the great majority of owners have had no JF> problems. JF> John JF> On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 07:05:50 +0100, Trevor Bailey JF> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> G'day All. >> I have stayed with film for the time being. >> The PZ-1p is super reliable even if it's hard on batteries. From the >> traffic on this forum about *ist D body malfunctions, I am holding >> off of investing in Pentax Digital SLR. >> >> I don't have the Dollars to throw at a Digital or the patience for >> the pissing around of warranty claims, waiting around and freight >> costs. >> >> If the reliability improves, Who knows. >> >> I wonder if Pentax will release a grip and strap for the *ist Ds2 >> similar to the one for the PZ-1p if they don't do a battery grip? >> >> Hooroo. >> Regards, Trevor. >> Grafton. >> Australia >>
