It's not ridiculous if money is an issue. Digital MF will be really expensive, and even many pros won't be able to justify it. Besides, LF film cameras existed but where not a big market. Photographers shoot what they have to and no more. One lesson of digital has been that many shot the larger format because of the lack of grain and not because of the enhanced resolution.
Someone will buy Pentax's digital MF, but it will have a smaller market than its film MF did. And that may make it too small to be viable. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/21/05 11:21 AM >>> Dario wrote: > Today, digital FF is more than enough for at least 99% of the pro market. > For that reason I think of digital MF as a niche. But these kind of arguments are absurd! It they made any kind of sense we would still be driving Ford model T's. Kodachrome was good enough for 99% of all 35mm outdoor shooters but still virtually all of them switched to Velvia because it was "better". The fact is that people will buy the best there is as long as it is within reasonable cost/hassle constraints. Whats good enough doesn't enter the equation. Pål
