Jim A. wrote:
>
> I would like those who are salivating for a Pentax dslr to form their own
> list so that those of us who are contented film users can live in peace
> without all the digital stuff intruding.
>
> Jim A.
Writes Jim, digitally.
Jim, get a grip. Form your own list of film only shooters. While you're
at it, why don't you use snail mail instead of email. You could have a nice
tight group of Pentax film-only penpals, and you could start a stamp
collection to boot.
99% of my shooting now gets digitized: I scan it in for personal use, to
do enlargements on my Epson 1270 printer, and for my professional work like
cd covers, video boxes, ads, labels, business cards, brochures, take out
menus, trade show booths, and the odd cover. I have thousands of rolls of
print and slide film, which I am probably not going to use again, sitting in
boxes waiting to get organized, but I just couldn't be bothered.
If I had a digital camera, it could all be archived for easy retrieval
on CD alphabetically, by date, by scene, by subject, or all of the above,
instantly, and repeatably. Quite often my shoots are on the weekend when the
good labs are closed; I have to wait until monday to take them in, when
everyone else does, and have to make two trips downtown, one to drop them
off, and another to pick them up. Also, there is the expense of the film,
the developing, the running around in the car, the time involved, all for
one or two good shots. Not to mention the worry of never really knowing if
you got the right shot or not, no matter how good you think your technique
is. With a good digital, I could have most of my work finished before monday
morning rolls around, and concern myself more with picking up the cheque.
Not to mention the environmental impact of all those chemicals used in
making my image.
Digital is here, now; it is not going to go away. Sticking with Pentax
is now costing me hundreds of dollars a month, and I rarely do any shooting
for my own enjoyment and/or personal growth because each roll is costing me
$30.00, at least, not including my time driving downtown. I just no longer
feel like spending that money or that time when I know I shouldn't really
have to, if only the goddamn camera company I have been supporting for the
last ten years would make the appropriate, up to date equipment for our
needs. Even if I blast a roll on my own, I then have to scan them in, do
hours and hours of touching up of digital artifacts which don't really
happen in a good digital camera, and I still wind up backing it all up on
CD. The thought of dumping them all in the computer quickly via firewire,
and for that matter, deleting the bad shots on site and only keeping the
good ones, and having great insight into what effect the flash, filters,
etc., are having on the image is so appealing, indeed almost necessary these
days to stay competitive. Talking to other photographers is somewhat
embarrassing because they can't believe I haven't gone digital yet. Almost
no one is using film anymore; have you seen a max rez shot from a new high
end Canon or Nikon digital? A lot of pros are dumping their medium format
stuff for it. And it is only going to get better. And Pentax is only going
to get further and further behind.
I reiterate, their new camera better be bloody good, or there will be a
LOT of nice FA* lenses on the market. And they had better introduce a decent
flash or two to match, because a guide number of 30 (barely) just doesn't
cut it for me, or for anyone who is serious. Not two mention the gaps in
their high end lens lineup.
Cameron
-
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 .
