Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/09/14
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Thanks for the thoughtful responses, George. Interesting and exciting developments are ahead in cameras, that's for sure! Best, Gary At 02:07 PM 09/13/06, you wrote: >On Sep 13, 2006, at 3:28 PM, Gary Todoroff wrote: > >>Your argument implies that the comparison is between two non- >>evolving kinds of equipment, just like mainframers argued that >>those little toy computers would never amount to anything. > >Not really trying to argue Gary. I recognize, indeed am part of the >(r)evolution. I'm a user and constantly upgrading hardware and >software and often an early adopter. > >>The P&S cameras are breaking creative ground at a clip that makes >>the pro digital cameras appear to be standing still - just like >>PC's did to mainframes. SImple P&S cameras today are miles beyond >>the pro digital cameras of only a few years ago. > >Of course they're ahead of the old. But they're not ahead of the >pro- stuff today. The huge consumer market allows for the pro r&d and vice >versa. > >>Ignoring the comparison of a broad range of digital cameras today >>will be like thinking that COBOL will forever be the computer >>language of the future. I try to predict some of the future of >>digital cameras at >> http://northcoastphotos.com/Lympa-2006-04-30.htm > >Here again I'm not ignoring comparison of digital cameras. I read >everything available on each "interesting" development. I'm very >interested in the technology. However wiz-bang the P&S become there >will, I believe, always be professional requirements which the P&S >will not meet. That is why there's still $30,000 digital backs (no >doubt they're using technology developed in the P&S r&d) The big >megapixel leaps of the quasi 35mm bodies have put a dent into that >market - but the medium format folks continue to invest heavily in >larger bit depth, etc. Perhaps in ten years the best P&S will provide >22megapixels and 64 or 128 bit depth - I don't deny that possibility >- and it may only cost $999. And perhaps consumers will have >computers powerful enough to process those files. But I would expect >that the "pros" will be using equipment which is significantly more >powerful and considerably better built as well. > >>I believe that many P&S innovations will make their way into the >>pro cameras; indeed some P&S style cameras may overtake the pro >>cameras, just as networks of little PC's took over mainframe >>computer rooms. So now is a great time to do some serious >>comparisons, especially since so many current pro cameras appear to >>be made as though they still should hold film and are like the >>mainframe dinosaurs that mostly disappeared. > >I appreciate what you're saying and agree with much of it. However, >each tool, in my opinion, needs to be compared to a comparable tool >to be meaningful. The only meaningful comparison that I can imagine >making with the M8 would be the Epson RD1 - which to my knowledge are >the only two precision RF digital cameras currently available. >Comparing either one of them to the best P&S, or even a DSLR, or >medium format back, simply won't help me in any meaningful way; >because I'm extremely interested in a manual RF digital with >dependable build quality which will take fine optics. I don't care >who makes it. It appears that for the foreseeable future we have two >choices to compare; with Zeiss, as we learned this morning, >apparently waiting for some technological leap before leaping in. > >Regards, >George Lottermoser >george@imagist.com > > > > > >_______________________________________________ >Leica Users Group. >See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information