Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/08/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I understand the money-saving allure of digital(no film or processing, just memory cards, ink, new printers,new computers and software,,,) and it certainly DOES make sense for a pro using hundreds or thousands of rolls of film a year. the confusing part for me is the way that serious amateurs, who would have balked at the price of a Leica and 3 lenses or a new Hasselblad system just a few years ago will rush out, change to an new system (?Brand C) for 50% more money- all for a camera that may be as "stale" as last week's toast in 2-3 years. I don't deny the utility, quality, or ease of digital- I just feel like Moose Peterson and his exclamation point-studded magazine reviews has taken over a previously sane world. Allen >Yep, considering people were paying $13,000 for digital cameras with >1/3 the resolution five years ago. Until this past spring cheap was >$2,000! > > >On Wednesday, August 20, 2003, at 12:11 PM, Martin Howard wrote: > >>Red Dawn wrote: >> >>>I'm stunned....really cheap consumer digital SLRs have arrived sooner >>>than I imagined... >> >>$900 is considered "really cheap" these days? >> >>M. >> >>-- >>To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html >> >Associate not with evil men, lest you increase their number. - Frank Herbert > >-- >To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html