RE: [Leica] digitalrebel

["bdcolen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>]

Your first response did get through, but not with the first part
attached in its second iteration - or something like that -:-)

For the vast majority of those on this list, who only take photos for
their own pleasure and the pleasure of friends and family, it matters
not where the digital bar goes in the future. At this point, cameras
with 5-6.8 mgp processors can produce stunning images up to 13 x 19 -
and with the help of computer manipulation, can produce stunning
posters...Yes, some pros may be forced to upgrade with annoying
regularity - but even that is no longer all that likely with the advent
of digital cameras that can shoot 10 fps and produce images of
sufficiently high quality for newspaper and magazine reproduction. It is
quite telling, btw, that both Canon and Nikon are introducing lenses
clearly designed to be used with smaller - rather than full-size - ccds.
I'd be willing to be that the Canon EOS1Ds is going to be Canon's only
full-frame digital for a long-time to come, and will have relatively
limited use for specific purposes.

And remember, btw, that I was the one who a number of months back said
that the new Nikon pro camera would NOT be full-frame, but would have
faster capture and write speed, have improved electronics, etc. etc. At
that time I was pretty universally told I was a twit, and that Nikon
would have to produce a full-frame camera. Wellllllll....:-)

B. D.

- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Douglas
Herr
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 12:10 PM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: RE: [Leica] digitalrebel


bdcolen <bdcolen@earthlink.net> wrote:

> The oft repeated canard that digital forces one to 'trade up' every 
> 12-18 months is pretty hilarious when read so often on a list which is

> probably dominated by people who are using film equipment that is 
> anywhere from 30-60 years old, including lenses which "glow" - meaning

> they produce soft, flare prone images and often suffer from other 
> optical aberrations. If one can comfortably use a Leica lens 
> manufactured in, say, 1955, a Leica lens which may not have even then 
> been up to the standards being set by Zeiss and Nikon, and a lens 
> which is now a Coke-bottle-bottom when compared to the latest Leica 
> lenses, why can't one buy a 5 mgp digital camera and be happy with it 
> for the next five to 10 years?

A 5 mgp camera may enable the photographer to produce
technically-competetive images for a year or so but the digital bar
keeps getting raised at a rapid pace, making the entire camera
technically obsolete.

In the right hands, 30-year-old Leica equipment is still making images
which on a technical level are still very competetive because today's
film is so much better than it was 30 years ago.  To make your analogy
more meaningful put Kodachrome X or High Speed Ektachrome in the
30-year-old Leica; I guarantee those photos won't be technically
competetive.  Film cameras are upgraded each time we buy upgraded films,
a rather small cash outlay vs. the big expense of a digital camera which
depreciates to nothing in a matter of months.

- --
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