Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/05/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]on 5/23/04 11:39 AM, Peter Klein at pklein@2alpha.net wrote: > I'm in a bit of a quandry about the whole film vs. digital situation. I'm > going to muse out loud, and I invite others to join me. But note that this > is a practical matter, not a religious issue, from a guy who rarely prints > above letter size. :-) > > I would like to change over some (not all) of my photography to digital, > and main reason is simple--*time*. Dynamic range and image quality issues > concern me. But the main issue is time. Or lack thereof. If history is any guide, speed wins over quality once the difference in quality is small enough for the users' purposes - and that's how 35mm dominated news photography as long as it did. The market is telling us the same thing is happening now with digital. Digital will be mainstream for the forseable future, but I'm not willing to concede the quality issue until my supply of frozen K25 dwindles to nothing. The stuff (K25) is glorious. I use the time spent scanning and such as a reason to edit my take more, to be more selective. If it were easier I'd have a lot more drek on my website. I'm not blindly clinging to the past though. I've got several R lenses and the options for using them with digital cameras are good and will only get better. Since I like using a viewfinder that is designed for manual focus I'll hold out for the Digital Module R rather than use the EOS+adapter route, unless market pressures in the next few months make it imperative that I speed up my workflow. As it is there is no marketing reason to use film any more. Everything I've sold in the last couple of years aside from prints has been in digital form - and my printing is all digital as well. I treasure my Leicaflex SL but the future belongs to digital. Doug Herr Birdman of Sacramento http://www.wildlightphoto.com