[Leica] digital transformation

[pklein at 2alpha.net (Peter Klein)]

I shoot both film and digital.

If I want a high level of fine detail, a certain "look," very precise
focus and dynamic range, I shoot film in a Leica.  I have to put up with
processing time and cost, scanning, dust, and physical storage issues. For
me, the Leica is still the best tool for people photography, particularly
in low light.

I choose digital when I want instant gratification, convenience, speed,
smoothness, flexible white balance, and the ability to shoot as much as
I want.  I have to put up with noise (often uglier than film grain),
narrow dynamic range, Bayer artifacting and aliasing, and more
postproccesing to get a decent print. Plus the fact that a 5-6 mp camera
has noticeably less fine detail than I'd like on an 8x10 or bigger, and
that digital is a never-ending money pit with much faster depreciation
than Leica.

I waited longer than many to get my first digital camera.  I got a used
Coolpix 990 as a learning tool, shot it casually for a year or two.
When it became clear that the RD-1 was not what I wanted, I bought
an E-1.  I still consider it a transitional camera.  I may or may not
stick with the E-system, depending upon what happens on both the Olympus
and the digital RF fronts.  But I felt that it was time to put one foot
firmly into the digital world. And I had some nice Olympus lenses
sitting forlornly in the closet.

I've scanned film and printed digitally for a few years now.  I did wet
B&W darkroom work in the 70s and 80s.  With MIS Ultratone inks and
Picture Window Pro, I find I can do pretty much what I did in the wet
darkroom, and do it better and faster.  As others have noted, the prints
are a bit different, but I think they are as pleasing as all but the
very best wet prints.  There is indeed a special magic to watching wet
prints come up in a tray, but it's nice not to breathe chemical fumes
and stand in the dark for hours.

--Peter