Again I pretty much agree with you AG.
I have noticed that I do take better pictures overall with digital than film
- and like you, I think it's due entirely to the instant feedback from the
digital camera - but I will say that film makes you think more about your
shot. Maybe that was the problem for us? To much thinking and worrying about
things, since you know,say you're maybe 1/2 way through the roll and don't
wanna waste 18 exposures. Whereas with digital, at worst you'll have to
delete a shot or two from the card to make room for another shot. The
biggest worry is maybe how much battery life is left - but while that is a
real BIG worry with my Oly P & S, it's not now such a worry with the 300D (I
can use it for nearly two days on one full charge, or around about 300 shots
[with not much flash usage]- and it only takes 90 minutes to recharge the
battery). I might have to start worryng a bit more about space on the card
since I've upped the quality and starting using RAW - but I load the pics
onto my PC and delete them on the the card ASAP anyways.
I feel a lot happier taking the 300D out shooting than the OM2SP I had - the
OM2SP used batteries faster than I can credit. Even the Minolta 7000 AF
wasn't 1/2 as bad as the OM2 SP - and the Minolta 7000 has AF, an LCD screen
on top, program modes [which means using a CPU] and even a built in winder!
In fact the Minolta 7000 was amazingly frugal with batteries. The OM2
classic is also so frugal on batteries that it was never an issue. The Canon
A1 is also suprisingly frugal with batteries - being a multi-mode camera,
with a clever CPU, and a very informative LED numerals viewfinder, and an EM
controlled shutter I had expected it to be a bit heavy on batteries. But
again, no worries there I'm very glad to say :)
In short, I think that overall digital is much better than film. I think
film cameras will physically outlast digital cameras though - they were much
better built! But I also suspect that the fewer moving parts of the DSLRs
and the better electronics may prove to be their long-term saving graces -
and may give them unexpected longevity. Time will eventually tell. Will
there be a strong s/h market for Rebels, 5Ds, D200s, D80s, E1s, E500s, etc.
in, say, 20 years time? I think its way too early to make up my mind on that
yet.
Allan
PS No trees were harmed in the sending of this message and a very large
number of electrons were asked their permission to be terribly
inconvenienced. (And threw a party for them afterwards for being really cool
about it).
Disrupting the unnatural balance that you, as a conscious human being and a
confused mass of energy, have created.
-Disturb the mind -
>From: AG Schnozz <agschnozz@xxxxxxxxx>
>Reply-To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
>To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [OM] Looking back and forward
>Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 13:46:31 -0800 (PST)
>
>
>Over the weekend I did some scanning and worked on a photo
>project. One thing that I noticed as I dug through 20 years of
>slides is that prior to Digital, a lot of my images are quite
>dreadful. What I thought was good is now pedestrian. In
>reality, I probably only took two to three "portfolio grade"
>pictures per year. You've already seen most of them. In the
>past three years, since going digital, I've shot more "portfolio
>grade" images each year than all the previous years combined.
>
>Much of that is through sheer quantity. But another aspect is
>the instant-feedback. Looking at the instant-review provides a
>rather crude "hey moron!" moment to you. What looked fantastic
>in the viewfinder yields a stark reminder as to why you're still
>flying a desk for a living. Right away you know that the idea
>stunk up the show. How many slides I've thrown away because I
>didn't catch the errant branch, slanted horizon, or lopsided
>composition. A quick "chimp" will yield greater feedback to
>photography improvement than nearly anything else. Chimps are
>not just for exposure!
>
>What about the tool itself? I'd suggest that my old OM-2S is
>capable of better images than my digitals, but in reality it's
>more a situation of what is more appropriate for a given
>purpose. The E-1 might lack some of the "resolution" and
>"detail" of some other digital cameras, but it's the rare 35mm
>film image that even comes close to matching it.
>Shutter-vibration, the archilies' heal of the OM series, has bit
>more images than I ever care to admit. I like to wax poetic
>about the OM's, but I'm reminded every time I use one just why
>it is that they aren't my primary axes anymore. They still
>serve a purpose, but usually only when it is advantageous to use
>it.
>
>I was looking at some Grand Canyon pictures taken exactly two
>years ago. The Velvia slides have a "depth" to them the digital
>images don't. It's subtle, but there. The digital images are
>sharper, but the film images just possess a "yummy" look to
>them. So many of my old pictures had the same lovely
>tonalities, but something else made the entire image lame.
>
>During my several years of B&W shooting, I also grew so much as
>a photographer. I recognize this self-imposed limitation as a
>critical part of my growth. It'll take me a couple years,
>though, before I revisit those negatives in digital form.
>
>One doesn't shoot 20,000 pictures in a year without doing some
>growing. It's inevitable. But at the same time, I've
>discovered that for my own artistic expression that I've
>exhausted my old thoughts and visions. Finally, I'm starting to
>get the urge to break free from the bonds of my photographic
>history and express myself in new uncharted territories. This
>is exciting and refreshing. Just as Bill Barber has
>rediscovered photography through pin-hole cameras, I'm seeking a
>look which is both unique and refreshing--putting the emphasis
>on form and shape, light and dark and eye-flow. I want the
>picture to be "music to the eyes". An experience, not just
>something to "look at" but to draw you in with your emotional
>being.
>
>This is my goal for 2007--to create and implement this new
>"vision" and to have a gallery showing of it by year's end. This
>is both attainable and reasonable. My travel plans will be
>influenced by this as well as other aspects of my personal and
>professional life. Meanwhile, I must not look down on my
>previous work because it doesn't fit my new current vision.
>
>AG
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>==============================================
>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================
_________________________________________________________________
Be the first to hear what's new at MSN - sign up to our free newsletters!
http://www.msn.co.uk/newsletters
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|