clinton_abe Posted October 21, 2005 Share Posted October 21, 2005 I see that Agfa will probably be liquidated by the end of the year. Also, Kodak states that by 2008, digital will account for 80% of their business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grinder Posted October 21, 2005 Share Posted October 21, 2005 Can we plese stop poting the exact same crap everyday around here. Asimple look at unified view would show this topic is old and boring. If you have a question many of us will be happy to try and help but this CRAP is getting old. Thank you , Grinder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anupam Posted October 21, 2005 Share Posted October 21, 2005 Ok. So why do you care? Are you a salesman trying to sell me a digital or are you really anxious that I might die of heartbreak when film is no longer sold at Walgreens? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clinton_abe Posted October 21, 2005 Author Share Posted October 21, 2005 Donald- I only post on this (Minolta) photo.net forum, but it's good to know that I am not the only one who tries to get the non-believers to realize the truth. If you don't like it, don't read the thread. The subject line is your hint that you're not going to like the post. I don't know what country you live in, but where I live, it's still a free country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keith_van_hulle1 Posted October 21, 2005 Share Posted October 21, 2005 Yup, and any fool is free to post more worthless crap to waste disk space and screw up the indexes to make it harder to search. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clinton_abe Posted October 22, 2005 Author Share Posted October 22, 2005 Anu- What you use is your decision, but it seems to me that Minolta users, or at least the ones on this forum, seem to be stuck in a time warp. They're still using equipment out of production for over thirty years. Is it any wonder that KM is in a dire financial situation as far as cameras are concerned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen hazelton Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 Reminds me of Saturday Night Live when Franco died. For weeks afterward, their newscast included the announcement that Franco "is still dead." Seriously, everyone knows film is in decline, nobody knows if there will still be film around in 20 years (or 5), so not much point going on about it. And I wouldn't have been surprised if digital didn't already account for 80% of Kodak's business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john falkenstine Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 But...bad photography is alive and well.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stan_forsightness Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 Film is dead? Funny I just used it this morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clinton_abe Posted October 22, 2005 Author Share Posted October 22, 2005 Mauricio- I always love to see those who fail to read the subject line. If you check, it reads- 'Even more proof film is dying'. You'll notice I used the word 'DYING', not 'DEAD'. No wonder film is dying, film users can't read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_hohner Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 Clinton, how about reading the forum name? This is the MINOLTA forum. This discussion is off-topic here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clinton_abe Posted October 22, 2005 Author Share Posted October 22, 2005 Okay, Michael, just for you, I'll make a connection between my post and the Minolta forum- "Minolta users, here's some bad news- it looks like Agfa will be closing up shop and their fine products will be no more. And I read that Kodak expects that by 2008, 80% of their business will come from digital. I hope that I'll be able to get film for my Maxxum 9. Either that or I'm hoping that KM will release a full sized sensor DSLR so I'll be able to use my collection of lenses the way Minolta designed them, instead of having to take into account the smaller size sensor. I don't care if it has Sony on the front. Any one heard anything?" See Mike, I tied everything together for you. Happy now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Goose Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 As long as there is demand there will be supply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clinton_abe Posted October 22, 2005 Author Share Posted October 22, 2005 Uncle Goose, what you say is true...but at what cost? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_hohner Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 How silly! Why don't we also discuss shoes and socks here? I'm sure most Minolta photographers wear them, too. I just made the connection, see? <p> This forum needs some moderation... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerry297 Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 If film is dead, then I suppose that makes me a necrophiliac, because my choice is to continue using a "dead" medium. Why don't you all stop this incessant and stupid bickering. Channel this useless and wasted energy into taking pictures, not criticizing those who are different in philosophy than you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stwrtertbsratbs5 Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 Why not just google pnet and read the other 9,382 threads just like this one? We're all glad that your happy with your new digital wondercam. Now just leave those who shoot film in peace. And start saving your money because your new digicam is already obsolete. Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_h.1 Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 "it's good to know that I am not the only one who tries to get the non-believers to realize the truth." Its delightful to know that your ego is fulfilled by something incredibly unimportant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben conover Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 I agree with the previous post. If your ego is stimulated by preaching what you see as the truth, then organized religion would be a better bet for you, probably pays more too! A for digital vs. film, it is daft but like Bob says there are always newcomers to this site who take up the thread and have a go. I was lying awake in bed last night thinking why I have collected 5 old film cameras, when one cheapo digital would have done the job. For me the reasons are obvious. I owned a $50 digital camera, it died very quickly. Now I have cameras and lenses that are very well made and produce images which digital cannot, because I like to use very slow B+W film. For my purposes the film cameras are perfect, but if I could afford a good digital camera, I would use it as a lightmeter and for street snaps. Film may die one day, just as the people who painted the rock art in Africa died thousands of years ago. However, the rock art is still there...... I found the subject of 'Hal' far more interesting recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael R Freeman Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 <i>And I wouldn't have been surprised if digital didn't already account for 80% of Kodak's business. -- Stephen H</i><P> A direct quote from <a href="http://money.cnn.com/services/tickerheadlines/for5/200510191403DOWJONESDJONLINE001024_FORTUNE5.htm">this article</a> (Kodak's 3rd Quarter sales from <u>this year</u>):<P> "Digital-product sales rose to $1.89 billion from $1.28 billion, while traditional film and camera sales declined to $1.66 billion from the $2.08 billion of last year. Digital earnings came to $10 million in the quarter."<P> Looks like 53% to me. <P> <i>As long as there is demand there will be supply -- Uncle Goose</i><P> Looks like, although it's definitely in decline, there is still plenty of demand. $1.66 BILLION for ONE quarter, for ONE company. Guess there are still lots of "non-believers" with their head stuck in the sand.<P> Film is still a "cash cow" for EK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_bedell Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 Clinton - We'll believe that you're not just trying to start a flame war when you post an equal number of "(remotely affordable) digital dynamic range and black and white suck; and you lose all your photos when your hard drive dies every three years" threads. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ofey_kalakar Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 How in god's green Earth could film ever die? It was never ALIVE to begin with! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kahn Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 So.....Have you heard that film is dead? (Sorry - too much time on my hands today, and I couldn't resist.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clinton_abe Posted October 22, 2005 Author Share Posted October 22, 2005 Amazing how a simple statement can really stir up a big debate on this forum. I mean no one wants to talk about the KonicaMinolta KMB-1 camera bag that Shirish asked about a few days back. Is it the 'Subject Line' or the 'body of the post', which was based on recent news updates on dpreview.com, that raises such emotions. Don't shoot me, I'm just the messenger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_linn Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 No need to shoot you, Clinton. You will be dead and gone long before film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now