andrew_schank Posted September 12, 2002 Share Posted September 12, 2002 Very funny. Did some folks here actually think this post was serious? I remember when the first Minolta 35mm SLR cameras came out with programming cards you'd install for different types of subjects-we laughed our heads off at the camera store I worked at. Makes me wonder if in the future, human beings will evolve to where they won't even be able to think without some electronic device telling them how to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feli Posted September 12, 2002 Share Posted September 12, 2002 Because my friends who shoot digital keep asking me why my prints glow and theirs don't? feli Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red dawn Posted September 12, 2002 Share Posted September 12, 2002 hey guys!!!! i'm surprised only 1 or 2 posters see the point of David's humourous posting...... david isn't really asking wat he's asking! read carefully and between the lines to see the irony and wit! this is not meant to generate a serious discussion of why digital cameras or Leicas are better! (then again, if i misunderstood him...i'll be eating my words ;p) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglas k. Posted September 12, 2002 Share Posted September 12, 2002 I'll buy a digicam when I can get it with these picture modes: Tri-X in D-76 1:1, TMZ in T-Max 1:4, APX100 in D-76 1:1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alfie wang Posted September 12, 2002 Share Posted September 12, 2002 Digital is fabulous option whenever you need it. Great for street photography. People who ignore the digital possibility ignore at their own peril. On the other hand, we can't forget film. A trusty M3 is unbeatable in that respect. Of course, we need to look at both sides of the coin here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy_piper2 Posted September 12, 2002 Share Posted September 12, 2002 "ask yourself why "professionals" haven't abandoned their Nikons & Canons & Leicas for serious work." Hmm - the newspaper I work for now shoots entirely digital - the Noritsu in back hasn't been run in months. I suppose the staffers may not qualify as 'professionals' - notwithstanding the fact they won the 1999 Pulitzer for news photography. I'll ask them what they think... I'm a fan of film - but both Tuesday and Wednesday nights we were able to get 'digital' pictures of evening 9-11 memorials in NYC, from our own staffer, onto a newspaper page in Denver roughly 25 minutes after he fired the shutter (Tuesday he transmitted from the nearest Starbucks, of all places). Damn powerful pictures, actually. I'll see if I can link to them. Each format has it's strengths... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feli Posted September 12, 2002 Share Posted September 12, 2002 >Digital is fabulous option whenever you need it. Great for street > photography. People who ignore the digital possibility ignore at their own >> peril. -- Albert Wang How is digital great for street photography? Huge shutter lag with a PS and if you are shooting with something like a D1 all of the issues you have with a regular SLR. feli Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_killick Posted September 13, 2002 Author Share Posted September 13, 2002 Technology, eh! Dontcha just love it! Actually, I don't mind digital or computer stuff at all - my beef is just that it should be better designed, simpler, more ergonomic, more intuitive, more likely to last. And I would prefer a camera that just takes pictures well rather than playing music or being a video recorder or a cellphone. Why should technology be so frustrating to use? It's not just me who finds this. For example, Philips Design (www.philipsdesign.com) says: "People are questioning whether new technology actually makes them happier...after all it is people and cultures who ultimately drive technology, and not vice versa." Oh, and I still think film has got a future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy_piper2 Posted September 14, 2002 Share Posted September 14, 2002 Here's an upload of the Wednesday night picture I mentioned above. The other didn't make it to web publication... Dave - I'm with you. Digital devices are going to have to get much closer to the 'look and feel' of a Leica M before I get excited about them for myself... And, so long as time is not a critical issue, scanning film still provides the best of both worlds. Linked image copyright 2002 Rocky Mountain News - Todd Heisler, photographer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travis1 Posted September 15, 2002 Share Posted September 15, 2002 David's point is not that digital is better than Leica, but most likely the reverse. If you fail to see his sacarcism, sorry mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terry_rory Posted September 16, 2002 Share Posted September 16, 2002 We live in a world where you dont just "program a baby" on some camera setting (as David says) but can also "program a baby" for real , genetically! This is going to make these insane (inane?) digital vs analogue debates pale into complete obscurity when the debate is "Digitally determined genetically perfect babies vs old fashioned manually created babies". In fact one of the 'parameters' may be to program the digi-infant to want to be a Leica owner. (Once scientists at Leica Marketing have isolated the 'Leica user' gene.) Billions of currency units around the world are spent on trying to 'program' us all into the desired Intense Leisure Spending patterns in order to re-coup all the surplus 'value' sloshing around wastefully in our savings accounts rather than some industrialists Swiss bank account. It is only a matter of time before they get their hands on our genes to fix these patterns more efficiently. You only have to look at the Nikon v Canon threads on PN to see it has started already. I'm off to the nearest mega-mall now to satisfy some inexplicable craving for some new photo-gadget. I dont know what it is yet but I know I want it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_kastner Posted September 16, 2002 Share Posted September 16, 2002 David, That's my favourite question, so here's my favourite answer: I don't want a feature-packed camera, digi or not. All I want is that my camera does what I want and doesn't do what I don't want. Isn't that simple? That's why it's so expensive! 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