jmiska

<p>I enjoy film and digital photography both. There are some things about each that are unique and appealing. Having said that, I hope film will live on. If it can't, so be it. Still, I enjoy the look and the process, if for no other reason than to still do something without a computer, and to know that my pictures will be around longer than the hard drives the digital ones are stored on.</p>

<p>Many technologies that are no longer commercially viable live on. I read the other day about a new boat for the Americas Cup (in a court battle right now) out of San Diego that can sail twice the speed of the wind and go 40 knots. </p>

<p>I'm sure that 100 years ago there was lots of talk in all the harbors about steam replacing sailing technology, yet here we are with the best boats in history sailing the oceans today. Not for commercial purposes anymore, just because people love the process. Maybe film will survive in some similar way, or maybe it won't, but the people who will decide are the photographers who will choose to keep it alive.</p>

<p>I've seen damage to cameras from both methods:<br>

Several years back my wife had a Kodak P&S that she always tethered to her Mac. Once, upon plugging it in, the camera failed and would no longer start up- it just kept displaying error codes. Kodak determined the failure was caused by voltage through the USB cable (it was out of warranty when this happened). Whether or not Kodak's assessment was accurate, the camera worked perfectly just before being plugged in and never worked again after. <br>

I also saw someone damage the CF pins on a Canon DSLR at work by shoving the CF card in too quickly.<br>

Having seen both, I choose the card reader. I can control how carefully the card goes in. I can't control or see what comes down the USB wire. Why risk a $1000 camera body using it as a substitute for a $10 card reader?</p>