> Nah. It's never too late. And digital will get better and better, and
simpler to use as well. With film, the technology and ergonmetrics are
pretty well figured out, while we are still figuring out what a digital
camera ought to be and do. Present-day cameras (digital and film
wunderbricks) are far too complex, being encrusted with so many features
that nobody can remember how to take a picture, and burdened with
misfeatures like agonizing shutter lag and slow picture storage time
andinadequate capacity. Not to mention battery problems.
>
> Joe Gwinn
>
Thanks Joe, I needed that.
This is the most sensible statement on the argument I've read for awhile. It
is exactly why I haven't switched to AF film wunderbricks. I've spent a good
part of today trying to get a used HP film scanner working, and have finally
come to the conclusion it has to go back to the seller. (will work fine in
slide and negative mode, but not print mode, diagnosed as lid sensor switch
mal-functioning).
As some of you know, I've been seriously considering the Olympus C-5050,
but after this afternoons digital frustrations, am not so sure. I know the
two aren't directly connected, but somehow I've just been reminded that
maybe there is enough frustration in owning a computer, without an expensive
short-lived digital camera too, at least for a while yet.
I think tomorrow I'll load up an OM1n and 35RC with slide film, and go have
some fun.
Wayne
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|