>From: DaEyeGuy@xxxxxxx
...
>Are any of you considering trying a digital, have tried one recently, getting
>the bug, or all of the above??
I've been involved with digital cameras for over ten years, and have been
watching it grow up. I worked in Tektronix's Computer Research Laboratory,
and Tek also made large CCD imagers for professional telescopy. These were
256k and 512k pixel arrays, and were cooled with liquid nitrogen, and cost
well into five figures -- just for the chip!
In 1994, I bought an Apple QuickTake. It was lots of fun, but basically a
toy. That got my dad fascinated, and he bought the Olympus D-600L when it
came out. He has since taken several prize-winning photos with it, lightly
manipulated on a PowerMac and printed on an Epson StylusColor 800. I've
been very impressed with what the 600 can do, at least up to 8" x 10" or so.
I've been eyeing the D-620L on the used market. It's price has crashed
since the 2000 came out. When the rumored ZLR version of the 2000 arrives,
I expect the 620 price to drop further.
I currently have a Vivicam 3100. It's a piece of junk, but okay for simple
snapshots and such. I've been threatening to rip into it, and with the help
of a cheap teleconverter or extension tube, put an OM mount on it. The
imager is tiny, so a 50mm lens will probably be the equivalent of a 250mm
telephoto, but it seems to be an appealing experiment. Register distance
should not be a problem -- I'll just use long screws with double-nuts to
adjust the distance.
Digital is still moving fast, and will for perhaps another five years or
so. This means there is no future value in digital cameras, unless you look
FAR into the future. It may be that certain models will be as valuable as a
Brownie someday, but I wouldn't buy any digital on speculation of its
collectability!
Another problem is ink-jet print longevity and cost. Ink-jet prints can
fade in as little as a year or so, unless kept in the dark, where they
can't be seen! Special (expensive) archival inks are coming available, as
are special (expensive) archival papers, but the aggregate cost is still
far above conventional photography. I got a color laser printer, which does
acceptable, long-lived prints on almost any paper, but color lasers are
still at about $2000, and don't quite have the quality of a $400 ink-jet.
In fast-moving technology, you can get some great bargains if you are
willing to have the "State Of The Art Minus One" level of technology. This
goes for printers and computers as well as cameras. A 150MHz Pentium or
100MHz PowerMac is adequate for most photo manipulation, and the
StylusColor that cost $400 last year can be had for under $200 now.
Since today's new Olympus 2000 will go for half-price next year, why not
buy yesterday's "State Of The Art" at half price today? "Gotta have the
latest and greatest" is an expensive disease! :-)
: Jan Steinman <mailto:jans@xxxxxxxxxxx>
: 19280 Rydman Court, West Linn, OR 97068-1331 USA
: +1.503.635.3229
< 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 >
|