> There's been a lot of discussion of digital versus film and which is
"best".
> Much of this, at least for me, misses many of the points of why I won't go
> digital for some time:
>
> Firstly I'd be investing in equipment that will be largely obselete in a
> couple of years. Something like Moore's Law probably applies to electronic
> camera gear where performance/capacity double every couple of years (at
half
> the price). I'm very unlikely to see decent used values after a few years
> (unlike Oly gear).
Keep quiet, will ya! I want to see this Oly gear devalued to almost zero.
After all, I didn't buy it for an investment, NOR TO USE, but for
errr......, aaaaa....., my museum! With more and more people suddenly
realizing film is dead, the value should drop off rather quickly, and you
and I should both be able to pick up that 300/4.5 for about the cost of a
hamburger.
> I still like a slide show.
But can't you already get one of those nifty quality projectors that project
your computer images on a screen? Don't cost much. Who needs a slide
projector anymore? We can already pick up a spare Kodak 760H for about the
price of a bulb, for aaaa...., the museum of course.
>
> In summary, film (plus Oly gear) ideally meets my requirements, provides
> excellent value for money and largely keeps its value.
> Mike Blayney (happy with the gear I've got - well almost, there is that
> 300mm 4.5 I saw the other day......................).
< 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 >
|