I had a little spare time today. My mother was in the emergency room at
a nearby hospital and I was able to get to the emergency room while she
was still there. Around noon she was taken for X-Rays and a CAT scan.
So, off I went to get a sandwich. With a little time left, I saw a
camera store and thought I'd take a look at what they had.
What a surprise, not a film camera in the store. Not a one!
So, where am I in all this? I still shoot mostly film, and I always
shoot film when it comes to getting photos that I want to keep for a
very long time- translate family photos.
Yes, I own 2 digital P&S cameras. One is a Canon S1 IS and the other is
a Fuji 9000. The Canon was given to me as a tool for work and I won
the Fuji. Love them both. The variable angle viewfinder on the S1 has
literally saved my life a few times when I've needed to get the camera
close to dangerous machinery. I could never have done that with a film
camera.
But last week I also bought an Olympus IS-5. I already own an IS-3 and
a 30. Oh, yes, the IS-5 cost me $61 on yabe. $61. I think this is the
future of film.
There are "fools" like me that will buy film cameras for as long as they
can, and there are others, many others, that have dropped it like a hot
potato. (Does that have an "e" in it)? (:>
Many of you remember the amount of OM-related gear that I would find in
my travels around the Midwest and post it here. A few months ago I went
into Midwest Photo to see some of my friends. Interestingly, I had
moved to Columbus and had not had as much time to visit as I did when I
lived elsewhere. At any rate, I went into the store to look around.
What I saw was still a decent quantity of MF, and hardly any film-based
35mm. Much of that original 35mm space has been converted to DIGITAL.
Midwest is now an authorized dealer (WOW) for Nikon, Olympus and a
decent number of digital cameras, but not Canon.
I remember walking out of the store a little weak in the knees thinking
that film is dead and I didn't even know it.
Cheap film cameras will continue to be sold. A few people like me will
have film developed, and get a CD at the same time so they can still
email a few photos to loved ones, but film is dying and the future is
digital.
This happened faster that the conversion from tape to CD's. Whew.
Ali, what ever you write/wrote is moot. Most people won't even care.
Regards,
Brian Huber
-----Original Message-----
From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Winsor Crosby
Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 6:23 PM
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] Re: Your assistance...digital vs. analog
I agree. A local paper is probably not interested in the eternal
debate about which produces the better images. They are primarily
writing for either a nonphotographic or point and shoot audience.
They want to know what more whether they can get their prints at the
same places, if there are new ways to get them printed like the
internet and if they will look different. They want to know how easy
it is to print it themselves, whether they save money doing it, and
to provide images to family over the internet. They also might be
interested in the accelerating disappearance of film products and how
their film is no longer processed optically anyway and their digital
images may be better than the automated scans in the middle of
processing of their film.
Winsor
Long Beach, California, USA
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|