I've just been reading John Hudson's notes and Moose's long response ( as
well as what AG and others wrote).
I'm continuing to use both. The jury is still out for me. I still like large
format
negatives. But I don't have a Full Frame digital (yet). And an M9 will
probably be always out of my reach - not to mention the Leica S-2 which is
about $35,000 - $43,000NZ body only at my local photo shop (see
http://www.photo.co.nz/newprods/newleica_dig.htm) and lenses
(http://www.photo.co.nz/newprods/newleica-s_lenses.htm) $ 8,000 -
12,000..
Digital is in many ways easier, especially if I decide for whatever reason to
not use a tripod. But sometimes I also decide, having seen the results 'on
screen' to go back and re-take the shot on film if at all possible.
I *have* taken (rose flower) shots with the E-3 and zuiko 100/2 which yielded
prints that I don't think I could match on film. But I was working exclusively
with digital that day. And as I've written before, I am working on a successor
book to a man some of whose film shots were amazingly good.
I note what AG says about the characteristics of different sensors, and since
he takes a lot more photos than me I try to absorb his experience.
Perhaps I'm too easily distracted, and also wanting to emulate the film
experiences of great photographer friends who walked this earth before me.
Maybe I need to concentrate on one process only. Don't know.
I *have* just taken the step of investigating Picture Window Pro.
Brian Swale.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|