For the average enthusiast who needs snapshots to share - yes - stick with film.
Dave
At 09:22 PM 12/03/2002 +0000, you wrote:
My E20p costing 1200 GBP is making images in every way inferior to my EOS100 35 mm camera costing 300 GBP. It is just a lot more convenient. Except for the pc the cd the inkjet printer etc... Seems a very expensive way to get a few snapshots. Chris mailto:nimbo@ukonline.co.uk http://www.chrissdomain.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-photoforum@listserver.isc.rit.edu [mailto:owner-photoforum@listserver.isc.rit.edu]On Behalf Of David Thompson Sent: 03 December 2002 00:52 To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students Subject: Digital getting better? Hi everyone, I saw the article in Discover Magazine, and hunting up the links. This looks impressive enough for me to seriously consider digital now, versus film, for my 35mm shooting. Here's the link: http://www.foveon.com/ Dave "I saw a subliminal advertising executive. But only for a second."- Steven Wright
