Photographers, like many others, are caught up
in the NNBNDNHI loop.
Not Needed But Next
Door Neighbor Has It
It started with, maybe, personal computers and moved on to HD TV, cell
phones, PDAs, everything with electronics in it. I have a P3-6ooEB
processor but the guy next door has a P3-4 800 , he has a cell phone
that takes pictures so I need one too, and on and on.
I have a 20D that I got quite a while ago and now I "need" a 40D or 50D
because they're there! I haven't reached the point where the 20D
doesn't do it for me any more, BUT the 40D and 50D are out there and
the "guy next door has one"...... 8^)
Bob
mlent@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
You know, I have to wonder about something, Mark... Maybe you're the
guy who can answer this for me. I wonder why it is that photographers
CAN'T use a digital camera for longer than a year or two? Why is it
that we feel we have to have mind-crushing amounts of maga-pixels when
a 6mp camera will produce excellent results for most print work? Why is
it that we have to have THE latest gear? I'm not fussing at you, just
kind of wondering out loud here. I have a D100 and a few D200's and I
am perfectly content to use them and WILL use them for several more
years. My clients are happy with the images they receive and quite
honestly, I just don't see a need to upgrade to a D3x when what I have
does the job and does it very, very well.
Just remember too that if you DO go back to film that the
"digital" image you get from your scanner and the digital image
generated within a camera are two very different beasts. Good luck with
this and let us know what you've decided.
--
/////
( O O )
--------------------oOOO-----O----OOOo-----73 de w8imo@xxxxxxxx------
I plan to live forever. So far, so good......
|
