>From
>>
>"The CanoScan FS4000US will be my last 35mm scanner. It's more than adequate
>to capture the detail in my images going back to the 1960's. Digital cameras
>are improving so fast that I doubt I'll be using 35mm after 2002. Current
>digital cameras approach 35mm in quality. There's plenty of debate on
>whether they've surpassed 35mm already, but they certainly will by 2002. Any
>digital camera you buy today will be obsolete in a year or two, but you have
>to weigh the cost of the camera against the savings in film and processing.
>The scale is tipping ever more strongly towards digital. Film sales will
>soon start dropping like a rock; prices will go up and less popular films
>will disappear. It's over for film."
I used a digital camera at work 2 yrs ago, and the biggest problems were:
It ate batteries.
It didn't focus close enough.
It was awkward to use.
It was slow viewing and transfering images.
You've only got one effective sensor speed.
It was very expensive.
I believe it will take a few years before the quality and cost issues equal
film. It costs $7 to develop negatives and get double 4x6 prints. How
much does it cost to print digital prints? At least $1 each for 4x6. Film
is much cheaper. The scale is still strongly tipping towards film.
Mike Duncan
