You can not post to an archived thread.
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright Warning! Click for Details ]
In Reply to: Re: Digital -VS- Traditional posted by Van on April 21, 2001 at 20:02:09:
Van,As an early adopter to digital photography many years back and one who grew up using many Leicas and owned a Hasselblad... Cheap digital is just that. Cheap. Sure it works, but what is your true desired end purpose? Obviously digital on the cheap means you are stuck with the quality of glass and lens on the unit. With better, more expensive prosumer digital cameras you can interchange lenses as is done with 35mm/medium format/etc. Of course THAT is when digital cameras can get more expensive than the 35mm equivalent.
In the end you need to decide what is best for your photography needs/desires. As for my current digital rig, i went for the Canon D30. A good in between of pro and consumer with the ability to use pro lenses and use real lighting/flash units.
The choice is yours.
Enjoy the music,
Steven R. Rochlin
Follow Ups:
You can not post to an archived thread.
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright Warning! Click for Details ]