Just when I think I am tempted by the convenience of digital, this article reminds me the superiority of film cameras. The comparison is correct: $5000 for 5 years or $5000 for 3 lifetimes. It is a no brainer.
the pictures from this isnt going to beat slide film pics right out of the camera. besides being compact and last forever what other advantage does it give a photographer to make a better picture? the lens? Ive seen some of the street photos from renowned photogs, not so great to me. war photos are more compelling. Im talking about content.
One word: Holga.If you've never used one, you have NO idea what you're missing.I shoot professionally, use every combination imaginable, own an M6, Hassies, a 645, and use Canons and Nikons for some gigs, but when I go out for a leisure shoot? Holga.
That doesn't mean film cameras are better, it means they're not getting any better. People consider the lifetime of digital cameras to be short because the technology is always improving and you'll want to replace the body (not the lenses) in a couple years to take advantage of improvements. But film cameras aren't improving - they're just housings for the film, and everyone's shooting on the same film now as they did years ago.If you consider the digital Leica more useful than the film one now, then it will still be in five years, even though you may be able to buy an even better digital version then.
radiofrequencySep 15, 2006
I wouldn't spend $5000 on any other digital camera.
ayeroxorSep 15, 2006
"Could this be the street camera many street photographer is have been waiting for"Um... Three?
chozsunSep 15, 2006
Just when I think I am tempted by the convenience of digital, this article reminds me the superiority of film cameras. The comparison is correct: $5000 for 5 years or $5000 for 3 lifetimes. It is a no brainer.
anagaiSep 15, 2006
the pictures from this isnt going to beat slide film pics right out of the camera. besides being compact and last forever what other advantage does it give a photographer to make a better picture? the lens? Ive seen some of the street photos from renowned photogs, not so great to me. war photos are more compelling. Im talking about content.
Closed AccountSep 15, 2006
One word: Holga.If you've never used one, you have NO idea what you're missing.I shoot professionally, use every combination imaginable, own an M6, Hassies, a 645, and use Canons and Nikons for some gigs, but when I go out for a leisure shoot? Holga.
dinobotSep 15, 2006
When I think of Leicas, I think of Jana Palleska, Michelle Trachtenberg, Holland and a cigarrette break
vodnikSep 15, 2006
You should check out Cosina-Voigtländer! They make great rangefinders, altough not leica-quality.Check out this site or google it<a class="user" href="http://cameraquest.com/">http://cameraquest.com/</a>
hls1Sep 16, 2006
That doesn't mean film cameras are better, it means they're not getting any better. People consider the lifetime of digital cameras to be short because the technology is always improving and you'll want to replace the body (not the lenses) in a couple years to take advantage of improvements. But film cameras aren't improving - they're just housings for the film, and everyone's shooting on the same film now as they did years ago.If you consider the digital Leica more useful than the film one now, then it will still be in five years, even though you may be able to buy an even better digital version then.
suedeSep 16, 2006
@yttrx - I'm sure they'll keep selling the M7.