[200q20v] Re: Digital Camera Recommendations - for documenting auto repairs?

[t44tq at mindspring.com]

Phil,
IMHO,
Calling me way out on a limb is a little insulting.

I can see a radical difference between my friend's
N90S w/ 28-80mm f2.8 Nikkor lens and all of the point
and shoots that I've ever used recently, even with the
same exact film.

The digital cameras use similar optics to the better
point and shoot 35mm cameras and are not capable of
resolving as well as film.

As for scanning negatives, if this is too much work and/or
expense, you can have you photos scanned on a CD for a
nominal cost during processing.

I don't feel that any of the currently available inkjet
printers in the price range you mention are up to par with
the dye-sub printers, which still aren't as good as traditional
color prints, IMHO, even in a 4"x6" format.

While you may think me to be rather extreme, I don't take
lightly subjects such as recording one's child's life. I
think that is something that only happens once and should be
treasured as something nearly invaluable. I don't even have
kids and I feel this way. I am not a serious photographer, but
I can see quality results and IMHO, you won't get it with
the currently available digital cameras, even if you use the
digital Canon/Nikon/Fuji bodies that you mention.

In terms of inconvenience, yes, film is not as quick as
emailing JPEGs. I have no problem adopting new technologies,
but you won't get the quality and resolution of film with a
digital solution. The other thing you fail to mention is that
those digital SLR bodies run about $3000 w/o optics. Once you
get a few lenses, you're pushing $4000. Needless to say, you
can buy even an F100 or a prosumer Canon EOS body and a bunch
of very nice lenses for that kind of money.

With 1-hour photo processing readily available unless you live
way out in the countryside, the only downside is that you actually
have to go to the processor and/or ship your rolls of film to
have them processed.

You chide me for being so negative about the Audi/Bose stereo system in our=
 cars, but if you ask any audiophile, I'm willing to bet that
you will universally be told that the system is crap. I have no
problem with people who don't mind the crappy system and are willing
to put up with it- however, I do take exception to those who take
the extra step of defending the Bose system and say that it actually
sounds good- those are two different things.

As fellow Audi drivers, my feeling is that generally, we are a rather techn=
ically-minded bunch who appreciate quality, fine engineering and the like. =
As such, I don't see what is wrong with pointing out the faults of stuff li=
ke the Bose audio system or the current state of digital photography. Maybe=
 I am extreme- I appreciate things that are engineered to a high level, tha=
t exhibit the highest standards of quality. As an example, I have an IWC GS=
T chronograph- one of the finest automatic-winding Swiss chronographs you c=
an buy, in terms of mechanical finish and engineering- IWC's finish of the =
7750 movement is one of the highest in the industry, not exceeded in its pr=
ice range with the possible exception of the Blancpain Trilogy series at tw=
ice the price and the nitrided Titanium finish is not exceeded by any other=
 watch manufacturer regardless of price. Yes, its MSRP is even greater than=
 a Rolex Submariner, but it's a higher quality piece by orders of magnitude=
, for someone wh!
o is into these sorts of esoteric things.

I'm sure that now you're going to call me crazy, that's fine, just don't at=
tack me personally for being an enthusiast.

Have a happy Thanksgiving.

Regards,
Taka Mizutani