Benjamin
Registered Snoozer
Yes please, kill the LCD screen'.
Also, as I've mentioned before, I really think that they should ditch the more traditional, but slightly grotesque and oversized M shape. Why pretend it's something that it isn't? Make a proper digital camera. I already have a normal film M, and I love it dearly.
I don't need some pretender.
Be bold and make it more like an M5!
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photograph...ca-M6/M6-Special/M6-Electronic-1981/index.htm
Benjamin
Also, as I've mentioned before, I really think that they should ditch the more traditional, but slightly grotesque and oversized M shape. Why pretend it's something that it isn't? Make a proper digital camera. I already have a normal film M, and I love it dearly.
I don't need some pretender.
Be bold and make it more like an M5!
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photograph...ca-M6/M6-Special/M6-Electronic-1981/index.htm
Benjamin
Last edited:
krishilife
Member
Pickett Wilson,
No, not all of them are crap. In my opinion fewer people with their digits can make good pics than those with film cameras. I see it looking at my friend's pics. Those who have/had film have much better hit ratio than those with digitals. I can understand the reason to have digital, especially for those who make money doing photography. I also used to observe my friends if they made any progress since they bought digital camera, and I can't see any. These pics after 2, 3 years of using digital look as bad as before. I think that's because there is no cost of making mistakes (other than recharging the battery). I pay for slides and processing at photolab, and I'm more and more satisfied with my results. I tried to explain this process to my friends, but all I hear is "life is too short".
However M9 with full frame and NO LCD is an interesting idea.
No, not all of them are crap. In my opinion fewer people with their digits can make good pics than those with film cameras. I see it looking at my friend's pics. Those who have/had film have much better hit ratio than those with digitals. I can understand the reason to have digital, especially for those who make money doing photography. I also used to observe my friends if they made any progress since they bought digital camera, and I can't see any. These pics after 2, 3 years of using digital look as bad as before. I think that's because there is no cost of making mistakes (other than recharging the battery). I pay for slides and processing at photolab, and I'm more and more satisfied with my results. I tried to explain this process to my friends, but all I hear is "life is too short".
However M9 with full frame and NO LCD is an interesting idea.
Wouter
Well-known
But it would be nice to have a full frame digital rangefinder that somehow forces you to concentrate on compositional skills. I would certainly go for it. My situation now is that I tend to use less film, not because I don't like it - on the contrary - but because technical support here is rapidly deteriorating. What use is it to have a superb camera and lens, shoot on film and then see your precious images spoiled by low-quality labs ?
Nevertheless, I just bought an M6 ... hoping to see the day that the concept of digital film is developed further, so that we can continue to use our beautiful equipment in the digital era.
Nevertheless, I just bought an M6 ... hoping to see the day that the concept of digital film is developed further, so that we can continue to use our beautiful equipment in the digital era.