I'm not in deep need of a fight, but an intense dicusssion of some of these issues could be interesting, since some of us are planning to spend some big bucks on an M8 and some of us are on the fence. It's an important decision, so why not have it out right now: what are the **real** objections and strengths of the two systems?
And I'd really like to have it out with the full-frame people. What's so holy about the old 35mm frame size? I simultaneously had Nikon 35mm film and 1.5 crop digital cameras, and a full-frame Nikon mount digital camera, and just lookin gfrom one print to the next, the 1.5 was the one I liked best.
To say nothing about the arguments about DR and post-processing. Film has to be post-processed -- that's why you have an enlarger.
We could even declare these discusssions to be Bill-Amnesty zones, so he could take the gaffer tape off his mouth and say anything he pleased. We could even make it a word-amnesty zone, so anybody could say whatever the *#@&* anybody wants.
Just an idea, but an exceptionally good one, I think.
JC
By the way, I didn't understand the comment above about Jorge and the Malvinas. What's that about?