P3D Re: The future (digital vs. film)

[Michael Kersenbrock <michaelk@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> range.  Almost none of the consumer (< $1,000) digicams have even half
> the features of any 35mm SLR (interchangeable lenses being a big sore
> point).  I haven't seen any consumer digicams that offer manual focus

My wife's Nikon 950 has manual focus (never used), and most all digital cameras
have the equivalent of SLR viewing (the LCD screens).

> and exposure, SLR viewing, interchangeable (not auxiliary) lenses, and

Nikon's auxillary lenses for the 950 seem pretty decent, even if
not the same (although priced as if they were).

> capacity of 36 images at highest resolution out of the box (i.e., no
> need to buy additional storage).
....
> The $125 Olympus Epic Stylus point&shoot
> that I got my wife last year takes better pictures than any < $1000

How many images could that Olympus Epic camera take without having
to buy any additional film other than that included with the camera?  :-)

Yes, I think it'll probably take 5~10 years for digital cameras to
"take over" in a substantial way, and nearly forever before film
is completely gone.

Mike K.

P.S. - Take a look at the new Nikon D1.  It's not a consumer camera,
       but it's way way cheaper than the zillion dollar digital cameras
       of the past.  It's roughly comparable to Nikon's pro 35mm film cameras
       in terms of price and features -- but digital.  And is only version
       one (wait for D5 to compare with F5 :-).  Anyway, seems to be a
       milestone in terms of watching trends. First digital cameras have
       been P&S style, and they're (not only Nikon) going toward the SLR
       replacement style only just now.