|
Uhh...another blanket comment about CCD that
just ain't true.
Tony, how many people do you know who do large and
medium format
landscape photography? Other than the above
everything else is better
off on digital these days which includes anything
previously done with
35mm, all macro
photography and much of nature photography.
Regarding astrophotography your comment (I'm sorry
Tony) just doesn't make
any sense. Lets
see...whats better off imaged with CCD? OK...all galaxies,
planetary nebulas, planets, the moon, all nebulas smaller than 30 arcmin.
Whats better suited to film? A couple of dozen
large nebulas and of course
widefield imaging of the milkyway.
One other point is that the advantages of digital
astroimaging has allowed so
many more people to engage in astroimaging as a
hobby. The conditions for
successful film astrophotography are much more
stringent as you know.
How on earth can you make a statement like "digital
only works within
narrow parameters"? I really don't understand your
comments.
|