DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?

On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 10:32:29 +0100, "Bill Again" wrote:



You might be right. But just as the cheap watch from Woolworths tells me in
general the same time as any other watch, for some daft reason I prefer my
Rolex. And while my neighbours Nissan takes him adequately from A to B, I
prefer, silly as it may sound, driving there in the Mercedes. Daft I know,
but personal preferences play heavily in these choices. I am sure, however,
that you enjoy your P&S. Keep up the good work, the industry needs you.

:-)


You have that quite backwards, don't you. The industry needs people like you
paying $12,000 on DSLR bodies that only cost $200 to make, and paying $2000 or
more per lens when it only costs them $50 each to make. Much more than they need
someone like me who only puts his money where it really matters. As they say, a
fool and his money are soon parted. I do the research first to know when I'm
getting ripped off by some company. I also test things myself instead of
depending on some self-appointed internet pros who have never been nearer to any
camera than a photograph of one online. Every camera company CEO must raise a
glass and a hearty round of laughter in your honor from the deck of their next
new yacht that you stupidly paid for without even realizing it.

By the way, you're using a really poor if not just totally illogical analogy.
The images from my P&S cameras are every bit as good as any of those from any
DSLR. If they were not I wouldn't have sold my DSLRs and lenses. I also obtain
those images just as fast and with even more precision than you can on your
DSLR. So in effect I'm getting better performance out of my Nissan than you are
out of your Mercedes. Your analogy would only be correct if my images and camera
performance were less than yours. Reality is quite the reverse to what you are
trying to portray, I assure you. You have things so backwards. But then that's
to be expected considering where most DSLR supporters have their heads all the
time.