I generally try to stay out of these useless A is better than B discussions but this post brings out a few comments. These are also some pretty established facts.
1. A. It can be if you don't carry flood insurance. Which is a whole other discussion.
1. B. Basically true. But the majority of digishooters aren't using "super expensive digital systems". If/When the current model is obsolete or needs to be replaced, most digishooters are ready to upgrade anyway. Those cameras being replaced have a decent resale value to new digital users wanting to get started on a budget.
1. C. Again, basically true IF you are determined to print your own high quality photos and enlargements. The fact that we can print only those photos we want makes having them printed on the appropriate machines very affordable. It's cheaper than going to pro film developers that allow you to designate which negatives to print at a premium price, avoiding the same 'print them all, discard half' syndrome.
2. True. But I'm perfectly happy changing rechargeable batteries every 2nd dive, with power to go longer if needed. That's the same frequency I changed batteries in my film camera and strobe.
3. No doubt there are digishooters out there like that but don't lump us all together! One of the hardest things to get used to when switching to digital is that fact that you aren't limited to 24/36 exp. It took about a dozen dives before I could quit counting shots and enjoy. I still don't, how did you so eloquently put it..."bang off 200 thoughtless shots in a single dive without blinking." On average I shoot 45-50 shots per dive. Some of those are bracketted, some are just repeats because I can see in the monitor that I missed the composition I wanted or some other reason. No one argues that quality isn't better than quantity but that doesn't make quantity the bad thing you imply.
4. OTOH, some liveaboards provide computers loaded with editing software and CD burning capabilities. Most digishooters make sure they have some sort of storage device and don't depend on others to provide it.
5. Agreed. No one has claimed that the current quality of digital photos can compare to medium format medium, we aren't trying to! Again you are confusing the vast majority of digishooters here to professional photographers who have tens of thousands of dollars in LF camera equipment.
6. That's why we keep more than one copy of photos. The original stays untouched, one copy is sized and edited for the web, and a 3rd is edited for printing. It's not such a hard concept to master! I can also hook my laptop to a large screen TV and give one helluva slideshow presentation with no trouble at all.
Most of us here, and most of the digishooters that I know, are not pro photographers and don't expect to ever be. (However there are a few doing very well with 4MP systems!) We simply want the best photos available from the best systems we can afford...some are better than others. But we know that and except it. This is an old argument that all digishooters had to address first when deciding to go digital in the first place, it's a decision we have already made. Why can't you film shooters just accept that we like what we do and quit trying to tell us how wrong we are?
There's no question that everyone here has something to offer, your information about X-rays machines is very thorough and appreciated. But I hope you and Blacknet and any of the others who keep preaching about St. Ansel, the superiority of film, etc. will refrain from bringing this subject up again and understand when us digishooters ignore you.
It's a no win situation for both sides.
