I #believeinfilm, but digital is not just EVIL

I don’t like absolutes, the fact I do enjoy more shooting film does not prevent me to appreciate digital, as there are undeniable advantages. A friend of mine pointed out a few:

• Digital is good for newbies. The fact you can view immediately the result of your settings accelerate the learning curve.
• Digital spares you from having a polaroid back when working studio.
• Digital is mandatory for sport shooting.

If you ask my opinion, I agree. My wife is learning and shooting film is not helping her to improve quickly, as she does not have enough time to shoot much. On top of it, she just learned the basics of ISO, aperture and shutter speed, so it helps a lot to be able to experiment.

Lately I’ve realized that there are two categories of digital, Sport Pro and Mirrorless. When you’re on a job, shooting sport events or wildlife, a 1Dx might be the best solution, but for the rest a mirrorless camera is better. That’s why cameras like Sony NEX, Olympus EP or OM-D are so popular. Sadly, the only real digital rangefinders around are too much expensive…

I know I’m partial to Leica. I cannot help to think why such camera makers all over the world can’t make a simple digital rangefinder! If you think about it, except those cameras with focus peaking, you have to rely ALWAYS on autofocus, as not a single camera has a decent way to focus manually. I could live with my X100 and drop any idea of an M9 if they added focus peaking with a newer firmware release (like the rumored X100S that is supposed to be announced shortly).

I have a single Leica lens and I don’t feel the need for another, because I have two cameras perfectly suited for other tasks (28mm and 35mm).

What I’d like is CHOICE, to use my Summicron on different cameras… And be able to let my wife learn as well. I suppose I’ll buy a Leica to MFT adapter for her