[kevgermany]

I'm just starting to experiment with digital. Have been a committed film user for more than 30 years, 35mm and MF. I've been scanning my own flim for about 4 years and get much better results than the labs ever did.

I've used a digital p&s for a couple of years (it's slow, cumbersome, overexposes everything and oversharpens everything) and am now experimenting with a D70. Quality seems OK, but it's so easy to get things wrong. At least with film you took a bit of time cos there was no checking the LCD. Checking depth of field on that dark viewfinder is a joke...

I like the speed/immediacy of digital. I'm experimenting with flash and like the ability to shoot and examine, correct and reshoot, without burning lots of expensive polaroids...

I prefer the feel of film - and for me digital is more expensive (assuming new kit), because I don't shoot enough to offset the 2 year body life against film/processing costs. So far I haven't seen an affordable DSLR that can match the quality I get from my 40 year old Bronica bodies (with nikkor lenses).

One thing that's also painfully obvious is that cameras that are designed to be used manually (e.g. match needle) and a reasonable working knowledge of metering and light/aperture are MUCH faster than stuffing around with the menus & knobs on a DSLR trying to set yet another mode, exposure compensation and so on.

However I'll probably sue the D0 for experimenting and setting up, then switch to film when I'm happy with the digital preview... & the D70 will become a heavy, cumbersome p&s for carrying around.