Post New Message | Read Current Messages | FAQ
An archived message
Posted by John Ayres on July 22, 2002 at 21:49:31:
In Reply to: Re: Cost of APS and 35mm processing posted by mikeb on July 22, 2002 at 18:43:18:
Mikeb reminds me of the old argument about APS versus 35mm. I've always had the belief that it would only last until Kodak comes up with another gimmick film that they can fool the public into buying.
Go to K-Mart or Wal-Mart and see if you can find a roll of 110, 126, or Kodak disk film. In a few years you will have the same problem finding APS. The only advantage that APS might have is easier loading. The new 35mm cameras of today are nearly as easy to load as an APS camera, so that throws that argument out also. APS just doesn't make sense anymore. 35mm has a larger negative, more types available, cheaper processing, more speeds available, and lower cost per roll.
I feel sorry for those who went out and bought expensive APS SLR cameras and lenses. I can still buy film for my 30 year old Minolta SRT, and it will probably be available 30 years from now.
Follow Ups:
Select From Our Indexes
