Each time I hear about the demise of Kodak I think how sad it is that such a great company has so fundamentally lost its way.
No doubt all of us on this site cut our teeth on an Instamatic 126. If not then it is inconceivable that rolls of Kodak film didn't spool through our cameras from time to time.
I purchased my first digital camera in 1999. It was a Kodak DCS 210. A sub megapixel camera for £400. The batteries lasted about 30 mins and the 8MB card held about 27 photos. Even then I knew that Film was on the way out.
Canon's first consumer DSLR probably sealed the fate of film. The rest is history. I haven't shot a roll of film for eight years. Digital is more convenient, cheaper, more environmentally friendly and with the quality of the equipment all together better than film.
I wonder how many great companies will still be here in 2112? Microsoft? Apple? Marks & Spencer? Ford? BMW? Mercedes? Is it unthinkable that some of these names may no longer exist?
Stunning. Beautiful picture.
Having just purchased an IXUS 220, I'd say that this camera is the ideal size. I have an EOS 50D plus an 15-85mm lens and battery grip. The whole thing weighs almost 2KG. The IXUS weighs < 150g and fits in a trouser pocket without causing embarrassment.
I was considering the S100 or G12 but I know that if I had purchased one of them then Canon would have joined the mirror less 4:3 brigade or I'd be constantly wishing I'd brought my 50D along instead. The sensor on the IXUS 220 is I believe almost the same as on the S100. It's also about half the price.
When digital cameras started to appear I wondered why manufacturers continued with the SLR body shape. After all, it is only this shape, with the lens in the middle because the 35mm cassette unspooled from one side and spooled up on the other. A mechanical shutter also seems strange as well because the sensor could be made to 'record' electronically rather than remain live all the time. I think eventually they will disappear.
I really cannot see any point in this picture ;)