I do like the one-offness of Polaroid too. No reprints, no exact copies. This is it.

About 6 years ago, I read an article about a company who was developing an adapter that would fit into the body of an SLR and "convert" it to digital. You'd probably have to remove the door on the unit, but the theory was that a pro could convert and still use all the lenses and such that he had.

I love Polaroids. But mine disappeared with the Great Storage Unit Fiasco, lo these many years ago, and I never did replace it. We have a decent digital, but man, the guys that came out to shoot our video had an amazing digital, and now we're all gear-lusty again. Dammit.

Our photographer buddy just spent a week with us, and he's got a 4x5, the film from which he processed in our bathtub. He's a great photographer, but he's just learning this particular camera. It's all very interesting.

Our film SLR died in the Amazon about 4 years ago. We've always talked about getting a new one, but I doubt it will happen. If I ever get a serious camera yen again, I would probably go with a digital SLR. Other than that, I'm very happy with my little digital and then printing my favorites through iPhoto.

I wonder if any of the digital SLR cameras accept Pentax bayonet-mount lenses, or even 35mm lenses of the more common screw-type, even.

ETA: Apparently "Yes" to bayonet-mount. [link]

I wonder if any of the digital SLR cameras accept Pentax Bayonet mount lenses, or even 35mm lenses of the more common screw-type, even.

Some do.

I know the Canon Digital Rebel XT will take Canon EF and EFS lenes as well as EF compatible lenes from Sigma and Tamron. There is a huge selection.

One thing to keep in mind is that in most digital SLRs the CCD image thigie is not 35mm, so lenses don't do exactly the same thing as they do in a film SLR (there's an adjustment factor you have to use).

About 6 years ago, I read an article about a company who was developing an adapter that would fit into the body of an SLR and "convert" it to digital. You'd probably have to remove the door on the unit, but the theory was that a pro could convert and still use all the lenses and such that he had.

Yeah, I remember that. It sounded like a great idea (especially to my ex-photographer buddy who has a boatload of Nikon standard equipment), but I guess they ran out of money before they got it to work.

Blah blah blah Mac rumors blah...

Appleinsider claims that while the MacBook Pro line will expand out further to completely replace the current PowerBook line, they report that the iBook will see the next revisions by second quarter of this calendar year.

Based on comments by Steve Jobs, the rumor site expects that the iBook will likely see a name change in-line with Apple's desire to have 'Mac' as part of its product names.

Speculation, of course, leads many to believe the iBook may simply be renamed to 'MacBook' while 'MacBook Pro' would replace the current PowerBook line.

By itself, this information is not especially revealing, but Appleinsider's November report accurately predicted the introduction of the Intel iMac at MWSF, closely followed in February by the first Intel Powerbook. With the MacBook Pro shipping in February, these predictions were actually quite accurate. In that same report, the rumor site also reported that Intel Mac minis and Intel iBooks were not expected to be released until Spring 2006.

[link]