Re: Serious question from a skeptic - practical realities of taking clear video/stills of UFO's?

"Dudley Hanks" <hanks.dudley@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:Qs2vj.37026$w57.6836@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>
> But, as Ken has pointed out (I think with tongue in cheek), when it
comes 
> to always being ready, mechanical cameras rule.
>
> They always are ready to go;  they never have to power up;  they don't
go 
> to sleep;  and you don't have to worry about losing a preset focal / 
> compositional configuration until you decide to take everything down and

> move on.
>
> I for one miss that kind of reliability in electronic cameras --  
> regardless of what flavour we're talking about.
>
> Keep clicking, Ken.
>
> Dudley
>
>
Thank you, Mr Hanks, for noticing where the tongue was located! As a proud

owner of multiple Canon FX's, a couple Kiev 88's, and some bigger stuff, 
I'll give up my film cameras when they can get the developer stains off my

cold, dead fingernails!

Of all the Canon FX's I acquired (a camera that was manufactured from 1964

to 1969), about 75% of them worked fine, the balance of them were repaired

with a basic CLA. These usenet groups thrive on people asking how to cure 
the problems with their digital marvels.