I have to add my 2 cents about the issue of format size. Not really about the tech more the format. I no alot of people are used to the 35mm format and the digital variants, but i wonder if anyone has used or still uses medium format cameras? I was a student of fine art photography and to start with film was a massive no no for me. I just didnt like the fact there were anything between 1-35 frames on various film formats and the massive cost and time of production. Although I love being in the darkroom i would hate to edit 200 images from negative to paper, its just not economical in todays workflow. So i prefer digital purely for this reason.
But with film there is a quality that will never be produced from digital, it is so natural, the images of a good medium format camera feels like you could fall into them, they are beautiful. It is inherent in the medium, there are not many fine art photographers that use digital because they cannot get the same feel (not quality), Sally Mann still use collodion prints!! using a glass plate! Gursky uses a 10x8 large format same can be said with Jeff Wall. Not because digital is bad but because there is a quality to film which digital cannot match, digital is alot more flat. It is easy to say there is no difference, but if you shot medium format for a week its very easy to understand. Before i get carried away with how much i love film i have to say i rarely use it.
Simply because i love the digital workflow, endless images at no cost and easy editing compared to the darkroom. I also love digital because it is fantastic quality but in a different way to film, they are almost two different mediums that need to be treated differently.
The thing that is nice about film is the lack of happy snappy shooting. The medium teaches you how to see, with having only 12 shots on a 6x4.5 medium format camera and the cost of producing them really makes you look for those moments, the task of framing and composition with medium of large format is such a great feeling. I come away with alot more 'Good' pictures than i do with digital.
Also i think that the 6x7 is the nicest format available, 35mm is slightly too squished for my liking and i always crop to a squarer rectangle than the complete rectangle that is 35mm or APC. Dont think that i am ranting because im old or stuck in a way. My digital camera is pretty much all i use, but i do love going back to my 6x4.5 Bronica or my 6x7 Bronica because the image making process is a joy, but afterward the use of my DSLR makes it all worth while. Sometimes you can take for granted how much tech are in these things when you are out in the field with a light meter and a maximum shutter speed 500/s and changing the film back for a change of ISO.
The square format is one that never really took my fancy, regardless of the actual size squarer or more rectangular i prefer the rectangle format.
Anyone interested in fine art photography should get hold of the BBC 4 production of "The Genius of Photography". It will go through photography that is not widely expressed in todays view of photography.
Btw just to let people know i am 22 years old and im obsessed with technology, design and photography (or i wouldnt be here) I am a graphic designer and photographer. Working for a newspaper, i photograph advertising material, weddings, automotive (racing and events) local events, wildlife, landscapes (both as i live in Cumbria) and use alot of the images in the making of adverts, posters, page layouts etc for the newspaper. The thing i love the most is creating imagery from a fine art perspective but is technically spot on. What people forget is that its not the kit its being able to see, you cannot be creative without being technically minded (what the camera and lenses can do for your creativity) and you cannot make good imagery being technically perfect you need to be able to see.
I no off topic but never mind