[matthew]

When I looked through your initial list of "must haves" in your opening post, I thought indeed the only way to cover the "not too expensive" requirement was for you to go for film.

It's true, and I am partial to the stuff these days. My impression is that film use is increasing: rather than being killed off by digital, a tiny percentage of people who wouldn't be photographers at all if not for digital cameras, such as myself, are starting to pick it up.

But I do still want a digital p/s camera; I'm leaning toward the as-yet-unreleased Fujifilm XP30, a cheapish waterproof model with a GPS that can be used to backtrack to the places where photos were taken. Add an eye-fi card that can link to a tablet computer that can upload to my web host and let me post photos on forums and blogs, and I'll be able to simultaneously geek out in two different centuries.

Am delighted you didn't go "niche" and do the "anti-hero/smug-mac-user" dying swan of getting a Holga!

Then I'd also need large plastic-framed eyeglasses and a single-speed bicycle. But I do use a Mac, and my photos are hosted by Smugmug.

I was going to suggest the Fuji GSWII either in its 6x7 or 6x9 incarnation: extremely light, rhinoceros-build and optically ripping. Also, any "accessorising path" is either maddeningly or satisfactorily curtailed.

I looked at the Fuji - and yashicamat, rolleiflex, bronica, mamiya - but the fixed-lens design just seemed to make it too bulky for my camera bag. While I can't imagine carrying another system with it too often, the relatively compact box-style cameras do leave enough room for my Ikon or GH1+20mm. And the `blad does fit nicely, with just a little tightness in the bag because of its rather substantial knob.

What can I say? There are worse problems to have.

I was actually about to buy the Bronica GS-1, which is just slightly larger than the `blad but has a 6x7 negative. But ultimately I saw that the smaller supply of used equipment and parts could be a serious problem as I try to get another decade or two of service out of the camera. That's something that I'm also sensitive to with my GX680, so I'd much rather expose the hasselblad to the dangers of the big bad world - travel, weather, droppage - and having such a common camera makes me more likely to use it. I wouldn't expect it to be as tough as my Olympus E-1, which is what I carry to riots in the pouring rain, but I don't plan on coddling it.

knowing that you are also attracted by "rendering" quality of a lens rather than outright acuity, I wouldn't have put it past you to go for a Leica...but "not too expensive" gets eaten away pretty quickly when you pop a lens on....

Nah, no Leica for me - too much investment in only one camera to keep me happy for long. At least with the hasselblad, I can recycle my knowledge of what the Zeiss lens names mean from my 35mm Ikon rangefinder. Not that I can remember what 'sonnar' means at the moment, but if I did, it would apply to both the CF150 and the ZM50mm. Infinite knowledge is just a search engine away.