Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/05/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]> glass square with a desire for "economy." What is economical about such a > purchase? What exactly is so horrible about a film camera? You can spend > $2K on a film scanner with an auto film loader from that "N" company and get > pretty much the same result (without the instant gratification) and still > use the best glass in the world---and save a good $10-15K in the process. > Am I missing something here or has the world gone completely mad? It kind of depends on what you are looking at and what kind of pictures you are selling (and if you're not selling them, then a Kodak Instamatic doesn't even win the "economy" argument). If you're big and famous and your shots pull in big bucks per sale, than you can afford the easy going life of sitting in front of scanners now and then. If you're just mediocre, and your shots do not produce as much income per shot (or if you never got your business/marketing plan right), then you just might get tired of the hassle and wasted time involved with scanning. If you're under time constraints ... you can simply forget scanning. Shoot an event in the evening for publication in the morning. Then you'll get an idea of what I mean. None of this has any bearing on the investment in high quality glass that you mention. That introduces religion to the business aspects. Granted, you can do good business without investing the sums into digital that you mention. But that must be a calculation that Leica Camera takes into consideration when they look at their economy and business plan, not necessarily the photographer's. It can be done for less. Leica isn't interested in those people (like me). Best, Daniel - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html