Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/11/09
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]B.D., perhaps you missed the point I tried to bring up, that your blanket statement "Of course digital saves money - if you buy film" needed qualification. As a blanket statement, as you presented it, it's misleading and ignores the realities of many photographers. When each of us tries to decide whether film or digital is a better choice from an economic point of view, the variable costs are not the only costs involved. Econ 101. Doug Herr Birdman of Sacramento http://www.wildlightphoto.com -----Original Message----- From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> Sent: Nov 9, 2004 11:18 AM To: 'Leica Users Group' <lug@leica-users.org> Subject: RE: [Leica] Summilux vs. Summicron First off, interesting that you should site the Kodak "pro" cameras as your example, which have been stinkers from the word 'go' and which have probably sold to no one but Kodak execs ever since Nikon and Canon began producing digital pro cameras. (And you might note that I specifically mentioned the Canons and Nikons)...and for many working pros, Doug, particularly in photo journalism - an SLR may be ready to send to grave yard after 18 months to two years of hard wear and tear. Second, Nikon D1H bodies in Excellent Plus condition are selling at KEH for just under $1800. I may be wrong, but I think this is very close to 50% of the new price. And these days, pro film cameras in that shape are selling for...just about 50% - of the new price. But as you and I will apparently never agree on anything - unless I suddenly proclaim that Leica produces the best line of SLR bodies every to grace a camera bag ;-)- this exchange is pretty pointless. -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of telyt@earthlink.net Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 1:59 PM To: lug@leica-users.org Subject: RE: [Leica] Summilux vs. Summicron B. D. Colen <bdcolen@earthlink.net> wrote (with snide remarks snipped): > the top of the line digital cameras have not been depreciating to > nothing; they've been holding a surprising percentage of their value. Hom much is an early top-of-the-line Kodak DCS camera worth now, and how much was it when new? I don't know the model numbers but IIRC "new" was on the order of $20,000. Perhaps 5 years is a reasonable useful life for a top-of-the-line digital while top film cameras' useful life is often measured in decades. What do you consider a few years? 3? 10? Doug Herr Birdman of Sacramento http://www.wildlightphoto.com -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information