[Leica] Looking at buying an M8

[tedgrant at shaw.ca (tedgrant at shaw.ca)]

Jayanand OFFERED:

> Frank,
> Yes - but I bet you junked 99.9% of the clicks - in other words, most were
> not required, and a total waste - most of us do end up with 10 identical
> shots pretty often, don't we? Digital is not cheap, once you factor in the
> cost, in terms of hardware, software and time that you spend in post
> processing and digital printing as well. There are many reasons why I am
> exclusively using digital nowadays, but low cost is most definitely not 
> one
> of them.<<<<<<<<

Hi  Jayanand,
May I make a small offering on digital VS film costs.
MASTERFILE Stock Agency in Toronto, Canada  with several offices about the 
world.  Some of the top end photographers when stock was selling well and 
they were all using film cameras were astounded when doing a complete switch 
to all digital in their film cost savings in the first year.

Bill Brooks, I suppose the leader of the 50 photographers shooting for this 
outfit saved........ $20,000 dollars in film and processing cost first year 
changing to only digital. As it turned out their over all production of high 
end images increased, they  shot more and different variations, yet their 
over all costs went down.  He wasn't alone in this kind of saving.

Given my film costs during the "good old days?" Was always a cost many 
people I shot assignments for whined about. But once going to digital and we 
charge for computer time instead of film the whining has stopped.

In any event I'll take digital over film any day and my only complaint about 
digital is.......... "It's 50 years too late!" :-) And I use M8 and love it! 
Obviously I prefer M9's, but for now the M8's work just fine.

cheers,
Dr. ted :-)











----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Frank Filippone" <red735i at earthlink.net>
To: "'Leica Users Group'" <lug at leica-users.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2011 9:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Leica] Looking at buying an M8


> My hit rate is a bit better than 0.1%....  1:1000 is pretty dismal.....
>
>  I think the more you must think about the image, taking your time with
> metering the exposure by hand, using a tripod for exact camera placement,
> focus accuracy, and having to set the camera up completely, you rarely 
> waste
> your time with "lousy" images.  My 6x6 hit rate is considerably higher 
> than
> my 35mm ever was.....
>
> The point I was making is Digital cost payback is a pretty hard
> analysis......
>
> Sort of like comparing the M8 total cost with the M9 total cost........ 
> It
> is not as simple as the $4-5K body cost difference.....
>
> Frank Filippone
> Red735i at earthlink.net
>
>
> Frank,
> Yes - but I bet you junked 99.9% of the clicks - in other words, most were
> not required, and a total waste - most of us do end up with 10 identical
> shots pretty often, don't we? Digital is not cheap, once you factor in the
> cost, in terms of hardware, software and time that you spend in post
> processing and digital printing as well. There are many reasons why I am
> exclusively using digital nowadays, but low cost is most definitely not 
> one
> of them.
> Cheers
> Jayanand
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information