Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2011/07/18

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Digital vs film cost
From: richard at imagecraft.com (Richard Man)
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 14:32:12 -0700
References: <19575041.1311023894480.JavaMail.root@mswamui-bichon.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Doug, as a PRO, it would make sense for you to shoot digital any way,
if the image quality is there for you (which I know it is with the
DMR). For the advanced amateurs and amateurs, productivity is less of
an issue there.

Of course, the equations change drastically if one considers that an
excellent dSLR can be have for under $1000, and for $2500, you can get
a full frame dSLR, but that's besides the point.

On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Doug Herr <wildlightphoto at earthlink.net> 
wrote:
> The algorithm isn't that simple. ?Productivity needs to be considered, not 
> just cost per exposure.
>
> Doug Herr
> Birdman of Sacramento
> http://www.wildlightphoto.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>



-- 
// richard <http://www.imagecraft.com/>
// icc blog: <http://imagecraft.com/blog/>
// richard's personal photo blog: <http://www.5pmlight.com>
[ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all
previous replies in your msgs. ]


Replies: Reply from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Digital vs film cost)
In reply to: Message from wildlightphoto at earthlink.net (Doug Herr) ([Leica] Digital vs film cost)