Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2011/12/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Ted, You are talking from a professional's perspective, while I am talking from an amateur's. Cheers Jayanand Sent from my iPad On 19-Dec-2011, at 8:42 PM, <tedgrant at shaw.ca> wrote: > 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information