Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/12/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]christoph, I messed up, I thought you meant 3,000 frames not films. In Michigan we say rolls, not films so my eyes saw what my mind missed. apologies, Steve At 04:35 PM 12/2/97 +0100, you wrote: >Steve Hickel <smhickel@x2.alliance.net> writes: > > > christoph, > > > I think you mean 30,000 frames. > > > Steve > > > At 06:40 PM 12/1/97 +0100, you wrote: > >> The M6 helps saving money: I get 39 frames on a Kodachrome which is 3 > >> more than I could with my EOS 620. Thus I save about $0.80 per film. > >> Just 3000 films and I will save $2400 which will be enough to get > >> another Leica. > >> > >> christoph > >> > >> > >> > >Steve, >30,000 frames per film sounds like a nice machine ;-). >Jokes aside, I think I was correct: I save per film 80 cents. This makes 3,000 >Films, i.e. 117,000 frames to save the $2400 for the next Leica. Since this is >approximately the price for a new Leica and my M6 is going to last that long I >think I actually get it for free. > >I will hurry to tell my camera dealer to give me a second body! > >christoph > > >