Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/09/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]From: Bernard <5521.g23@g23.relcom.ru> Sent: Monday, September 27, 1999 15:26 Subject: Re: [Leica] Zone blues > I can't believe you don't have the money (as you have > stated) for pro-processing of your film. It depends on how much I want to shoot. > It should cost a few bucks per roll only ... $12 a roll at Picto for negatives and a contact sheet, 48-hour delay (average). > ... and they'll let you dictate what chemicals to use, > at what temperature etc etc. That costs $33 a roll. Ideally, if I want to learn, I should be shooting lots of pictures. If I shoot two rolls a day, five days a week, I'm paying at least $480 a month for development. Do you see the problem? > If you're really that badly out of cash after > an F5 and M6, you should have gotten cheaper cameras. No matter what cameras I might have bought, I'd still have to pay the same for development, and development is a continuing cost. It is one of the major factors driving the move to digital, in fact. > For the sort of photography you say you practice, you don't > need the world finest optics, nor the fastest AF. I'd say that only one photographer in 10,000 _needs_ the finest optics and/or the fastest AF; if that were the only reason for buying a camera such as a Leica, Leica would be out of business by now. > Buy film instead, and have it processed by pros, and not by > those one-hour kids who just lost their job flipping > burgers at MacDonald's. The one-hour labs do fine for E-6. As long as you don't need prints, they work well. I've read that even professionals find them more than adequate at times (depending on the application). They don't do black and white, though. And they actually aren't much cheaper than the pro labs. -- Anthony