Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/11/16

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] classical
From: "Steve LeHuray" <icommag@toad.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 16:45:13 -0400

Dan C.
Yes a drop in the bucket. But, when you consider that the cost of sync sound
(silent, 19db) ARRI 35 camera packages (a package will have a set of Zeiss
primes and a zoom or two plus 4 magazines, studio rig, follow focus, etc,
etc) now-a-days are about $500,000 hardly anybody buys cameras anymore, they
rent them for over $5,000 a-day and most features will have a B-camera plus
a MOS (too noisy to be used for sound recording) camera. When you consider
that the average shooting time for a feature is at least 60 days, these
daily cameras rentals add up. On the 16 mm front, camera packages (ARRI or
Aaton) really are in the $150,000 range which will include Zeiss, Cook or
Cannon zoom at about $20,000 plus the set of Zeiss Super Speeds. But when
you consider that a shooter for Discovery or National Geographic will add
$1,000 to $1,500 a day to the budget it starts to become a profit center for
a DP who owns one of these.
Steve
Annapolis

- ----------
>From: Dan Cardish <dcardish@microtec.net>
>To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>Subject: Re: [Leica] classical
>Date: Tue, Nov 16, 1999, 12:33 AM
>

>Yes, but consider the cost of the movie camera compared with the overall
>cost of the entire film that those cameras are intended for.  Probably a
>drop in the bucket.  
>
>Dan C.
>
>At 08:53 PM 15-11-99 -0400, Steve LeHuray wrote:
>>
>>Four years ago ARRI USA loaned me (they owed me a favor) a new Arriflex SR3
>>16mm camera package for 1 month for a low-budget feature film. The only
>>thing that I had to do was provide the insurance to cover the loss of the
>>camera. The insurance value needed was $143,000.
>[snip]
>
>NO ARCHIVE
>
>                       
> 
>