Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/08/10

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

Subject: [Leica] M9 - not much more expensive than M8?
From: imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser)
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 18:16:24 -0500
References: <380-22009811022527602@M2W010.mail2web.com>

Exactly so.
Comparing a digital range finder work flow or cost per frame
to a film range finder work flow or cost per frame
has as much value and usefulness
as comparing a digital range finder
to a 4x5 film camera
or a 4x5 scanning camera
or an SLR film camera
or an SLR digital camera
or a whatever different configuration of camera, back, film, etc.

Each format
each system
each light sensitive surface (film or scan or cmos or ccd)
has
its own cost in time and dollars
its own work flow
and
its own look.

Choose one (or more).
Make photographs
which bring joy to yourself
and/or possibly others.

After all is said and done
everyone on this list (with few if any exceptions)
spends a small fortune in dollars, time, euros, hours, british  
pounds, whatever
to make a few truly exceptional, fine images.

How you do it
film / develop / scan / enlarge / contact print/ capture digitally /  
pinholes / zeiss / leitz / schneider / rodenstock
makes much less difference
than what you show, print, and have to say visually.

Only when the image sings in some extraordinary way
do we ask with reverence
how did s/he do that?
what did s/he use?
how many minutes in what developer?
which plug in?

or

how much did it cost to make that one frame?

in my case -
49 years
and a couple hundred thousand dollars
for the last frame
and it ain't much to write home about.

;~)

Regards,
George Lottermoser
george at imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com/blog
http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist

On Aug 10, 2009, at 5:52 PM, wildlightphoto at earthlink.net wrote:

> Ken Iisaka wrote:
>
>>>> I am capturing more memorable moments.  That's priceless.
>
> Ken has it right.  The 'rational brain' calculations have it all  
> wrong.
> The equation isn't one of cost per exposure, it's one of  
> productivity.  I'm
> much more productive with the DMR than with the SL.  Part of that is
> because I can afford to make a LOT more mistakes with the DMR than  
> with any
> film - so the assumption that a digital camera is used like a film  
> camera
> is all wrong.
>
> How much is that productivity worth?  That's for each of us to  
> decide based
> on our unique circumstances.
>
> Doug Herr
> Birdman of Sacramento
> http://www.wildlightphoto.com
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> myhosting.com - Premium Microsoft? Windows? and Linux web and  
> application
> hosting - http://link.myhosting.com/myhosting
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



In reply to: Message from wildlightphoto at earthlink.net (wildlightphoto at earthlink.net) ([Leica] M9 - not much more expensive than M8?)