Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/09/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
At 07:59 PM 27/09/99 -0600, you wrote:
>I would argue that you do not save money by going digital. Factor in the
>cost of the computer equipment and a good digital camera for starters.
>Then have a look at film and flatbed scanners, storage media, color
>printers, upgrading computer hardware every five years at least, and ...
>you get the point. There is no justification in going digital if your sole
>objective is to try to minimize film and lab processing costs.
>
...and unless you have had to send DCS620, 560, D2000, et al for
repairs you don't know the meaning of misery. The AVERAGE repair bill on
professional digital cameras come in at $2500.00.... the price of a F5 or
other professional SLR in Canada.
Kodak is the manufacturer of most of these cameras (with exception
of 1 Canon and the new Nikon D1) and their method of solving a problem in
the body portion of their DCS cameras is to REPLACE THE WHOLE BODY!
For those who don't know, that would be with custom F5 and EOS1 bodies.
NOPE! I spent a year doing research and cost analysis of purchasing a
digital camera for my business and came to the conclusion that unless it
will save or generate $20,000.00 per year it is not a financially sound
investment.
Of course, the New Nikon D1 which slashes the price of a professional in
half, changes the formula.
The other thing to think about is how much of you income is based on stock
photo sales? If you are shooting digital exclusively you can kiss your high
quality stock sales good bye.
regards,
Greg Locke <locke@straylight.ca>
St. John's, Newfoundland.
http://www.straylight.ca/locke
- ----------------------------------
TOUCHED BY FIRE: doctors without borders in a third world crisis.
McClelland & Stewart Canada. ISBN#0-7710-5305-3
http://www.straylight.ca/touchedbyfire.htm