Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/07/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I fully agree here. I know one such person. I do not know what he personally makes, but I do know that the cost of a typical shoot that he does (including travel, model fees, his fees, stylists and so on) is several times the price of the S2. He currently shoots with one of the full-frame Canons. If image quality is sufficiently better with the S2, I see no economic reason why people like him should not adopt the S2. Nathan Nathan Wajsman Alicante, Spain http://www.frozenlight.eu http://www.greatpix.eu http://www.nathanfoto.com Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0 PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog On Jul 30, 2009, at 5:34 PM, George Lottermoser wrote: > Quite correct Slobodan. > The S2 is aimed at markets where the cost of the camera > is not a major factor in the cost of the shoot. > This is not a journalist's camera > (unless s/he's working in a unique slot - like Salgado) > The photographers using S2 like cameras > receive $2,500 - $5,000 per day. > as do the models, stylists, etc. > > Regards, > George Lottermoser > george at imagist.com > http://www.imagist.com > http://www.imagist.com/blog > http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist > > On Jul 30, 2009, at 10:16 AM, Slobodan Dimitrov wrote: > >> It'll make it hard to jump back over, as most of my client base >> can't barely recognize an image made with a crayon from a photograph. > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information