Jens Bladt wrote: > Hello All > Since I am soon to receive my K10D, which will partly replace my *ist D, I > guess a little statistics is in it's place.
I suspect your math is pretty much on the mark. I just noticed that the counter on my *ist-D has turned over again, and I have to go back and check to see if if it's in the 60,000 or 70,000 range. But the bottom line is - I've shot a lot more with it than I would have with film. When I made a serious go at shooting full time I would often shoot 25-50 rolls of slide film a week during the 15-20 prime shooting weeks in the year. That was about all my budget could handle and it simply was not enough for serious stock shooting (back when there was a viable market for stock photos.) With the *ist-D I was freed of that constraint and my good pals at the local pro photo lab are now just old acquaintances. But - I was also free to shoot in adverse conditions - for example, I with film I would usually pack it up on a windy day when trying to shoot wildflowers. With the *ist-D I'd just plop the camera on a tripod and if took 200 exposure till I finally got when when the wind paused - well, it took 200 exposures. I got the shot. I could also get results at ISO 400 that rivaled what I could get with ISO 100 slide film - which also meant more keepers. And then there is that element of experimentation - where you shoot somehting jsut for the heck of it and after doing that 1,000 time an interesting shot emerges. Hard to justify (cost wise) with film. I plan to keep on using the *ist-D - for now at least for snow crystals and as a backup to the K10D. - MCC - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Photography Kalamazoo, Michigan www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
