You make a good point there, Markus. The only way the cost of a hobby can be figured is "I can afford it", or "I can not afford it".
Now a business is different as that is figured "Income - Expenses = Profits", so it is somewhat different. But does taking 10x the number of shots increase profits? Before you folks answer, remember that your time is an expense. -graywolf Markus Maurer wrote: > Hi Mark and Jens > Marks description of the wildflower taking on windy days is a good example > of using the advantages of digital photography versus film use for me. > But, to do the math, I would compare the cost of the keepers only and > include the print cost as well, that would change quite a bit. > I get 15x10 oe 13x9cm prints with each first film development to give away > to "the subjects" without any computer work involved, thats a plus for film > for me. > > But honestly I do not really look at the cost of my hobby, I want to enjoy > it, and I see where my/the photo future is :-) > greetings > Markus > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > Mark Cassino > Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 12:46 AM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: A little *ist D statistics > > > 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 > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
