It's all a big cycle. Digital cameras by their very nature will meet with early obsolescence. Technology progresses. New products are made available. Older products either break or are no longer as desirable.
If it wasn't for this basic fact, the whole economy would collapse. Just think. If people didn't have a need to buy new cameras, computers, televisions, cars, washers, dryers, microwaves, vaccuum cleaners, clothes, software, etc., etc., etc., a huge percentage of the population would be unemployed. Cost of ownwership of film cameras? They lasted a long time with few changes year after year. But the cost of film added up. Every time you took a picture it was the cost of film + developing. If one's worried about cost of ownership witha product that costs $300 - $1000 dollars, one worries too much. Tom C. >From: Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >Subject: Re: NO FS this Friday? >Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 15:06:47 -0800 > >The cost of ownership of any camera is high when all you do is >collect thousands of dollars worth of ancient lenses and other crap, >and can't take a picture to save your life. > >For those who make a living with a camera, a DSLR saves a tremendous >amount of money over its useful lifespan. > >G > >On Feb 6, 2007, at 2:56 PM, The Whoopee Cushion wrote: > > > ... Cost of ownership is HIGH when you dont get but a few years > > of them and they rapidly depreciate in value due to rapid > > evolution. ... > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >[email protected] >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
