In a message dated 11/22/01 3:02:47 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> You mean for your 35, right? So, you have to factor in depreciation > into your camera and enlarger. You can't argue that one depreciates and > the other doesn't. > > -Aaron > Aaron, that was ~your~ original inference, not mine. Remember, I was the first to mention "cost" vis-a-vis "depreciation." Mafud [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
