On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 01:17:38PM -0400, Matthew Hunt wrote: > > I agree about the frequency of upgrades; when I say "only 500 rolls," > that's still a lot for me. My K10D just rolled over 10,000 shots = > ~300 rolls of film, and that's with me machine-gunning a heck of a lot > more than I would with film. So if I replace it next year with a K-5, > I'll probably just about break even with film, in terms of the body
Back in the film day I was shooting Fuji Provia 100F, and paying for processing at a semi-pro lab (for fast service without scratches). That meant that the price ended up pretty close to 50c per frame. At those prices it took only 4000 or so frames for the *ist-D to pay for itself (and the battery grip) in expendables alone, not to mention the amount of time I saved by not having to scan the film (plus, of course, I "saved" myself the cost of a new film scanner). Even at the rate I shoot - a lot slower than most posters here - the *ist-D has got to around 9000 frames, and the K10D (a cheaper body) over 5,000. I'm not sure I replace digital bodies faster than film bodies, either. Between 1995 and 2003 I bought a PZ-1p and an MZ-S (plus a spare MX body I spotted in the "used" case at Samy's camera when I stopped there to pick up the first rolls of Kodak Portra I ever used). That's two film bodies in eight years - about the same rate at which I have maintained with the digital bodies (not counting the EPL-1). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
