Of course, you have to factor in the cost of the computer, storage, monitor, software, and calibration equipment.
I think digital is still cheaper than film, but far from "free". Someday I might figure it all out... maybe. Rick On Sep 21, 2015, at 2:02 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: > You know it's funny, I hadn't thought about this in a long time, but: It was > always touted that you paid more for a modern digital camera than an > equivalent film camera, up front, and saved on the cost of processing the > film over time. It just occurred to me that I spent more in both nominal and > inflation adjusted terms on my last purchased Pentax LX during the film era, > than I did for my K-5II, true I bought both used, but still price per frame > shot is much lower with the K-5II in fact it's essentially free, almost > literally. > > -- > I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve > immortality through not dying. > -- Woody Allen > > > -- > 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. http://photo.net/photos/RickW -- 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.
