Re Cost of Digital Photography.

[Op's]

Has anyone worked out the cost involved in owning a full digital
outfit? compared to traditional photography?

Camera - say like a D1 type / Fuji or Nikon 990 etc
Computer
printer
processing time
material costs

Take into consideration depreciation as well and the cameras being out
of date in 12 mths etc

a Nikon D1 which has now been superseded in 12 mths and initially cost
$12,000 that's $1000 / mth alone.

Is it all worth it???

When you spend say even $3500 on a camera and lens and have that
printed/processed at say $20/roll of 36 exposures.

Is digital cost effective at present?

rm

[Tom Beer]

I imagine it will be impossible to come up with a definitive answer without
know exactly what the camera will be used for.

For example, a sports press photographer may take hundreds of shots, but can
save heaps because they are only printing one or two (if any at all!!).

OTOH, a portrait photographer may end up printing nearly all their shots,
which is a totally different ball game.

Nevertheless, I would be interested in seeing what the various break-even
points are.

Tom

"Op's" <mar...@wollongong.apana.org.au> wrote in message
news:3B831C6C...@wollongong.apana.org.au...

[Bruce Murphy]

Op's <mar...@wollongong.apana.org.au> writes:

> Has anyone worked out the cost involved in owning a full digital
> outfit? compared to traditional photography?
>
> Camera - say like a D1 type / Fuji or Nikon 990 etc
> Computer
> printer
> processing time
> material costs
>
> Take into consideration depreciation as well and the cameras being out
> of date in 12 mths etc
>
> a Nikon D1 which has now been superseded in 12 mths and initially cost
> $12,000 that's $1000 / mth alone.

and are happily going second-hand right now for 5-6k. Bear in mind
that professional kit has a slightly longer lifespan, and certainly
does have some resale value.

Bear in mind also, that the D1 you bought 12 months ago takes *exactly*
the same photos today. You haven't lost any of that functionality if
that is what you bought it for.

> Is it all worth it???
>
> When you spend say even $3500 on a camera and lens and have that
> printed/processed at say $20/roll of 36 exposures.
>
> Is digital cost effective at present?

It depends.

B>

[Womby]

>
> > a Nikon D1 which has now been superseded in 12 mths and initially cost
> > $12,000 that's $1000 / mth alone.

Superceded is an interesting word in the IT world.

The camera still produces the same shots it did when you bought it. The only
thing that changes is what the newer cameras can do over and above what yours
can do. The D1 is still a fine camera. The D1h or D1x each have improvements
that may or may not interest you. Whatever the next release is will have
further improvements, that again may or may not interest you.

I have a friend who still uses a 386 computer - does everything she wants it to,
so has no reason to upgrade.

Apart from that, a D1 that's 12 months old is still worth a fair bit, so you
dont really drop $1k a month.

Cheers,
Andrew.

[Shane]

That was done in a magazine a while ago, I will see if I can find it and
paraphrase it for you. I think it boiled down to how much film/developing
you do.
Shane

[Miro]

Given that if you have a PC and a digital camera, you can move into making
your own V-CD's and linking your own PC to a TV or presentation projector.
In this way you can also easily mix MPEG-2 into a seamless setup. As well as
mixing MP3's over a network as a super image and sound library.

A dude in Sydney called Rob has both an image and sound library to die for.
All his own compilation, not to mention file serving, email server and his
own website.

If you are heading down the path of total integration in all forms of
entertaiment, then all you need is more, not less hardware. It will however
replace the fax, CD player, photo album and several other technologies. More
or less it is the grandfather to the home of the future.

"Bruce Murphy" <pack...@rattus.net> wrote in message
news:m2ofp8n...@fuscipes.rattus.net...

[Paul Cavka]

Before I bought my D1H a couple of weeks ago, I was looking into getting a
second hand D1. I thought some of the owners were dreaming about the prices
they were hoping to get. I went and had a look at one in Melbourne whose
price was $5800. It was a piece of crap, you can just tell an ex press
camera from the abuse they have taken. All the rubber was scrubbed up pretty
bad. I also had a look at a couple in Sydney. One was $6900 which was in
excellent condition and another for $6500 which was pretty decent also and I
was thinking about getting it for a while but decided that paying an extra
$1650 and getting full warranty was probably a wiser choice.
$5800 was the cheapest that I had seen during the 3 weeks or so that I was
looking.
My work is probably a fifty fifty split that do and that don't require hard
copy.
A rough estimate would be about $300 a month on film savings. And probably
reduced my scanning time by about 30 hours a month.
I hope to get either a home Dye Sub printer or a high quality inkjet before
the spring wedding season kicks in. I don't think that I would be saving a
great deal of money shooting weddings on digital (I only average about 10-
12 a year) but digital just makes things so much easier. The ability to
check lighting etc on the monitor would have to improve every ones work.

Regards
Paul Cavka

[Miro]

Lindsay Merrit in Bulli (near the gong) part owns a pro lab in Sydney that
will custom print D1 shots onto photo paper.

For the quality and the price, it would seem good value. But only if you
were selling the shots.

"Paul Cavka" <ca...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
news:B7A9B93A.D3EB%ca...@iprimus.com.au...

[Gav]

This is the breakdown of my digital studio. I feel I did it fairly much on
the cheap, but I didn't scrimp on getting cheap crappy gear:

Fuji S1 Pro $8,000
Lenses from film Nikon $0 ($2,500)
Epson 1270 Photo Printer $1,000
Computer $3,500
Adobe Photoshop $1,500
Studio Lighting $2,000

Consumables
-------------
Inkjet Cartridges $60 (About 50 6x4's)
6x4 Photo Paper (20) $16
A4 Photo Paper (20) $30?
A3 Photo Paper (20) $60

I did the research into setting up a conventional processing lab with
enlarger, chemicals etc and decided that digital works out MUCH cheaper as
expensive as this looks.

Gavin

[Paul Cavka]

Any idea of costs Miro?

I'm tempted to go and enroll in another course just so I can have access to
a film writer again.
Oh well, I guess I'm just going to have to shoot 35mm for stuff that
absolutely needs small prints. I tell you what, It's even hard picking up my
4 week old shiny new F5 with any enthusiasm after shooting digital for a
couple of weeks.

--
Regards
Paul Cavka

[Miro]

How one calls it a cost depends on ones work. If you have a home office and
take photos for your clients as records of your work then all the equipment
is tax deductible. In essence, one can balance costs with function.

If the computer is not a main part of how one earns a living then it is
truly surplus to the equation. I would much rather see more websites than
belong to a photo ring. Most photographers do their own websites and the
equipment is a part of their business.

Rather than prints, I tend to think that tranny's are the best form of
non-digital archive. But I do think that film recorders can be fun.
Especially when they are owned privately.

"Paul Cavka" <ca...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message

news:B7AA1BD2.D5BF%ca...@iprimus.com.au...

[Cameron]

Paul, There are many other labs as well as Lindsay's. Lindsay's is
www.pixelperfect.com.au and caters mainly to wedding/portrait stuff and is
probably the most expensive lambda operation around. They are, however,
very good at wedding/portrait and you will find their prices at that link.
I use www.photoking.com for commercial and general stuff and their prices
are great. $27.00 (inc gst) for 24"x30" prints off lambda.

Cameron
www.camlairdphoto.com

Paul Cavka <ca...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message

news:B7AA1BD2.D5BF%ca...@iprimus.com.au...