k-x already old news ... time to get ready for the 645D

[flipfreak]

assumption if one dun make a living out of photography, if 1 were to shoot MF film and 1 were to shoot MF digital, what is the number of shot to reach the break even point where both will incur the same cost...

number of (film cost + film processing cost + scanning cost) = digital back cost

on bh photo:

a mamiya afd iii costs S$6258
roll of 120 negs = $5
developing + 30mb tiff scan at fotohub = $13

a mamiya dl33 kit with 33mp back = S$28380

taking away the cost of the camera = S$22122
cost of shooting 1 roll of 120 = $18
divide it to get the number of times needed to break even = 1229

although very rough estimation and could be totally off if u check local pricing, i think 1000 rolls of film to break even isnt far off.

assuming u shoot 1-5 rolls a month, it will take about 16 years to break even?

 

[flowerpot]

on bh photo:

a mamiya afd iii costs S$6258
roll of 120 negs = $5
developing + 30mb tiff scan at fotohub = $13

a mamiya dl33 kit with 33mp back = S$28380

taking away the cost of the camera = S$22122
cost of shooting 1 roll of 120 = $18
divide it to get the number of times needed to break even = 1229

although very rough estimation and could be totally off if u check local pricing, i think 1000 rolls of film to break even isnt far off.

assuming u shoot 1-5 rolls a month, it will take about 16 years to break even?

and u dun get any crop as well... hee hee...

 

[flipfreak]

and u dun get any crop as well... hee hee...

haha. if invest in a scanner, can even high res and save more money.

 

[Tachyon]

on bh photo:

a mamiya afd iii costs S$6258
roll of 120 negs = $5
developing + 30mb tiff scan at fotohub = $13

a mamiya dl33 kit with 33mp back = S$28380

taking away the cost of the camera = S$22122
cost of shooting 1 roll of 120 = $18
divide it to get the number of times needed to break even = 1229

although very rough estimation and could be totally off if u check local pricing, i think 1000 rolls of film to break even isnt far off.

assuming u shoot 1-5 rolls a month, it will take about 16 years to break even?

Hmm... not sure why you compared the Mamiya AFD III with DL33? Shouldn't you compare it with the Mamiya 645ZDb which uses the AFD III body instead? Maybe you wanted the 33 MP instead of the 22 MP from the 645ZDb? For 645ZDb, the whole set would cost about S$11,000 instead.

If it costs S$18 for 1 roll of 120, the break even would be 611x, or 10 years to break even for the entire system.

However, if you already have the 645 AFD I/II/III body, then you would just need the ZDb digital back, which costs S$5,300 only, with a break even of 294x, or 5 years.

 

[flipfreak]

Hmm... not sure why you compared the Mamiya AFD III with DL33? Shouldn't you compare it with the Mamiya 645ZDb which uses the AFD III body instead? Maybe you wanted the 33 MP instead of the 22 MP from the 645ZDb? For 645ZDb, the whole set would cost about S$11,000 instead.

If it costs S$18 for 1 roll of 120, the break even would be 611x, or 10 years to break even for the entire system.

However, if you already have the 645 AFD I/II/III body, then you would just need the ZDb digital back, which costs S$5,300 only, with a break even of 294x, or 5 years.

yup. it was more for the 30mb resolution files so i compared the dl33 back to the scans.

agree with your point. and when i think abt the pricing for the entry level mamiya, makes me even more how much the pentax 645 is going to be priced.

 

[flowerpot]

Hmm... not sure why you compared the Mamiya AFD III with DL33? Shouldn't you compare it with the Mamiya 645ZDb which uses the AFD III body instead? Maybe you wanted the 33 MP instead of the 22 MP from the 645ZDb? For 645ZDb, the whole set would cost about S$11,000 instead.

If it costs S$18 for 1 roll of 120, the break even would be 611x, or 10 years to break even for the entire system.

However, if you already have the 645 AFD I/II/III body, then you would just need the ZDb digital back, which costs S$5,300 only, with a break even of 294x, or 5 years.

i think irregardless of system, 5 to 10 years is a good guage depending on how often a person shoots as he/she might not shoot a single roll every week, and if he/she were to shoot it might be more a roll...

anyway thats is to say 1 would never buy another digital back for another 5 years... what if every 2-3 yrs he/she were to buy a new digital back/system...:dunno:

anyway anyone who can afford a digital MF will have no problems... only cheapo ppl like me will consider shooting film instead...:bsmilie:

 

[flipfreak]

i think irregardless of system, 5 to 10 years is a good guage depending on how often a person shoots as he/she might not shoot a single roll every week, and if he/she were to shoot it might be more a roll...

anyway thats is to say 1 would never buy another digital back for another 5 years... what if every 2-3 yrs he/she were to buy a new digital back/system...:dunno:

anyway anyone who can afford a digital MF will have no problems... only cheapo ppl like me will consider shooting film instead...:bsmilie:

the number of users who use a digital mf for leisure should be pretty small considering the cost to entry, the convenience and etc.

those who does invest in it for work should see returns on investment within a few jobs.

 

[Tachyon]

Many moons ago, when I read the Hasselblad announcement for their H3DII-50 and saw their price tag of US$40,000 (now US$27,000 - quick buy!), I thought to myself "Crazy! Who would buy that??"

Then I realized that while we are now wowing over K-7's 14.6MP, or 5DMk2's 21.1MP, or D3x's 24.5 MP in 2009, Kodak had already launched their 16-MP digital back (with a sensor size of 36.9 X 36.9mm) for Mamiya and Hasselblad MF cameras in 2002!

For comparison, in the same year Nikon launched their D100 at a whopping 6.1MP with a sensor size of 23.7 x 15.5 mm, Fujifilm with their S2 Pro with similar specs, and at the end of 2002 Canon launched their full-frame 1Ds at 11.1MP with a sensor size of 35.8 x 23.8 mm.

Did anyone remember the price for Canon 1Ds when it was launched? US$8,000 it was. The price for the Kodak DCS digital back? US$12,000. Not so bad, I think. If I had bought the Kodak 16MP in 2002, would I be in a hurry to change to a competitor camera? Not likely, considering what is currently on offer from Canon and Nikon. How many people are still using their D100 and 1Ds (Mk 1)?

Fast forward to 2009. The competition has just starting to catch up in terms of MP. Nikon D3x (24.5MP) is now selling at S$12,000, Canon 1Ds Mk 3 (21.1MP) at S$11,600, and Mamiya 645ZDb (22.0MP) complete system is at S$10,500. The Mamiya system is the cheapest, and with a larger sensor too (48x36mm)!

I know comparing like this is unfair, as these different cameras are made for different purposes, but it made me realize that if you want to be at the cutting edge and about 7 years ahead of the game, then the price is not so high, considering that the technology will last you for another good 7 years before the mass market catches up, and 10 years before it becomes obsolete.

Imagine getting a Hasselblad H3DII-50 complete system today. At approx. S$38,500, with Citibank 12 month interest-free installment, that works out to $3,200 per month. Assuming it depreciates to $0 at the end of 10 years (unlikely since it is Hasselblad), that works out to a depreciation of $321 a month, or $10 a day. Can I afford to spend an extra $10 a day?

The advantage is that I do not have to keep changing cameras and thus gain expertise with only one camera (think Michael Kenna who still uses his >20 year old manual film Hasselblad). The disadvantage is that for those who are gadget freaks like me ("cameragraphers"... heh), not having to buy new snazzy camera with billions of functions and gazillion colors will probably kill me.

So what is the solution? If Pentax can come up with a 50MP MF camera at just half the price of H3DII-50, I'll be the first in the queue! My family can survive on $5 less a day... :sticktong


Edit: After I wrote this message, the next day Hasselblad announced the H4D-60!