Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > On Jun 2, 2007, at 7:53 AM, William Robb wrote: > >> Godfreys point is valid if: >> A) There is no significant investment in equipment. > > I wouldn't say that I have "no significant investment" in equipment. > My work doesn't require $50,000 worth of equipment, however. My > Pentax kit (two bodies, eight lenses, accessories) amounts to about > $5000-6000 in new gear. That's certainly significant to me. If the > work you're doing requires $50,000 worth of equipment and isn't > returning income commensurate with that it costs you, your business > plan is pretty screwed up. > > If my equipment investment hasn't returned the money I've spent in > income over a three to five year period, it's hardly worth worrying > about it: I have far more significant issues. > > Of course, any Pentax lens with an aperture ring can be used on 4/3 > System cameras right now. Even ones without an aperture ring can be > used, with only minimum aperture available (or with a little > ingenuity, a manual aperture control can be rigged up...). I have the > adapters (both Kmount and M42 mount) right here ... along with the > Nikon adapter. They could also be used on a Canon EOS body. So these > lovely lenses will not be utterly useless even in the event of > instant, total vaporization of all Pentax camera bodies in the universe. > >> B) Money is not an impediment to equipment replacing. > > As I said above, if I can't manage to make enough money with this kit > for it to pay for itself in 3 to 5 years, well, I'm doing something > wrong. > > BTW: > > If you're a hobbyist and having a rewarding time with photography, > *ALL* photo equipment is a luxury purchase, NOT an investment, and > should only be paid for with your discretionary income. Once it's > purchased, its value is PURELY what you get out of it in use. If you > don't get enough value out of it before it falls to bits, well, > that's not the equipment's problem. > > Godfrey >
Godfrey, One thing to remember is that a professional kit for sports or wildlife shooting is extremely expensive, and the income isn't actually any greater than a less expensive kit. Costs of doing business in those fields mean that your amoritization is much longer and the costs of switching systems is significantly greater. Your approach is quite reasonable for anyone whos needs are in the 300mm and shorter range, but your entire Pentax kit wouldn't buy one 500mm f4 AF lens. Your approach works for you, and it works for me (if I was shooting professionally, as my kit resembles yours) but not for someone like Bill who's stuck using lenses with an individual cost greater than our entire shooting kit. -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
