But when people say film is cheaper than digital cuz u can buy a Nikon N80 for $20 (I just did), while a FF Nikon is (for argument's sake) $1000. Shooting film is cheaper! As long as you do not shoot much film.
I've been tracking my film use since Sep 2014. From then until now - 1025 rolls. Some of it colour film, some B&W. Some E6 etc. Just rough guessing it (remember some films are much more expensive than others) picking an arbitrary number of $7/roll of film, that is $7175.
$7175 in film since end of 2014. But wait, there's more! Developing. Only in the last few years I've developed B&W myself. So again, taking that into account, I'll estimate $7/roll for all my C41, B&W, E6.
$7175 x $7 = $50,225. When I came to... I of course realized that does not include the cost of scanning. But I have been scanning myself using digicams for a long while now so just to pretend there is little cost there (I had to buy the camera, lens, stand etc), let's say $2k
$52,000 for 10 years worth of film photography. Ok, maybe saying $5000 a year makes it less painful? Eeeeesh.
Mar 09, 2023 at 06:02 PM
Previous versions of Desmolicious's message #16190155 « The expense of shooting film. »
