Shashin
Well-known member
So, from your numbers, then you concur that film is not a cheaper solution. Which was the point I was trying to make.I have btw. calculated the cost per click for the Fuji. If I take 10,000 photos with it over its life time, it's $1.54 or lower per photo, including film, developing (which I don't do myself) and scanning (which I do myself). Then all the gear is written off, including scanner and lenses. If I take more photos or I'm able to sell the gear or if I start developing myself, the cost per photo will go down. Particularly if I start developing myself. If I had used 6 x 4.5 film, like a Mamiya or Pentax 645, the cost per photo would go down more than 40%.
The aesthetics of format choice is a personal one, as you have pointed out, and really not something that can be "better" or "worse." I assume you have not been shooting MFD and so you are basing what you see on the internet, which is really not a great measure of the properties of any system. I happen to print with it and at large scales. I certainly see a significant difference in the size of the format and I am not talking about splitting hairs when pixel peeping. YMMV.