me@myplace.to wrote/replied to: >>... for anyone who is really short on money - film is *MUCH* cheaper > >I don't think so. A 1GB microdrive costs less than twenty rolls of decent >film with processing. I've shot over 3000 images (equal to about 80 rolls >of film) on mine in the past two and a half months. Film would have been >much much more expensive than the $220 USD 1GB IBM Microdrive. It's kind of different though when you can take photos 'free' rather than with film where you'd like take way less. Depends on what you're doing with those shots though. I figure most new digital photogs like take thousands of test shots after getting their cameras, so it's tough to compare to what they actually might have taken with film.
