is photography your most expensive hobby?

Racer X 69 · 02-07-2014, 04:49 PM

Originally posted by ziscwg

Photography most expensive hobby? Oh hell no............Try mountain bike racing and road riding those 100 milers. The K-3 body costs what my wheelset costs on one bike.

In another thread here there was some discussion about a carbon fiber bike.

Costs more than I earn in a month.

And although I really like the look of carbon fiber, and think it would be really cool to have a bike so light that I could pick it up with one finger, I have a hard time justifying a purchase for a bike that costs that much.

ziscwg · 02-08-2014, 12:28 AM

Originally posted by Racer X 69

In another thread here there was some discussion about a carbon fiber bike.

Costs more than I earn in a month.

And although I really like the look of carbon fiber, and think it would be really cool to have a bike so light that I could pick it up with one finger, I have a hard time justifying a purchase for a bike that costs that much.

Yeah, A good carbon road frame can set you back $3000 easy. To spend that kind of money, you have to be able to make decent use of it. Climbing big mountains is where the low weight really pays off. It's just like any hobby, the nice stuff is pricey. I'm sure many would scoff and paying $700 or more for a good lens. Yet many hear could see the value in it.

**ivanvernon** · 02-08-2014, 12:59 AM

Flying once a week in a rented Cessa runs around $750, which puts you half way to a K-3 with lens, or $9,000 for the year, in 645D territory for sure!. Aviation is probably not the most expensive hobby, but if you buy your own aircraft, it can move up near the top of the list.

$50,000 reasonably equipped used Cessna, so figure a monthly payment of around $1,000 if bought on installment plan
$2,400 hanger fees or maybe 1/3 of that if you just want to tie it down out in the open (tough on paint jobs)
$3,000 aviation fuel for weekly short flights (less, or more, depending on hours of flight)
$4,000 aircraft insurance
$300 physical exam
$3,000 annual maintenance

There are also unprogrammed expenses, like leaving the plane at an airport away from home because of bad weather, then driving home, then driving back for the plane when the weather clears.

Racer X 69 · 02-08-2014, 08:23 AM

Originally posted by ziscwg

Yeah, A good carbon road frame can set you back $3000 easy. To spend that kind of money, you have to be able to make decent use of it. Climbing big mountains is where the low weight really pays off. It's just like any hobby, the nice stuff is pricey. I'm sure many would scoff and paying $700 or more for a good lens. Yet many hear could see the value in it.

Yes, $3000 for the frame.

Then get a pair of wheels, forks, brakes, seat, etc.

I saw one that was over $10,000.

My first car was $500.

And true, I have spent over $700 for a lens. But it is a great piece of glass!

j2photos · 02-08-2014, 10:32 AM

Originally posted by Racer X 69

Yes, $3000 for the frame.

Then get a pair of wheels, forks, brakes, seat, etc.

I saw one that was over $10,000.

My first car was $500.

And true, I have spent over $700 for a lens. But it is a great piece of glass!

Just a piece of glass!? Sir, it is Pentax glass. That, is far more than "just a piece of glass".

Racer X 69 · 02-08-2014, 10:59 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by j2photos

Just a piece of glass!? Sir, it is Pentax glass. That, is far more than "just a piece of glass".

No, I said "great", not "just".

dansamy · 02-08-2014, 11:42 AM

Originally posted by j2photos

Just a piece of glass!? Sir, it is Pentax glass. That, is far more than "just a piece of glass".

Pentax glass = great glass?

Some people are huge fans of the colors from Pentax.

Racer X 69 · 02-08-2014, 11:48 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by dansamy

Pentax glass = great glass?

Some people are huge fans of the colors from Pentax.

For sure. I read all the time about the Canikons using adapted Pentax glass on their cameras.

Gotta be a reason.

mikemike · 02-08-2014, 11:52 AM

When I was originally shopping for my first DSLR, I got the impression that Pentax was the only system to support legacy glass because it was the only company (other than zeiss or leica) which has always produced glass that could meet the precision required by digital sensors.

Racer X 69 · 02-08-2014, 12:17 PM

Originally posted by mikemike

When I was originally shopping for my first DSLR, I got the impression that Pentax was the only system to support legacy glass because it was the only company (other than zeiss or leica) which has always produced glass that could meet the precision required by digital sensors.

How could a lens manufacturer produce glass meeting the precision required by digital sensors, when the digital method of image capture had yet to be conceived?

Perhaps the person who made that statement meant to imply that the quality had always been that good, and not that they somehow could foresee the future?

dansamy · 02-08-2014, 01:23 PM

Originally posted by Racer X 69

How could a lens manufacturer produce glass meeting the precision required by digital sensors, when the digital method of image capture had yet to be conceived?

Perhaps the person who made that statement meant to imply that the quality had always been that good, and not that they somehow could foresee the future?

I think that's probably it. That Pentax glass has always been carefully & precisely made.

mikemike · 02-08-2014, 03:51 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Racer X 69

How could a lens manufacturer produce glass meeting the precision required by digital sensors, when the digital method of image capture had yet to be conceived?

Perhaps the person who made that statement meant to imply that the quality had always been that good, and not that they somehow could foresee the future?

Correct, they always maintained a level of quality that was much higher than that demanded by film. There are some companies that manufacture stuff to a precision above and beyond the actual requirements. When lasers were first actually implemented, they measured how powerful they were based on how many gillette razor blades they could burn through because gillette made razor blades that were more uniform in thickness, material strength, etc. than any other thing the scientists could find or make at the time.

Pentax certainly wasn't building lenses in the 1960s for technology that was 40-50 years away, but they were one of the few that was building lenses that could stand the test of time. I have a lot of respect for that kind of ethic.

dansamy · 02-08-2014, 04:11 PM - **1 Like**

Superior craftsmanship will always stand the test of time. Perhaps the quality of their existing glass contributed to Pentax retaining its legacy K mount rather than creating an entirely new mount for the digital era. Taking pride in their stable of previous work, perhaps they felt that a new mount system might denote that the legacy K was insufficient for the modern, digital, high res era when they knew they'd made glass that would stand up to it.

VoiceOfReason · 02-08-2014, 04:13 PM

I think I may have more in my guns than my photography gear, but I'm not sure. Both are expensive hobbies.

stormtech · 02-08-2014, 05:13 PM

Originally posted by VoiceOfReason

I think I may have more in my guns than my photography gear, but I'm not sure. Both are expensive hobbies.

More in my camera and lenses right now, but that is slowly changing as I have the kit I am happy with now. It's so much easier to buy/sell/trade lenses than guns.........

02-08-2014, 12:59 AM	#198
ivanvernon Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Medina, OH Photos: Albums Posts: 7,224	Flying, private aviation is more expensive Flying once a week in a rented Cessa runs around $750, which puts you half way to a K-3 with lens, or $9,000 for the year, in 645D territory for sure!. Aviation is probably not the most expensive hobby, but if you buy your own aircraft, it can move up near the top of the list. $50,000 reasonably equipped used Cessna, so figure a monthly payment of around $1,000 if bought on installment plan $2,400 hanger fees or maybe 1/3 of that if you just want to tie it down out in the open (tough on paint jobs) $3,000 aviation fuel for weekly short flights (less, or more, depending on hours of flight) $4,000 aircraft insurance $300 physical exam $3,000 annual maintenance There are also unprogrammed expenses, like leaving the plane at an airport away from home because of bad weather, then driving home, then driving back for the plane when the weather clears.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
This is why your used gear is so expensive	scratchpaddy	Photographic Industry and Professionals	21	06-27-2013 12:47 PM
Most Expensive lens	Fl_Gulfer	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	5	08-30-2012 06:06 PM
Your % of your earned income is from photography?	slackercruster	General Talk	9	07-12-2012 05:14 AM
Is Photography a Men Only Hobby?	cbaytan	General Talk	85	02-20-2010 12:01 PM
Is this the world's most expensive lens? (not Pentax)	Ash	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	02-18-2008 10:58 PM

02-07-2014, 04:49 PM	#196
Racer X 69 Moderator Man With A Camera Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: The Great Pacific Northwet, in the Land Between Canada and Mexico Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,068	Originally posted by ziscwg Photography most expensive hobby? Oh hell no............Try mountain bike racing and road riding those 100 milers. The K-3 body costs what my wheelset costs on one bike. In another thread here there was some discussion about a carbon fiber bike. Costs more than I earn in a month. And although I really like the look of carbon fiber, and think it would be really cool to have a bike so light that I could pick it up with one finger, I have a hard time justifying a purchase for a bike that costs that much.

02-08-2014, 12:28 AM	#197
ziscwg Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 110	Originally posted by Racer X 69 In another thread here there was some discussion about a carbon fiber bike. Costs more than I earn in a month. And although I really like the look of carbon fiber, and think it would be really cool to have a bike so light that I could pick it up with one finger, I have a hard time justifying a purchase for a bike that costs that much. Yeah, A good carbon road frame can set you back $3000 easy. To spend that kind of money, you have to be able to make decent use of it. Climbing big mountains is where the low weight really pays off. It's just like any hobby, the nice stuff is pricey. I'm sure many would scoff and paying $700 or more for a good lens. Yet many hear could see the value in it.

02-08-2014, 08:23 AM	#199
Racer X 69 Moderator Man With A Camera Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: The Great Pacific Northwet, in the Land Between Canada and Mexico Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,068	Originally posted by ziscwg Yeah, A good carbon road frame can set you back $3000 easy. To spend that kind of money, you have to be able to make decent use of it. Climbing big mountains is where the low weight really pays off. It's just like any hobby, the nice stuff is pricey. I'm sure many would scoff and paying $700 or more for a good lens. Yet many hear could see the value in it. Yes, $3000 for the frame. Then get a pair of wheels, forks, brakes, seat, etc. I saw one that was over $10,000. My first car was $500. And true, I have spent over $700 for a lens. But it is a great piece of glass!

02-08-2014, 10:32 AM	#200
j2photos Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Manteca, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,653	Originally posted by Racer X 69 Yes, $3000 for the frame. Then get a pair of wheels, forks, brakes, seat, etc. I saw one that was over $10,000. My first car was $500. And true, I have spent over $700 for a lens. But it is a great piece of glass! Just a piece of glass!? Sir, it is Pentax glass. That, is far more than "just a piece of glass".

02-08-2014, 10:59 AM - 1 Like	#201
Racer X 69 Moderator Man With A Camera Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: The Great Pacific Northwet, in the Land Between Canada and Mexico Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,068	Originally posted by j2photos Just a piece of glass!? Sir, it is Pentax glass. That, is far more than "just a piece of glass". No, I said "great", not "just".

02-08-2014, 11:42 AM	#202
dansamy Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2013 Location: Alabama Posts: 2,450	Originally posted by j2photos Just a piece of glass!? Sir, it is Pentax glass. That, is far more than "just a piece of glass". Pentax glass = great glass? Some people are huge fans of the colors from Pentax.

02-08-2014, 11:48 AM - 1 Like	#203
Racer X 69 Moderator Man With A Camera Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: The Great Pacific Northwet, in the Land Between Canada and Mexico Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,068	Originally posted by dansamy Pentax glass = great glass? Some people are huge fans of the colors from Pentax. For sure. I read all the time about the Canikons using adapted Pentax glass on their cameras. Gotta be a reason.

02-08-2014, 11:52 AM	#204
mikemike Inactive Account Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: New Orleans Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,053	When I was originally shopping for my first DSLR, I got the impression that Pentax was the only system to support legacy glass because it was the only company (other than zeiss or leica) which has always produced glass that could meet the precision required by digital sensors.

02-08-2014, 12:17 PM	#205
Racer X 69 Moderator Man With A Camera Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: The Great Pacific Northwet, in the Land Between Canada and Mexico Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,068	Originally posted by mikemike When I was originally shopping for my first DSLR, I got the impression that Pentax was the only system to support legacy glass because it was the only company (other than zeiss or leica) which has always produced glass that could meet the precision required by digital sensors. How could a lens manufacturer produce glass meeting the precision required by digital sensors, when the digital method of image capture had yet to be conceived? Perhaps the person who made that statement meant to imply that the quality had always been that good, and not that they somehow could foresee the future?

02-08-2014, 01:23 PM	#206
dansamy Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2013 Location: Alabama Posts: 2,450	Originally posted by Racer X 69 How could a lens manufacturer produce glass meeting the precision required by digital sensors, when the digital method of image capture had yet to be conceived? Perhaps the person who made that statement meant to imply that the quality had always been that good, and not that they somehow could foresee the future? I think that's probably it. That Pentax glass has always been carefully & precisely made.

02-08-2014, 03:51 PM - 1 Like	#207
mikemike Inactive Account Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: New Orleans Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,053	Originally posted by Racer X 69 How could a lens manufacturer produce glass meeting the precision required by digital sensors, when the digital method of image capture had yet to be conceived? Perhaps the person who made that statement meant to imply that the quality had always been that good, and not that they somehow could foresee the future? Correct, they always maintained a level of quality that was much higher than that demanded by film. There are some companies that manufacture stuff to a precision above and beyond the actual requirements. When lasers were first actually implemented, they measured how powerful they were based on how many gillette razor blades they could burn through because gillette made razor blades that were more uniform in thickness, material strength, etc. than any other thing the scientists could find or make at the time. Pentax certainly wasn't building lenses in the 1960s for technology that was 40-50 years away, but they were one of the few that was building lenses that could stand the test of time. I have a lot of respect for that kind of ethic.

02-08-2014, 04:11 PM - 1 Like	#208
dansamy Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2013 Location: Alabama Posts: 2,450	Superior craftsmanship will always stand the test of time. Perhaps the quality of their existing glass contributed to Pentax retaining its legacy K mount rather than creating an entirely new mount for the digital era. Taking pride in their stable of previous work, perhaps they felt that a new mount system might denote that the legacy K was insufficient for the modern, digital, high res era when they knew they'd made glass that would stand up to it.

02-08-2014, 04:13 PM	#209
VoiceOfReason Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Mishawaka IN area Photos: Albums Posts: 6,124	I think I may have more in my guns than my photography gear, but I'm not sure. Both are expensive hobbies.

02-08-2014, 05:13 PM	#210
stormtech Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: In the boonies (NW Penna) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,744	Originally posted by VoiceOfReason I think I may have more in my guns than my photography gear, but I'm not sure. Both are expensive hobbies. More in my camera and lenses right now, but that is slowly changing as I have the kit I am happy with now. It's so much easier to buy/sell/trade lenses than guns.........