Is there any such thing as 'best value for money'?
- Thread starter Roger Hicks
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 80
- Views 10K
JohnTF
Veteran
- Local time
- 6:53 PM
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2008
- Messages
- 2,083
Word Up, ;-)
aniMal
Well-known
I think there is such a thing, but I find it very hard to decide what is best value when it comes to the current line of digital cameras.
CV lenses are definitely good buys, the quality one gets is more than enough for any purposes - and the price used is often the same as for leica lens-shades and other accessories!
Today I hauled my Mamiya RZ along, and that is certainly value for the money. I have collected an almost complete set for a fraction of the price I would have had to pay only 5 years ago, and I cannot see it breaking down ever. Built like a tank really.
That is for me, and then others will have other priorities.
But why is it so extremely hard to decide on a digital SLR? I have some Nikon gear, and would like a D700. But then the Pentax K7 has some really good features, and the Sony 900 is a really good buy compared to other 24 mpix cameras... Also the market for second hand digital gear is hard to follow, prices changing almost monthly... Best value for money seems always to be waiting a month or two!
CV lenses are definitely good buys, the quality one gets is more than enough for any purposes - and the price used is often the same as for leica lens-shades and other accessories!
Today I hauled my Mamiya RZ along, and that is certainly value for the money. I have collected an almost complete set for a fraction of the price I would have had to pay only 5 years ago, and I cannot see it breaking down ever. Built like a tank really.
That is for me, and then others will have other priorities.
But why is it so extremely hard to decide on a digital SLR? I have some Nikon gear, and would like a D700. But then the Pentax K7 has some really good features, and the Sony 900 is a really good buy compared to other 24 mpix cameras... Also the market for second hand digital gear is hard to follow, prices changing almost monthly... Best value for money seems always to be waiting a month or two!
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
I think those referees in the 1996 World Cup matches were the best value for somebody's money. Yuknowaddamseyin'? :angel:
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Or, alternatively, buying a camera now and using it. I'm not sure of the best way to "get your money's worth" out of a camera. Obviously it is a complex blend of getting good pictures; of getting a reasonable number of good pictures; and of enjoying using the camera, rather than fighting with it. What else can others think of?
Cheers,
R.
oftheherd
Veteran
Without reading the current pages 2 and 3 of this thread, I think you have put it best. Do my folders deliver the same quality as my Super Press 23? More importantly, do I care? When I use my folders I am having fun and I am getting quality photos. What else matters?
Nice photo for a 1953 lens. Granted that you probably tweaked it, but again, it goes back to one's own idea of fun.
wgerrard
Veteran
This has been my traditional advice for people wanting to buy a new PC:
Watch what I buy and then wait two months and buy the same thing.
Sadly, that's been good advice for years.🙄 Maybe it applies to digital cameras, as well.
Watch what I buy and then wait two months and buy the same thing.
Sadly, that's been good advice for years.🙄 Maybe it applies to digital cameras, as well.
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
It exists.
When you pick up a new 40 nokton for your first normal.
When you choose the $600 user M3 instead of a worse $800 user M3.
Prices abuse exist.
It's not just about having the money or not.
With what paid for three new Bessas, two new Voigtländer lenses and a used Leica lens in the same month or two, I could have bought a nice MP with a Leica lens.
Some of you may consider the second a better choice. I didn't.
Cheers,
Juan
When you pick up a new 40 nokton for your first normal.
When you choose the $600 user M3 instead of a worse $800 user M3.
Prices abuse exist.
It's not just about having the money or not.
With what paid for three new Bessas, two new Voigtländer lenses and a used Leica lens in the same month or two, I could have bought a nice MP with a Leica lens.
Some of you may consider the second a better choice. I didn't.
Cheers,
Juan
Meleica
Well-known
As many have previously stated - value means different things to different people. Since I have had GAS for 20+ years, I have learned that value, sometimes, is the price at which I can resell the items I obtain. Used Leica has always remained a great value in this respect. I could buy a Leica M3 or old 50 Summicron, use it for years, then resell it for the same, if not more $$$... This is almost as true of many Canon L lenses. The "value" would be in using equipment for free ( great economic value ! )
Having said that, there are things in life that bring so much joy, that $$ becomes less relevant. Collecting pre 1900 wood cameras is my true passion - and for the right piece in my collection - I will pay just about any amount....
Learn whats valuable to you and dont worry about what others value.
Dan
Having said that, there are things in life that bring so much joy, that $$ becomes less relevant. Collecting pre 1900 wood cameras is my true passion - and for the right piece in my collection - I will pay just about any amount....
Learn whats valuable to you and dont worry about what others value.
Dan
Last edited:
Michael Markey
Veteran
I bought a user M3 last year for £300 and a new Nockton 40, Perhaps I should have stopped there and then.
Michael
Michael
oldoc
oldoc
I have to say that, among the toys in the left hand column in this forum, the Contax G series has to be close to yhe top.
Until I spent more than any other two lenses in my Contax G1/28/45/90 kit for an amazingly good 21/2.8, I had a little over 1000.00 US in everything. Especially with the awesome 21, the results are very high on Chris 101's quality photo for the price. Well less, in total, than my M7 body alone. Sure, it's not a 50 dollar ebay Canonet or Yashica ( second best on Chris' scale, IMO). Leica is amazing, and I love mine. But I have to wonder how many I'd own now if I had started with my G1 and 21...
Until I spent more than any other two lenses in my Contax G1/28/45/90 kit for an amazingly good 21/2.8, I had a little over 1000.00 US in everything. Especially with the awesome 21, the results are very high on Chris 101's quality photo for the price. Well less, in total, than my M7 body alone. Sure, it's not a 50 dollar ebay Canonet or Yashica ( second best on Chris' scale, IMO). Leica is amazing, and I love mine. But I have to wonder how many I'd own now if I had started with my G1 and 21...
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
It's personal... But I guess for shooters it's normal having a few bodies and lenses... I think Voigtländer's prices could be higher... Maybe there we can see part of an answer to Roger...
Cheers,
Juan
Cheers,
Juan
aniMal
Well-known
Voightländer prices could well be higher, but fortunately they are not! Therefore CV lenses are definitely best value for money in my book.
I just bought a Sony A900, after weeks of deliberation. I think this is really good value for the money, good build, high resolution that will make it attractive as a working tool for many years, and access to some really great Zeiss lenses.
I even think a 2500-3000$ zeiss tele like an 85 1.4 or 135 1.8 is good value for the Sony, as they are really really sharp wide open - which is the reason for having these lenses around anyway. For me, this combination seems to be good value for the money, at least compared to a Nikon D3X!
Its been said in this thread before, it all depends on the needs and priorities of each photographer...
I just bought a Sony A900, after weeks of deliberation. I think this is really good value for the money, good build, high resolution that will make it attractive as a working tool for many years, and access to some really great Zeiss lenses.
I even think a 2500-3000$ zeiss tele like an 85 1.4 or 135 1.8 is good value for the Sony, as they are really really sharp wide open - which is the reason for having these lenses around anyway. For me, this combination seems to be good value for the money, at least compared to a Nikon D3X!
Its been said in this thread before, it all depends on the needs and priorities of each photographer...
chipgreenberg
Well-known
My two best values
My two best values
My best image quality vs price buys where :
Kowa six. Bought a nice one w/ a 50mm and 150mm off ebay. Under $1000 for the kit. Made wonderful 20x24 prints.
Picking up a Bronica rf645 for under $600 with the normal lens. Moat likely won't buy other lenses. Expect great image quality for under $600
35mm is too small for me. Both these cameras offer great large print quality at modest cost
My two best values
My best image quality vs price buys where :
Kowa six. Bought a nice one w/ a 50mm and 150mm off ebay. Under $1000 for the kit. Made wonderful 20x24 prints.
Picking up a Bronica rf645 for under $600 with the normal lens. Moat likely won't buy other lenses. Expect great image quality for under $600
35mm is too small for me. Both these cameras offer great large print quality at modest cost
aniMal
Well-known
I agree - right now medium format of all makes and formats can be had at really great prices.
One example: I acted quick, and got a Pentax M645 with some malfunction, along with a 45mm, 80mm, 150mm and one film insert for 1000 NOK, approximately 180$ !
Once I get around to ordering an extra body from KEH, which are anything down to 150$, then I will have a high quality set of 645 - which has come almost for free.
I think film will survive a long time as a medium, and these bargains are around now to be taken advantage of!
One example: I acted quick, and got a Pentax M645 with some malfunction, along with a 45mm, 80mm, 150mm and one film insert for 1000 NOK, approximately 180$ !
Once I get around to ordering an extra body from KEH, which are anything down to 150$, then I will have a high quality set of 645 - which has come almost for free.
I think film will survive a long time as a medium, and these bargains are around now to be taken advantage of!
muser53
MUSER53
Value
Value
I'd just like to add that in this instance value like beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Value
I'd just like to add that in this instance value like beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
The eye and wallet and priorities of the beholder -- which was pretty much the point of the thread.
Cheers,
R.
dee
Well-known
It's strange ,
I agonised over buying two 1958 broken Kiev 4 cameras for a Kiev III / IV and a Contax III / IV ... just because they have a rare plain [ Contax IIa style ] meter cover , which has increased the cost of the twins .
I seem to sense Contax II and III as right , but Kiev IV as wrong , due to the modified chassis . However , I like the compact meter . This will form a ' set ' of Kiev and Contax for me , and will be the most useable ' Kontaxes '.
Obviously , I could have had the two 1958 Kievs rebuild at a fraction of the outlay , or simply used later Kiev 4 donors with ridged meter covers , but they would have been compromised .
With donors , build costs , CLA etc , they are ' prohibitively ' expensive , yet ' worth ' every penny to me .
This is evidently very different from buying another cheap parts Contax III body , just to repair the meter of another good condition Contax III .
This is justified as ' restoration ' of a camera with ' perceiced value ' [ the second body a fine excuse for the III/IV LOL ] The hybrids , however , are just an indulgence .
OK , I have ASdee issues about perceived ' rightness ' . But I think that I am not the only one to pay more than is sensible for a dream machine - or two ! Hence all of those classic cars being sold for a fraction of the restoration costs .
Thinking about it , these ' values ' are imposed by society - an artificial scale of an average expectation which also devalues a mint 1952 Kiev II against a Contax II of dubious condition .
Interesting thread for me .
dee
I agonised over buying two 1958 broken Kiev 4 cameras for a Kiev III / IV and a Contax III / IV ... just because they have a rare plain [ Contax IIa style ] meter cover , which has increased the cost of the twins .
I seem to sense Contax II and III as right , but Kiev IV as wrong , due to the modified chassis . However , I like the compact meter . This will form a ' set ' of Kiev and Contax for me , and will be the most useable ' Kontaxes '.
Obviously , I could have had the two 1958 Kievs rebuild at a fraction of the outlay , or simply used later Kiev 4 donors with ridged meter covers , but they would have been compromised .
With donors , build costs , CLA etc , they are ' prohibitively ' expensive , yet ' worth ' every penny to me .
This is evidently very different from buying another cheap parts Contax III body , just to repair the meter of another good condition Contax III .
This is justified as ' restoration ' of a camera with ' perceiced value ' [ the second body a fine excuse for the III/IV LOL ] The hybrids , however , are just an indulgence .
OK , I have ASdee issues about perceived ' rightness ' . But I think that I am not the only one to pay more than is sensible for a dream machine - or two ! Hence all of those classic cars being sold for a fraction of the restoration costs .
Thinking about it , these ' values ' are imposed by society - an artificial scale of an average expectation which also devalues a mint 1952 Kiev II against a Contax II of dubious condition .
Interesting thread for me .
dee
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Dee,
I think that the difference between market value, and value to you, is all too often ignored -- and badly 'cooked'. My 1972 Land Rover woud sell for far less than I have spent on it -- new chassis, rebuilt engine, rebuilt gearbox... -- but as I'm not selling, I'm not fussed.
One reason I value your posts so highly is that you tend to think 'sideways', as I am inclined to do.
Cheers,
R.
I think that the difference between market value, and value to you, is all too often ignored -- and badly 'cooked'. My 1972 Land Rover woud sell for far less than I have spent on it -- new chassis, rebuilt engine, rebuilt gearbox... -- but as I'm not selling, I'm not fussed.
One reason I value your posts so highly is that you tend to think 'sideways', as I am inclined to do.
Cheers,
R.
sanmich
Veteran
every time I hear "best value for the money" or "best bang for the buck" I immediately think of my Canon 50mm f/1.4....
No idea why...:angel:
No idea why...:angel: