Lately there has been a growing chorus of finger pointing at China for driving up the prices of Leica's. While I don't doubt there is growing demand for luxury names, one of them called Leica, China alone can't possibly be the sole reason why prices have increased.
Prices have steadily climbed up from very low prices. Could the low prices have been affected by a recent recession? The remainder left behind when professionals switched to digital? Could the increase in prices have been affected by the advent of digital Leica cameras and mirrorless systems that free lenses from film bodies? The "Lomo effect" where people started out with cheaper film cameras and liked them enough to work their way up the quality ladder?
It has been mentioned before that there is a difference between what the serious collectors worldwide, not just China alone, seek in spending lots of money in terms of "collecting". The rare, the pristine, and untouched models that sell for so much. Not my M2 and M3 that has been touched by a commoner.
So the "user" bodies and lenses have been going up from what seemed like the lowest price anybody from any age group could remember (taking inflation into account). With a
finite supply of previous generation film Leica models made (not MP or M7) spanning the time they were built to today the number can only decrease.
Leica M prices have been going up but what about Leica Screwmount or Leica Reflex systems? Are they all rising at the same rate or one more than the other? It sounds like there is more concern about all the M3s and Rigid Summicrons in the world destined to languish in a cabinet in China but less so about a IIIC and 50 Elmar facing the same fate.
Are we feeling jealousy over the price, speed of sale, and new owner of cameras we love have shifted in a different direction? One that we are not entirely familiar with.