Your Opinion: Most Over-Priced Film Cameras + Most Undervalued Film Cameras?

[KoNickon]

I think more than one person mentioned the K1000 as being overpriced for what it provides, certainly compared to the similar but better spec'd KM.

 

[astrosecret]

the ricoh k mount bodies are dirt cheap and so much better than the 1000s

 

[flavio81]

Overpriced?? Any camera posted on Ebay. Full stop!!

I've just had a good look at Ebay Australia, in their cameras and other photographic sections, for the first time in ages. Now I need a stiff drink...

(But I did note the sometimes great differences between asking the sellers' auction/buy it now prices and the finished sales.)

I shop at eBay, internationally, and i've noticed australian sellers tend to ask too much, in general.

 

[bluesun267]

Maybe it's already been mentioned, but what about basically any non-Leica 50mm LTM lens being in the under priced category? (Or maybe they're just "right priced"). Considering the full compatibility with the M mount, the price/performance ratio is very good. Canon 50/1.8 & 50/1.4 for example. Or even some of the rarer ones like the Topcor 50/2, Minolta Super Rokkor 50/2, Nikkor 5cm f2 (or even the 1.4) are still a tremendous to excellent value. Or any of the Elmar clones.

For overpriced, I vote for the Canon 35/1.5 LTM. My gawd. That thing is going for sickening $$$ now! While it has always been somewhat of a rarity, 15 years ago they could be had for around $500-$1000. I can't think of ANY other piece of camera equipment or lens that has undergone a 10X-15X increase in that amount of time.

 

[bluesun267]

An interesting aside, I looked at completed ebay auctions and found what appears to be the same Canon 35/1.5 lens from France or Italy at least 10 times in completed auctions over the past month (for a silly low price). When you click on them you get taken to an error page that the 'auction can't be found'. Clearly it is the same lens being sold over and over (or rather, the same *picture* of the lens being used over and over).

I am amazed Ebay allowed such a scam to happen that many times before putting a stop to it. But the old adage holds true, if it seems to good to be true...



...And, drumroll please, here's a genuine completed auction:

 

[james.liam]

flEaBay was allowing terrorists to launder money this way and do nothing about it when informed.

 

[xayraa33]

An interesting aside, I looked at completed ebay auctions and found what appears to be the same Canon 35/1.5 lens from France or Italy at least 10 times in completed auctions over the past month (for a silly low price). When you click on them you get taken to an error page that the 'auction can't be found'. Clearly it is the same lens being sold over and over (or rather, the same *picture* of the lens being used over and over).

I am amazed Ebay allowed such a scam to happen that many times before putting a stop to it. But the old adage holds true, if it seems to good to be true...

filedata/fetch?id=4787765&d=1654297101 filedata/fetch?id=4787766&d=1654297102

...And, drumroll please, here's a genuine completed auction:

Unbelievable high price, I paid 300 CAD for that lens in the early 1990s.

 

[Mos6502]

I shop at eBay, internationally, and i've noticed australian sellers tend to ask too much, in general.

Shipping to and from Australia is crazy, so it sort of makes sense that once it's in the country, the price stays premium.

Ebay asking prices have been getting worse for the past decade. Lots of stuff listed for camera store prices, by people with no knowledge about cameras. Just recently spent a lot of money on a rare camera, described as being in "great working condition" and when I received it, the lens' focus was stuck solid, and the shutter didn't work. Thankfully the seller didn't argue with a return and refund, but it was still my time wasted. I didn't mind taking a gamble and getting junk every now and then, when most things sold for junk store prices. Now it's almost enraging.

 

[Pál_K]

Too lazy to read all 78 post but I can't see a mention of the Topcon SLR's, the Konica SLR's …

In post # 7 I mentioned the Topcon Super D and Konica Autoreflex. I think these are bargain cameras today - although the Super D is perhaps sought after as a cult camera, maybe.

I have a Topcon R-II and a Super D. They are very nice and well built.

A few years ago I bought a Konica Autoreflex T (actually T2) for about $20, then followed up this year with a T and T3n. Trap needle system. Manual and shutter priority. Nice viewfinder and readout. I really like their build quality and style. Best of all, they still work!

 

[Mos6502]

Topcon Super Ds haven't been a "bargain" for twenty years or more. Overlooked? Maybe. Undervalued? I think an argument could be made for them being remarkably overvalued. Although this is mostly the fault of the lenses, which have been ludicrously overhyped online for years now. Not hard to find a Topcon body for "cheap" (say $100), but another matter entirely to find one with its lens intact for a reasonable price.

 

[David Murphy]

I actually don't think $900-$1500 is overpriced for a Canon 35mm F1.5 LTM. This is a rather uncommon lens and as far as I know the fastest LTM lens ever made at that focal length. I do think $11,999 is a little out of line!

 

[fireblade]

Undervalued, Nikon F100
Overvalued, Mamiya 6s and 7s.

 

[Pál_K]

Topcon Super Ds haven't been a "bargain" for twenty years or more. Overlooked? Maybe. Undervalued? I think an argument could be made for them being remarkably overvalued. Although this is mostly the fault of the lenses, which have been ludicrously overhyped online for years now. ...

What I should have written was that Topcons like my R-II were bargains but the Super D seems to have always had a cliquish appeal. I think the Super D is an excellent camera, but probably priced correctly given that there have always been people willing to snatch them up.

 

[hap]

I actually don't think $900-$1500 is overpriced for a Canon 35mm F1.5 LTM. This is a rather uncommon lens and as far as I know the fastest LTM lens ever made at that focal length. I do think $11,999 is a little out of line!

That would buy me a Sony A1 and a down payment on the hasselblad new digital back

 

[The Spastic Image]

Hmmmm, I'd say the single most undervalued film camera might be the Nikon FE. All-metal, quality construction; great and accurate match-needle metering system; aperture priority mode with exposure lock; takes most lenses (including non-AI) that Nikon ever produced; can take a motor drive; swappable focusing screens (I pimped mine out with a later, brighter FM3a screen); small but not excessively so form factor; two LR44 batteries last practically forever with them. And because they're older than the FE2 and lack a few features of that camera, they're viewed as being "less capable," which they only barely are.

A nice FE will hit you for around a hundred bucks--often less--which is a screaming bargain for such a well-built, capable film camera. Whenever students go enquiring about a film camera and start talking about K1000s or A-1s or whatever, I'm like forget those things, get an FE: it'll be cheaper (than a K1000, given their inflated prices; and than an A-1 if you decide to fork out to get the squealing shutter properly repaired), take a huge range of great lenses, you can shoot it in full manual, *but* it will also have a bit of automation. A no-brainer, really.

I keep a pair of FEs, one in chrome and one in black; they're great toss in a bag and carry around all day cameras. And I call them my "riot cameras"--if I'm ever going to shoot something where I want the best images I can get, but there's a chance the camera will get lost/destroyed in the process, they'd be easily and cheaply replaced.

I'd rather have a Nikon FE or FM, than any K-1000 or AE-1. Usually cheaper and far superior. And you can also use your old non AI lenses on one. Modern spiritual successor to the excellent Nikomat/Nikkormats. Nikon mechanical advantage: They are very Cerebral Palsy resistant when photographer trips over his own feet sometimes. Not to mention winds up becoming an improv amateur stunt man! The Nikon FM/FE/Nikkormat line are tanks. I am living proof of how durable the manual and mechanical models are. I like mine pre-brassed up before I get them.

 

[f.hayek]

I second the Nikon FE/FM series and F100 for best undervalued film camera and to them I'd add the venerable and bulletproof F3. They're all great values especially in light of the vast number, variety and quality of compatible lenses.

The Mamiya 6/7 are odd birds (modern rangefinder 6x6, 6x7) along with the Fuji GF670, GW670/680/690 and Plaubel Makina 67/670. Uncommon medium format cameras made in limited quantities and shouldn't be judged by the same metric.

Overpriced? Contax T2 & T3. Hands down. Plainly ridiculous.

 

[Rayt]

The current new Leica rangerfinder cameras can be seen as overpriced when excellent condition M2, M3, M4, M5, etc., bodies can be had for less than half the money even after a full overhaul. The difference is just a meter and with the M-A not even a meter. Arguably an M6TTL or M7 are affordable and can do more than a new $5500 MP. But then it is new vs used so it is justifiably worth it.

All Rollei’s with Tessar and Xenar lenses are undervalued especially the Rolleicord. If you prefer the 3.5 planar or 2.8 Xenotar then an earlier Rolleiflex model such as the E or preferably E2 does the same thing. The practical consideration is the mandatory overhaul. When you buy a used Rollei that needs to be serviced plan on dropping at least $500 or more. Would you spend that kind of money for a CLA on a $400 Rolleicord or a $1200 Rolleiflex 3.5F? Given the total investment I would buy a 3.5F Planar.

 

[Pál_K]

I wish Leica would've made a Tri-Elmar in 35-50-90 or 28-50-90 instead of the short focal lengths they chose. Untapped potential? They probably thought about it and decided the wider angles for the lens would be more popular.

 

[das]

I wish Leica would've made a Tri-Elmar in 35-50-90 or 28-50-90 instead of the short focal lengths they chose. Untapped potential? They probably thought about it and decided the wider angles for the lens would be more popular.

I mean, with the benefit of hindsight, the original Tri-Elmars were not particularly great lenses speed or performance-wise, but just versatile in a way that professional zoom lenses can be. I think that Konica's 21-35 idea was much better. You are probably right, though, about popularity. Most Leica M shooters seem to be attached to their fast fixed 35mm or 50mm lenses and the three focal lengths in one would probably appeal to someone who wants to play with wide angles but not commit to a particular focal length. I think using lenses that wide on an RF is kind of silly without liveview, as even the Frankenfinder has fairly inaccurate framing and does not communicate the true visual distortion these lenses create in the captured image.

 

[Dralowid]

Undervalued, well made, reliable and simple...the Retinettes.