Ray Nalley
Well-known
Cameras are terrible investments over time. You might want to rethink your strategy, Vick.
But they are great fun to buy and use!
But they are great fun to buy and use!
gavinlg
Veteran
I treat my cameras as tools. I don't really get emotionally attached to them, and if I find something suits me better I'll buy that and sell what I have. There are exceptions of course, like my bomby old nikon fm2n, which I won't sell. My girlfriend bought it for me.
kevin m
Veteran
I just "let go" of my beautiful M2 because I realized it was a nostalgia purchase, (my first Leica was an M2) and I really wasn't using it much. I feel better knowing that the person who bought it is excited about it and plans to put it to use, and that I no longer have to feel "guilty" for letting it collect dust. 
I really can't abide collecting or clutter, though. If I'm not using something, it's gone.
I really can't abide collecting or clutter, though. If I'm not using something, it's gone.
tbarker13
shooter of stuff
I have no attachment whatsoever to any of my gear.
I have been a frequent buyer/seller over the past two years, with very few regrets. I've had as many as 12 rangefinder lenses at one point. But I find that I'm happier with a smaller kit. (Fewer decisions to get in the way of making pictures.)
My plan is to get down to five and call it a day for at least six months.
I have been a frequent buyer/seller over the past two years, with very few regrets. I've had as many as 12 rangefinder lenses at one point. But I find that I'm happier with a smaller kit. (Fewer decisions to get in the way of making pictures.)
My plan is to get down to five and call it a day for at least six months.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
The other syndrome that can be fustrating is lusting after something hard to find that you're convinced you need ... searching it out, eBay or otherwise then discovering it wasn't quite what you'd hoped for but then not wanting to sell it because it was so hard to find.
Tim Gray
Well-known
When I got into RF gear, I sold my macro setup (lens and flash). I realized my photography had shifted focus (haha) and that an RF was better suited to what I was doing.
There have been a handful of times that I think, wow, that macro lens would be useful. Then I take a different shot instead. I don't really miss that equipment at all, which is why I sold it.
I say sell. If you can afford to keep both, do it for 6 months or a year, and then sell the one you haven't touched.
Then again, if you're only going to get a small amount of money for an item, its not really worth selling - I'd rather just save a little longer and keep it.
There have been a handful of times that I think, wow, that macro lens would be useful. Then I take a different shot instead. I don't really miss that equipment at all, which is why I sold it.
I say sell. If you can afford to keep both, do it for 6 months or a year, and then sell the one you haven't touched.
Then again, if you're only going to get a small amount of money for an item, its not really worth selling - I'd rather just save a little longer and keep it.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Tim,
This may sound a bit 'holier than thou' but it's not meant that way; just a different take.
I used to buy and sell a lot too. It got in the way of my taking pictures, and it did occasionally lead to regrets when the replacement didn't do what the new kit did, or did it differently.
For years now, instead of buying and selling a lot, I have been trying to take pictures a lot. (That was the sentence that risks sounding 'holier than thou'.)
I've a pretty good idea of what will get me good pictures, and when a camera or lens gives me good pictures, I get attached to it.
But I remain alive to equipment that will do something else, or do it better. Thus I have just bought a Thambar (a unique look) and I'd sell the M4-P and one of the M2s in a flash if I thought the receipts would get me within striking distance -- within 1000 euros/$1500, say -- of another MP.
So ('holier than thou' alert again) I'd say there can be wise attachment and unwise lack of attachment. Wise attachment is recognizing what gives you good pictures, and sticking with it. Unwise lack of attachment is failing to do this...
I'm not saying you're doing this. I'm just saying that 'no attachment' seems an odd approach to something that does what you want.
For fun, I'll add that this sails quite close to the Buddhist concept of 'Three Poisons': attachment, aversion and indifference. You have to be able to give anything up (chod, cutting attachment); you have to be able to conquer aversions (cf the Nectars of graveyard ceremonies); and you have to recognize the value of what you have (conquering indifference).
Cheers,
Roger
This may sound a bit 'holier than thou' but it's not meant that way; just a different take.
I used to buy and sell a lot too. It got in the way of my taking pictures, and it did occasionally lead to regrets when the replacement didn't do what the new kit did, or did it differently.
For years now, instead of buying and selling a lot, I have been trying to take pictures a lot. (That was the sentence that risks sounding 'holier than thou'.)
I've a pretty good idea of what will get me good pictures, and when a camera or lens gives me good pictures, I get attached to it.
But I remain alive to equipment that will do something else, or do it better. Thus I have just bought a Thambar (a unique look) and I'd sell the M4-P and one of the M2s in a flash if I thought the receipts would get me within striking distance -- within 1000 euros/$1500, say -- of another MP.
So ('holier than thou' alert again) I'd say there can be wise attachment and unwise lack of attachment. Wise attachment is recognizing what gives you good pictures, and sticking with it. Unwise lack of attachment is failing to do this...
I'm not saying you're doing this. I'm just saying that 'no attachment' seems an odd approach to something that does what you want.
For fun, I'll add that this sails quite close to the Buddhist concept of 'Three Poisons': attachment, aversion and indifference. You have to be able to give anything up (chod, cutting attachment); you have to be able to conquer aversions (cf the Nectars of graveyard ceremonies); and you have to recognize the value of what you have (conquering indifference).
Cheers,
Roger
Last edited:
Roger Hicks
Veteran
The other syndrome that can be fustrating is lusting after something hard to find that you're convinced you need ... searching it out, eBay or otherwise then discovering it wasn't quite what you'd hoped for but then not wanting to sell it because it was so hard to find.
Dear Keith,
Ah... Been there, failed to get around to selling that!
Cheers,
R.
maddoc
... likes film again.
Funny that you mentioned this ! I thought about this point and my personal experience is having never regretted to have a specific lens with me or not with but the wrong film in the camera ... :bang: (Low ISO BW when I needed high ISO color and so on ...
)
Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
Roger.....a Thambar of your own? - now my curiousity is really aroused!, I've heard you enthusing about the one you borrowed, and one or two other folks lustfull coments about this fabled and very expensive piece of kit, but I've never seen anything from one, - looking at pictures on these 'Mickey Mouse' screens is nothing like holding a nice silver print, but I'd like to see some shots from yourself, or other fortunate owner, perhaps...your website, soon?
Cheers, Dave.
Cheers, Dave.
pfoto
Well-known
I'm selling what I don't need/use. I recently sold my very first Leica body and didn't think twice about it. As someone posted above, better someone should be a happy user than have the thing collecting dust.
tbarker13
shooter of stuff
Roger,
I'll draw a distinction here between being attached to something and having a preference for it. I hear some people talking about their lenses as though they are precious heirlooms dripping with sentimental value.
I have no lens or camera that comes anywhere close to that.
I see mine as tools. I don't want to be any more attached to my 35 summicron than I am to the best hammer in my garage.
In my opinion, there are just so many camera/lens combos that will yield good/great photos. Obviously, there are some exceptions to this, but I think most lenses are quite replaceable by something similar.
I'll draw a distinction here between being attached to something and having a preference for it. I hear some people talking about their lenses as though they are precious heirlooms dripping with sentimental value.
I have no lens or camera that comes anywhere close to that.
I see mine as tools. I don't want to be any more attached to my 35 summicron than I am to the best hammer in my garage.
In my opinion, there are just so many camera/lens combos that will yield good/great photos. Obviously, there are some exceptions to this, but I think most lenses are quite replaceable by something similar.
eli griggs
Well-known
I tend to accumulate gear for cameras I use and if I find something I don't have a camera for and no intention to try, I'll sell without reservation. Having said that, personally I suggest if you have any doubt, you should keep it. If you sell it while unsure, you'll have a nagging question in the back of your mind and reason to regret taking the decision.
By-the-way, my first Leica, a M3 ss came with the same lens/goggles as your thinking of selling and I loved using it. Keeping it as a back-up incase you damage your prime user is good insurance against the unforeseen.
Cheers
By-the-way, my first Leica, a M3 ss came with the same lens/goggles as your thinking of selling and I loved using it. Keeping it as a back-up incase you damage your prime user is good insurance against the unforeseen.
Cheers
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Tim,
We are in broad agreement, but even at that, I'm not sure about 'similar'. Many years ago I sold a 100/2.8 Linhof-fit Zeiss Planar. The second (acquired by accident with an outfit) was never quite the same. And I've never found anything quite like the 150/6.3 Tessar I had 20+ years ago.
Then of course there are actual heirlooms and keepsakes. The KowaSix I use belonged to my late father-in-law. And my first Leica; well, why would I sell it? I've never needed the money badly enough to do that, and it's an interesting reminder of the pics I took with it and how my life in photography has changed over the time I've owned it. It was made in 1936; it's now more than twice as old as when I bought it...
Cheers,
R.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Dave,
Funnily enough, I use it mostly on the M8 (EDIT: Yes, I originally typed M9. No, Leica hasn't lent me one -- mainly, I suspect, because they don't exist), at around f/4.5 to f/9, where it gives a 'richness' unlike anything else I've ever seen. I intend to do a piece on it, though I may move the studio first: we are well disrupted at the moment, with a new dishwasher, sink and stove in the kitchen, so why stop now?
I'm intending to try some more B+W portraits, though: cf Frances's portrait on the site, http://www.rogerandfrances.com/aboutus.html
Edit: the friend who lent it to me was willing to sell, and it's as good as they get, with all the bits (hood, cap, centre filter) and sparkling glass, so it was hard to resist.
Cheers,
R.
Last edited:
Uwe_Nds
Chief Assistant Driver
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Uwe,
More what I don't know -- viz., how to touch type!
Now corrected to M8 -- and there won't be an M9 at photokina unless I have REALLY been misreading the signals from Leica!
Cheers,
R.
ampguy
Veteran
I find this method works - if one ends up selling the exact piece of gear twice, and find they still need/want it, then it was meant for them to have.
Uwe_Nds
Chief Assistant Driver
Roger,
I was sure that it was a typing error.
But that would have stirred up the forums: "Roger Hicks confirming M9..."
Best regards,
Uwe
I was sure that it was a typing error.
But that would have stirred up the forums: "Roger Hicks confirming M9..."
Best regards,
Uwe
tbarker13
shooter of stuff
Hence my qualifier - "Obviously, there are some exceptions to this."
I know there are lenses out there that are unique. Fortunately for me, I don't find myself craving them. I'm quite happy right now with a 35 summicron V3 and a 50/1.5 Zeiss Sonnar as my primary lenses. (I have a couple others, but the 35 and 50 seem to be getting the bulk of the work)
Every time I sell a lens, I know that I could regret it. But I do believe in the concept of embracing impermanence. Of course I have a few belongings with extreme sentimental attachment. It's just that none of them are labeled Leica, Zeiss, etc.