Building interest = rising prices

[tunalegs]

After an initial near collapse when digital came along, I have watched film camera prices, particularly for the collectible gear, rise and fall several times over the last 20 years. It is economy dependent to some extent.

Right now however, I think prices are on the rise. The economy is one reason, another I think is that fact that new film camera and lens production is close to nil.

I don't know, I've noticed some prices have been trending downward. There are a lot of bubbles that ride on internet hype. Once people lose interest, the bubble deflates. I see this a lot with vintage lens prices. Some lens will get internet hype (blog posts, forum threads, videos, etc.) prices will climb for a year or two, and then start to fall. Either because people have moved on to the next magical old lens, or because the few people bidding them up to absurd prices finally all got what they want, and now the rest are left for everybody else. And it is never a lens which is actually rare, only something which is just uncommon enough that supply is limited, but never rare enough to be unobtainable online for more than a few days or weeks at the most.

I remember about 8 to 9 years ago when the Diana camera bubble reached its peak and people were bidding old plastic toy cameras up to $150-$200 on ebay. Now you can find them all day long for $20, often ending without bids.

A lot of old stuff is still practically worthless. But we don't notice how worthless it is because nobody is hyping it up on the internet, so nobody is searching for it on ebay.

 

[mani]

I remember about 8 to 9 years ago when the Diana camera bubble reached its peak and people were bidding old plastic toy cameras up to $150-$200 on ebay. Now you can find them all day long for $20, often ending without bids.

The Diana camera phenomenon isn't typical precisely because the original high demand for vintage Diana cameras was followed by an enormous amount of newly produced cameras by Lomo. These can be found everywhere for sale, brand new, and have by now been over-produced for their target-market.

On the other hand, their popularity has indeed led to a broader interest in film photography in an audience that otherwise might never have tried it.

 

[tunalegs]

Sure. But that's not the only bubble I've watched deflate. To say nothing of the cameras and lenses that haven't risen in value at all over the past five or six years (or longer).

 

[bucs]

The only amazing thing about this thread is that nobody has blamed the high prices on 'hipsters'.

Oh yes the hipsters are partly to blame. Those running LSI (lomography)

 

[LukeBanks]

All of the small automatic 35mm cameras became hugely popular with the Lomo / Diana / etc movement over the past few years. I've never really understood why but the Olympus Trip 35 seemed to be the darling camera for many of those types of shooters, in London anyway. The Photographers Gallery bookshop have been selling them for a couple of years now. For £95. They're regularly sold out. I don't get it.

 

[David Murphy]

I simply don't understand this lofty, patronizing, dismissive attitude from the RFF old-timers.

Why exactly are the laws of supply and demand "Fashion" or "hysteria"?

More and more people are discovering film photography, but naturally the old guard here feel the need to insult and belittle newcomers for their naive stupidity paying 'inflated' prices for film cameras.

I can't even say how many times I've seen the economic idocy of people on RFF saying stuff like "I can't believe buyers are paying $nnn for camera-X. I have four of them gathering dust on my shelf..." Ye DUH! If all the old fogeys would actually release their dusty old cameras onto the market, there wouldn't be scarcity pricing for the ones that are available.

Aside from this simple commonsense, I'm frankly sick to death of hearing from the RFF old-timers how new film enthusiasts are just buying the cameras as 'fashion' accessories. The only amazing thing about this thread is that nobody has blamed the high prices on 'hipsters'.

Masses of new people are getting interested in film. They need to buy cameras. Get over it.

We are having fun chatting with each other - try it sometime, you might enjoy it.

 

[HHPhoto]

(this quote as a generic example of the attitude of so many RFFers)

I simply don't understand this lofty, patronizing, dismissive attitude from the RFF old-timers.

Why exactly are the laws of supply and demand "Fashion" or "hysteria"?

More and more people are discovering film photography, but naturally the old guard here feel the need to insult and belittle newcomers for their naive stupidity paying 'inflated' prices for film cameras.

I can't even say how many times I've seen the economic idocy of people on RFF saying stuff like "I can't believe buyers are paying $nnn for camera-X. I have four of them gathering dust on my shelf..." Ye DUH! If all the old fogeys would actually release their dusty old cameras onto the market, there wouldn't be scarcity pricing for the ones that are available.

Aside from this simple commonsense, I'm frankly sick to death of hearing from the RFF old-timers how new film enthusiasts are just buying the cameras as 'fashion' accessories. The only amazing thing about this thread is that nobody has blamed the high prices on 'hipsters'.

Masses of new people are getting interested in film. They need to buy cameras. Get over it.

+1.
You've described the situation exactly.
It's the same "grumpy old men" brigade who has told us for years that "film is dead".
But they have been wrong, film is getting stronger again, starting a revival.
And they have severe problems to accept that they have been wrong. They thought they are market experts, but reality have proven them wrong.

Parts of the film market like Fuji Instax are booming, having now a market volume which is even more than double (!!) the size of the (completely overrated) DSLM market e.g.
We should not forget: Some years ago these people said that instant film will be the first film type killed by digital.
The complete opposite happened instead.

With increasing interest in film (especially by young photographers) prices for used film cameras will rise in the coming years.
That is just normal and nothing to worry about. It is good.
The higher the prices will be in the next years, the more attractive it will be for camera manufacturers to introduce new film cameras again.
I bet we will see new film cameras in the mid and long term.

For buyers there is currently still a very good situation:
Because the best film cameras are currently still offered as real bargains:
- Nikon F80, F90X, F100, F5
- Canon EOS 300X, EOS 30V/33V, EOS 3, EOS 1V
- Minolta Dynax 600si, 700si, 800si, Dynax 7, Dynax 9
- Pentax MZ 5N, MZ-3, Z1P
- Leica R7, R8, R9
- Contax Aria
- Rolleiflex 6000 series
- Mamiya 645 series
- Zenza Bronica
just as some examples of excellent cameras which are currently still extremely cheap and underrated on the used market.
Now is the best time to build a camera system with one main camera and a second one as a back-up.
Clever photographers use the time now to get these best cameras at bargain prices.

Cheers, Jan

 

[David Murphy]

I don't know, I've noticed some prices have been trending downward. There are a lot of bubbles that ride on internet hype. Once people lose interest, the bubble deflates. I see this a lot with vintage lens prices. Some lens will get internet hype (blog posts, forum threads, videos, etc.) prices will climb for a year or two, and then start to fall. Either because people have moved on to the next magical old lens, or because the few people bidding them up to absurd prices finally all got what they want, and now the rest are left for everybody else. And it is never a lens which is actually rare, only something which is just uncommon enough that supply is limited, but never rare enough to be unobtainable online for more than a few days or weeks at the most.

I remember about 8 to 9 years ago when the Diana camera bubble reached its peak and people were bidding old plastic toy cameras up to $150-$200 on ebay. Now you can find them all day long for $20, often ending without bids.

A lot of old stuff is still practically worthless. But we don't notice how worthless it is because nobody is hyping it up on the internet, so nobody is searching for it on ebay.

Well if you are right, it might explain the Rolleiflex "bubble". A few years ago one could buy a used 2.8 Rolleiflex for $300-500. Now anything less than at least $1000 without some sort of serious defect seems impossible to find. The fact that Franke and Heidecke appears to be bankrupt for good now, may be partly responsible for the astonishing prices. The market may be reflecting the sobering fact that the Rolleiflex is really gone for good.

Alpa's are another example. These were always expensive cameras, but now the prices are simply astronomical. It would really help the film world if Voitgtlander returned to producing a line of modest priced quality lenses and cameras like they did a few years ago (mainly in LTM).

 

[David Murphy]

You should check out Thomas the Tank Engine toys. The original wooden ones that run on wooden track. My wife bought tons of them when my son was 3. He only liked the ones he commonly saw on TV, so we ended up never opening up the less well known characters, which stayed in their boxes. Well, the boy is 8 now, and too old for Thomas trains.

My wife had bought bunches of these for about $10 when Toys R Us was trying to get rid of slow moving stock. 5 years later, these "Rare" characters, in unopened boxes have tremendous value. They typically sell for $50 - $80 each. That's far better than the stock market has done in that time. Yes, ebay is where you get the most money when selling.

Thanks for the tip. I have a young Thomas fan in my house - we are rather loaded up on the stuff. I'll be sure and store anything Thomas away carefully when he outgrows it! Maybe it will help pay for his college.

 

[radi(c)al_cam]

Oh yes the hipsters are partly to blame. Those running LSI (lomography)

You're right, hipsters/nipsters/all that incredibly uniform «individualists» are to blame, but no, certainly not the guys in Vienna. In Vienna they have a law against that ugly phenomenon; they drown hipsters/nipsters etc. in the Danube.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Fashion influences the laws of supply and demand.

So does hysteria: think of tulipmania, the South Sea bubble, and the dot.com bubble.

This is not "grumpy old men": it's basic economics.

Cheers,

R.

 

[mani]

Fashion influences the laws of supply and demand.

So does hysteria: think of tulipmania, the South Sea bubble, and the dot.com bubble.

This is not "grumpy old men": it's basic economics.

Cheers,

R.

I don't need clarification of basic economics (something being 'in fashion' == greater demand. wow!) I was discussing the dismissive terms of the entire thread: the entire tone of 'Look at these idiots paying so absurdly much for x-camera'.

It's tough for the grumpy old men to accept that a whole generation of plebeians have joined their exclusive club. Especially after they spent so many years prophesying its death with such certainty.

 

[Scrambler]

For buyers there is currently still a very good situation:
Because the best film cameras are currently still offered as real bargains:
- Nikon F80, F90X, F100, F5
- Canon EOS 300X, EOS 30V/33V, EOS 3, EOS 1V
- Minolta Dynax 600si, 700si, 800si, Dynax 7, Dynax 9
- Pentax MZ 5N, MZ-3, Z1P
- Leica R7, R8, R9
- Contax Aria
- Rolleiflex 6000 series
- Mamiya 645 series
- Zenza Bronica
just as some examples of excellent cameras which are currently still extremely cheap and underrated on the used market.

SNIP

Cheers, Jan

I'll bite.

While agreeing with the general sentiment (cameras going up is a good sign not a bad one), I find the list above disagreeing with my general view of reality.

Firstly, there is no such thing as a good price for an MZ-x/xx Pentax (expect maybe the MZ-60 which came later) because they are all ticking time bombs with fragile mirror return cogs. You are certainly welcome to any of the the dead ones I still have - free if you pay postage.

Second, many of the cameras you list (Zenza Bronica the clearest example to me, but others as well) run to fairly decent money - Leica territory - for bodies which if worn are unrepairable. And this is based on quite a lot of checking because I would like a medium format camera more modern than my 1950s examples.

Sometimes prices are really weird. I have a Pentax K100D - still worth around $100AUD, but the Epson R-D1 is worth more than $1000AUD, uses the same sensor, has narrower software options and can neither focus nor fully auto-control anything. The image software overall is twice as good as the Pentax, but surely the package isn't ten times better.

The same variations come into film. Frankly, for most uses get a 1960s Pentax - an S3, S1, S1a or SV, even one of the multitude of Spotmatics, for the same peanuts as the plastic self-destructing 1990s MZ-whatever and have a camera that will last essentially forever with occasional care.

 

[Arbitrarium]

I don't need clarification of basic economics (something being 'in fashion' == greater demand. wow!) I was discussing the dismissive terms of the entire thread: the entire tone of 'Look at these idiots paying so absurdly much for x-camera'.

It's tough for the grumpy old men to accept that a whole generation of plebeians have joined their exclusive club. Especially after they spent so many years prophesying its death with such certainty.

I'm about as hipster as they come. Beard? Check. Uses old cameras? Check. Drinks craft beer? Check. And I only started photography/collecting cameras about 5 years ago.

I didn't start this thread as a resentful, bitter clique member, if anything I'm part of the young crowd that are driving prices up.

All I was doing was raising a point. Not even an interesting one. Chill your beans, you sound more like a grumpy old man than anyone else on this thread.

 

[HHPhoto]

I'll bite.

While agreeing with the general sentiment (cameras going up is a good sign not a bad one), I find the list above disagreeing with my general view of reality.

Firstly, there is no such thing as a good price for an MZ-x/xx Pentax (expect maybe the MZ-60 which came later) because they are all ticking time bombs with fragile mirror return cogs. You are certainly welcome to any of the the dead ones I still have - free if you pay postage.

Honestly, never heard of that problem. Several friends of mine are using Pentaxes of the MZ serie (MZ-5n and MZ-3) for years without any problems.

Second, many of the cameras you list (Zenza Bronica the clearest example to me, but others as well) run to fairly decent money - Leica territory - for bodies which if worn are unrepairable. And this is based on quite a lot of checking because I would like a medium format camera more modern than my 1950s examples.

I have to strongly disagree, because
- none of the cameras listed are in "Leica territory" (even not the R models listed), all are very cheap (at least here in Europe...😉)
- I know that Zenza Bronica has no official service anymore, but that does not mean that they cannot be repaired anymore: two completely different things. Good camera repair companies use broken bodies as spare parts spender and are able to repair lots of cameras with no official service anymore (here in Germany dozens of repair companies are doing that).

Nikon F5 and Canon EOS 1V can be bought for 250-300€ in good condition here in Europe. An F100 or EOS 3 for about 100-200€.
F90X and F80 for less than 50€.
EOS 30/33V for less than 50€.
It is ridiculous how cheap these cameras currently are.
Lots of them have very little "mileage" and are almost as new.

Cheers, Jan

 

[Scrambler]

Jan, the mirror cog is an issue - just google. Can be replaced if you want to spend a lot more than the camera is or ever will be worth.

And the early Bronicas use soft cogs and are reportedly unrepairable. Later models use harder cogs, a different story. Still, that gets them into twice the price of a IIIc or approaching an M2 price. I don't own a Bronica so I don't have the hard physical evidence for this like I do for the Pentax comment.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Strange... Nobody wanted my absolutely working M3, not trashed, all vulcanite intact at low end BiN on ebay. Some wanted it cheap with BO, but after two months of lowballing at ebay, I realized it was shame on me to try to sell it. I pull it out from sale few weeks ago. It is my bag now and I'm going to get original case for it today.

BTW, FSU RF gear is at its lowest prices now. Single digit prices for 50mm RF lenses are common.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I don't need clarification of basic economics (something being 'in fashion' == greater demand. wow!) I was discussing the dismissive terms of the entire thread: the entire tone of 'Look at these idiots paying so absurdly much for x-camera'.

It's tough for the grumpy old men to accept that a whole generation of plebeians have joined their exclusive club. Especially after they spent so many years prophesying its death with such certainty.

Or perhaps you do.

Is it dismissive? Where, and how? Why do you see simple observations on prices as the maunderings of "grumpy old men"?

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I interviewed a young guy wanting a photo assistant job. He suggested I fire my current assistant of many years and hire him.. because he deserved a chance. Another recent photo school grad suggested I retire because people like me were getting all the work.

Quite. Economic idiocy is far from the preserve of the old. The same is true of a baseless sense of entitlement.

Cheers,

R.

 

[retinax]

I've just now noticed again that ebay sold listings show the initial BIN asking price even if the item has been sold for a lower offer (on these listings that accept offers). Pretty outrageous, as that makes checking price levels pretty pointless. In case someone is looking at ltm Steinheil Culminar 85/2.8s, no, the one that just today in Germany didn't go for 180€. Slightly over half.