Graybeard
Longtime IIIf User
Permit me to offer some historical perspective (my personal take on things, of course).
In the 1960's rangefinder cameras had become passe and the camera(s) to have were the Japanese SLR's. This was true even before the advent of TTL metering (or any on-board metering for that matter) and a Pentax H1 was state of the art.
Screw mount Leicas weren't worth much. I remember a store called "Fotoshop" on 32nd Street in NYC, several doors down from Willoughby's, that had shelves of LTM Leicas in the window. These were labelled "any camera this shelf $25" and offered Leica IIIA's, IIIC's, and IIC's with the f2 Summar. This was about 20% of the discounted price of a Pentax.
The $35 shelf had the same cameras with a F3.5 Elmar. The Elmar, at the time, was desirable as an enlarging lens, hence the higher price.
I was a poor student in those days and was able to afford only two cameras: a IIc with a Summar and a IIIf body (which I fitted with a $25 50mm.f1.8 Serenar) to go with the $10 electronic flash I bought at Spiratone. My (also) graduate student wife (same girl as now) was very understanding. With my first job, a Spotmatic F joined the stable.
Nikon rangefinder cameras went for a bit more, but usually well under $100. There were plenty of them in the pawnshops below 14th Street. Twenty exposures of Plus-X had risen in price from 85 cents to just shy of one dollar.
Today, film cameras, obviously Leicas among them, have become less desirable again due to the advent of digital imaging. Used (user) M-series Leicas can be had for $500 or so. Leicaflexes and SL's are much cheaper still. (BTW, don't kid yourself; any second hand camera which you might purchase needs a CLA in order to be a reliable instrument unless the seller can offer you documentation of a recent servicing.)
My point in this ramble is that (IMHO) we are in a similar point in camera pricing as was the case, forty years ago, when SLR's seemed to dominate everything. If one believes that 35mm film will be readily available in the future, then Leicas, and in particular darkroom equipment, are at (relatively) historically low prices. For example, one can readily buy Nikor tanks, with reels, for under $10.
I subscribe to the "film will be available at an acceptable price to me (perhaps as high as $5 for 36 exposures)" position and feel that this is the time for judicious purchase of equipment. I futher submit that B&W photography took its hit sometime between 1985 and 1990 with the advent of cheap color negative film and one-hour minilabs; it follows that mass market color photography, rather than B&W imaging, will be the victim of the digital revolution.
Even greater bargains are to be had with the all-metal SLR's of the 1960's and 1970's; I have several Nikkormats, with f2./50mm Nikkors, that set me back less than $75.
If one feels that 35mm film will not be readily availabe in the future, then everything that I offer here or consideration here will be hogwash to you.
I post this to provoke discussion and invite your comments.
In the 1960's rangefinder cameras had become passe and the camera(s) to have were the Japanese SLR's. This was true even before the advent of TTL metering (or any on-board metering for that matter) and a Pentax H1 was state of the art.
Screw mount Leicas weren't worth much. I remember a store called "Fotoshop" on 32nd Street in NYC, several doors down from Willoughby's, that had shelves of LTM Leicas in the window. These were labelled "any camera this shelf $25" and offered Leica IIIA's, IIIC's, and IIC's with the f2 Summar. This was about 20% of the discounted price of a Pentax.
The $35 shelf had the same cameras with a F3.5 Elmar. The Elmar, at the time, was desirable as an enlarging lens, hence the higher price.
I was a poor student in those days and was able to afford only two cameras: a IIc with a Summar and a IIIf body (which I fitted with a $25 50mm.f1.8 Serenar) to go with the $10 electronic flash I bought at Spiratone. My (also) graduate student wife (same girl as now) was very understanding. With my first job, a Spotmatic F joined the stable.
Nikon rangefinder cameras went for a bit more, but usually well under $100. There were plenty of them in the pawnshops below 14th Street. Twenty exposures of Plus-X had risen in price from 85 cents to just shy of one dollar.
Today, film cameras, obviously Leicas among them, have become less desirable again due to the advent of digital imaging. Used (user) M-series Leicas can be had for $500 or so. Leicaflexes and SL's are much cheaper still. (BTW, don't kid yourself; any second hand camera which you might purchase needs a CLA in order to be a reliable instrument unless the seller can offer you documentation of a recent servicing.)
My point in this ramble is that (IMHO) we are in a similar point in camera pricing as was the case, forty years ago, when SLR's seemed to dominate everything. If one believes that 35mm film will be readily available in the future, then Leicas, and in particular darkroom equipment, are at (relatively) historically low prices. For example, one can readily buy Nikor tanks, with reels, for under $10.
I subscribe to the "film will be available at an acceptable price to me (perhaps as high as $5 for 36 exposures)" position and feel that this is the time for judicious purchase of equipment. I futher submit that B&W photography took its hit sometime between 1985 and 1990 with the advent of cheap color negative film and one-hour minilabs; it follows that mass market color photography, rather than B&W imaging, will be the victim of the digital revolution.
Even greater bargains are to be had with the all-metal SLR's of the 1960's and 1970's; I have several Nikkormats, with f2./50mm Nikkors, that set me back less than $75.
If one feels that 35mm film will not be readily availabe in the future, then everything that I offer here or consideration here will be hogwash to you.
I post this to provoke discussion and invite your comments.
