Hard decision time...

AlwaysOnAuto

AlwaysOnAuto

Well-known
Local time
4:00 PM
Joined
Mar 6, 2013
Messages
1,356
After this past week of shooting the cars up at Monterey car week, I've come to the point of having to re-think my picture taking with film.
I'm not in a position to be able to afford the film+developing+printing so am considering selling my film cameras so I can get a full frame digital. Ideally what I'd like is a Sony A7 so I could use the old lenses I've got.
Is it sacrilege to sell off a family heirloom to pursue one's desire? I'd like to think my Grannie would be proud that I'm taking pictures even if it's not with her old M3.
What do you guys think?
I've read most of the thread about selling off one camera to get another. Is it the same when it's been handed down?
Thanks for your thoughts.
 
When my father passed away several decades past, I inherited his Leica IIIf kit. It was a nice kit, and he adored that camera ... held it as sacred ... so I wanted to love it and enjoy it.

But I couldn't, it just wasn't terribly pleasant for me to use and my father had wrapped so much emotion into it that I couldn't take the vibe. I sold the whole kit ... camera, summicron 50, elmar 35, hektor 135, visoflex, bellows, all the filters and gizmos ... which funded my way into a medium format kit which proved to be much more fun and useful to me. Whenever I used MF camera, I thought of my father and thought he'd approve since I made the choice that was producing more photographs.

That MF camera has been long gone for years and years too. I still thank my father for the gift that gave it to me, and for all that I learned using it. The equipment itself doesn't matter.

G

... "Equipment is transitory. Photographs endure." ...
 
Thank you for that Godfrey.
I'm thinking along the same lines, seeing it (the M3) as an enabler more than anything else.
Again, thanks.
 
Godfrey is spot on. I just gave a Panasonic G1 (in mint condition) to my 19 year old daughter. I just hopes she gets some enjoyment from it. Maybe it will spark and interest in going further, maybe it won't. If all she gets out of it are some great memories from her photos - I am happy. What she does with the tool, is up to her.
 
Is the cash you get now worth the regret later? For what you would get for the M3 now, it better to just save a bit, stash the M away and see if you ever take it out to use it. If you find after a while you really don't miss using it, then sell it.
 
I hear you Steve, and have thought of that many a time. I had this camera sitting in a closet for over ten years before I finally had time to investigate it and what it was/is. Other than being a really fine piece of mechanical equipment (I'm a gearhead at heart and an ex-machinist too, so I appreciate the camera from that aspect) it holds no special interest for me. It also pains me to hear how people have always wanted one and would love to use one and here I am with one I don't really care to use all that much.
I took over 300 photos last week with my D7000. There's no way I could have done that with the M3 due to the cost involved with it. This is why I'd rather see it go to someone that would at least use it, rather than have it sit in my cabinet.
 
I once spent a lot of money relatively to buy a beautiful Contax IIa. My Dad bought one in the PX in Korea, and took all the family photos with it until he gave it to me around 1973-74.
So 40 years later I buy one and show it to him, and he really didn't recall that he had the same one...

sell the stuff you will never use or enjoy and buy what you will
 
There is no universal camera. Your choice of tools will almost certainly be different than another's, even your Dad's. I would even venture to say that most people change their cameras as their own personal vision changes, grows and matures.

If that particular camera was one of his most important possessions then there is nothing wrong with keeping it, even if you don't use it. If not, then move on.
 
I can only say that despite my love of old cameras I have progressively sold off many that I had acquired and loved - including an M3 - to fund my desire for digital equipment. Some might say its a false economy as digital equipment goes down in value while old Leicas tend to hold much of theirs. But if you need the money and you love actually taking pictures - rather than looking at an heirloom on a mantelpiece then I think this is what you should do. A camera is only useful if its being used. Otherwise its just an artifact.

On the other hand if you are so attached to this camera due to the fact that your granny owned it then that's perfectly understandable and you may well need to hold it. As for me I have never had the advantage of being given an M3. But my dad did give me a gold bracelet that he owned. I sold it to help buy an expensive lens. I was attached to it because it was a gift from him but it was not something I had ever used or would ever use (it was much more his taste - from the 1970s when big chunky gold jewellery was the fashion amongst some men) so I bit the bullet despite the emotional connection.

This is too personal a decision for me to say - but I would say that you should not just keep it unless it means an awful lot to you. If it does mean a great deal to you then keep it and find another way to fund your purchase. I like many others have also sold equipment only to regret it later and have then gone out to buy another. But of course a different M3 would not have the same meaning for you so you have to weigh all that up. ( As for me, I certainly do not envisage going out to buy another chunky gold chain a la my father's :^) )

Before you sell it, if you sell it, take a picture of it and keep the picture. Its a way of preserving the memory and honouring her memory
 
Thank you all for commenting.
I've taken many pictures of the camera as it makes for a very willing subject.
I like the fact that I know where it's been as she traveled the world with it. Right now it's not going anywhere with me, and I feel it should be going somewhere. It's like a fine sports car, they're meant to be used.
 
AlwaysOnAuto said:
I took over 300 photos last week with my D7000. There's no way I could have done that with the M3 due to the cost involved with it. This is why I'd rather see it go to someone that would at least use it, rather than have it sit in my cabinet.
Click to expand...

Steve, just want to comment from a different perspective.
I started photography with digital, still use digital cameras, but my Leica M4-P holds a special place.

The family and I just came back from a road trip to Iowa. Between my wife and I, we took about 300 digital photos. But I only shoot 2 rolls (48 shots) with my M4-P.

Guess which of those photos are the most memorable to me? The film ones.

My point is, in my personal experience doing both digital and film, the photo count is rarely (if ever) an indication for the level of satisfaction that I get looking at the results.
 
They'll never get my dear old Grandmother's Kodak!

My Dad never had an "expensive" camera, although what he did have probably put dents in his budget. He sold off one of his cameras, but I got the other two, and luckily I don't have to worry about them being worth a lot, and tempt me into selling them.

But it's all a matter of preference, and I can understand you feeling that someone should get use out of it, instead of it housing spiders in a closet somewhere. I'm sure your Grandmother would understand. Besides, you can still use the lenses on a new camera with an adapter. So it's not like it's totally gone.

PF
 
You have money for new FF, but no money for 135 film, developing and print?
I don't know what to think.
I guess, 99% of your shots are in color, not in b/w. Or you take ten rolls of b/w per week, every week.
I use my old digital FF for color.
 
i wouldn't sell it. money comes and goes, but heirlooms are irreplaceable. an old camera might not look that significant now, but wait several generations....
 
I once had a black Canon 6L rangefinder. It was in good condition and quite rare (haven't seen one since) and was a good shooter. I traded it in for about $75, which was about the cost (back then) for a new 50mm 2.8 Elmar for my M3. Still have the M3 and Elmar and both are in daily use. Even now, I wish I hadn't traded the Canon. Since then I've acquired quite a few different cameras and lenses, digital and film. If you don't find any particular joy in using your M3, no sense keeping it to gather dust. Just make sure you won't regret it later on. One valid point made above--digital depreciates very quickly and that new Sony you're looking at might not be worth much 5 years from now while the Leica would still be worth quite a few $$. It's your life and your money.
 
A lot depends on sentimental value of the item. If it was me, if it is sentimental, I would not sell it until forced to due to situation.

Currently only Leica drf and Sony A7 are FF for your legacy Leica lenses. If u don't mind apsc (1.5 crop factor - 50mm becomes a 75 fov), there are other cheaper solutions then the A7.
- Sony Nex 6 w/ a 16-50 kit zoom is selling below 500 if I remember correctly
- Sony a6000 w/o a lens - 699
- Ricoh gxr is discontinued u can pick up a gxr body plus a12 m module for under 700
-- the m module has micro lenses designd to be used w/ rf lenses and no aa filter.
If u don't mind the crop factor, maybe the price is low enough not to sell your m3.

Good luck
Gary
 
Keep, sell, re-buy or don't even remember what you had....it's enough said already by other posters.

But is FF only real route to go which meets your vision and needs? Sure, nice to have but there are tons of APSC cameras, new and used, not costing leg and arm.

Personally me - I'd keep camera of my dad or grandma, but that is very personal. Some people don't need this kind of attachments.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom