Homeless with an M9

[Roger Hicks]

An expensive Leica is not a prerequisite to making extraordinary photographs. Think photographs first and camera gear last. And read some photo history for comfort: many of history's great images were produced by individuals who had few resources and much lesser cameras.

Did anyone say it was?

But given the choice I'd rather use a Leica, because they suit me better. They have done since 1969 when I bought a IIIa for £30.

What does "Think photographs first and camera gear last" actually mean? Nothing. "Think photographs" means that you need a camera. Given that not all cameras are the same, the next thing to think is "What camera should I use?"

Cheers,

R.

 

[Godfrey]

witzansky :

i like your photos. keep going!

your living situation and predicament, well, good luck!
life has its up and downs. i'm sure you'll figure it out.

G

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Not what I want to, but if I bring M9 to my wife, I'll be homeless instantly.

 

[witzansky]

Thank you all for the great advice!
And thank you for the... What is it called "chear up, stop whining"
And for the feedback on my photos!

possibly an appropriate time to start shooting film 🙂 gear (and partners) come and go
good luck with the life transition and keep your head up!

I have my Canon F-1N, and it will see a lot more use now.

It's too bad you can't keep your M9 and sell your girlfriend!

The photo series sounds like a great idea, good luck with finding a new home. In a few months time it'll look like no big deal.

I feel the same way, after the did this to me!

It seems to me, i don't hear about a job..
Women are very logical and realistic.
Are you able to contribute, to the relationship?
The Leica M9 is a great box.
A simple basic camera should suffice.
Make a plan. The girl may see it as relationship that can't work.

I do have a job, thats how i could afford a camera like that. (and many years of saving)
It is her parrents appartment and we both pay our rent. 🙂

I wound up homeless with an M9 a slough of Leica lenses and an X100 a few years ago. I got billed for an ER visit the VA was supposed to take care of. And it was at a VA medical center!
Sold it all off, switched back to film, traveled across the country, bought an old Mercedes diesel and a Nikon D2x, got a job, got some inspiration. It's been an uphill battle for the most part since then with some severe setbacks but I'm still alive and now I own two of my dream cameras (Leica M4 and a Mamiya 6) as well as a fantastic Nikon D3 that I use for work.

All the gear comes and goes. Significant others come and go. Keep your good friends close and make sure to thank them as often as possible and contribute as often as you can. Learn to rely on yourself for 100% of your living and you'll find that you're really a very rich person in life.

Sell that M9 and pick a favorite focal length lens to find when you get a cheaper film camera, whatever it may be. Stick with one camera and one lens and you'll come out of this with a very impressive and inspired body of work. Some of the best work people can do is when they are pushed to hustle for a living, day to day. Get yourself back on your feet but keep a camera with you always if you want to be a photographer. Shoot when you can. When you can't afford to develop or find good clean dark space to load film into a tank, you can always just stick the film in the fridge and wait for a better day. No batteries to worry about (depending upon the camera,) no buffers to wait on, no electricity to worry about finding to charge or operate the computer. You can do it.

If you're in the US, I have a few cameras I can send to you for free. They work just fine.

Phil Forrest

So nice to hear your story, it sure is an inspiration for me, now that I see myself in the same sort of situation. Really nice to hear how you got by.
And thank you for the very generous offer, but I have my Canon F-1n and I live in Denmark.

 

[leicapixie]

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2297320#post2297320

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2297320#post2297320

Glad to hear you have a job.
Don't see why you can't keep the camera..
OK, new place, moving, some furniture.
Friends will help! Accept gratefully.

Going with film is very romantic.
Reality, more expenditure.
Sure it's expensive.
So if it works what else would do it for you?

My Leica M3 has survived a marriage, numerous relationships,
re-settlements in different continents.
Yup! "Gypsy" with camera .

The girl.. well sometimes it's better to not go further.
Till you find the right one, they come regularly like buses.

In time you will both move on.

Grab the camera, go shoot!

 

[VertovSvilova]

Did anyone say it was?

But given the choice I'd rather use a Leica, because they suit me better. They have done since 1969 when I bought a IIIa for £30.

What does "Think photographs first and camera gear last" actually mean? Nothing. "Think photographs" means that you need a camera. Given that not all cameras are the same, the next thing to think is "What camera should I use?"

Cheers,

R.

Given the choice I'd rather use a Leica, too (and I own two of them; M4 and M6.) But if I were so broke that I couldn't afford to keep them because I was being kicked out of my residence, then I would do like the OP is having to do and sell them. But clearly not having the M9 (and it is expensive, that's simply reality) wouldn't mean the OP couldn't still produce excellent photographs.

It's basically telling him not to fret. It's just a camera. He needs to get finances and life figured out first. And so therefore get any camera and make photographs. Any camera is still capable of making extraordinary photographs. And it's the photograph itself that is the end result (unless it really is just about having cameras; then that's another story altogether.) The OP can still make good photographs with pretty much anything. He's making good ones already and it's not because he owns a Leica. And in this case of particular financial necessity in respect to his own personal situation, it doesn't have to be a Leica M9. And it really shouldn't be if one has to sell it to find an apartment (which does suggests there's no 'rainy day' fund in the bank.)

And so I tried to 'comfort' him to find solace in the fact that there are many great photographs made with so-called 'lesser' cameras. "Think photographs first and camera gear last" is precisely what it means. Think about the end product and what the photograph itself is about (in the context of you being the author); what you use to make that photograph is up to you. And yes, how the particular camera itself might facilitate you in doing so. But in this particular case it doesn't mean it needs to be a Leica, and it probably shouldn't be financially speaking. As the OP already stated, he will replace it with a Fuji. And the reality is that he will no doubt make great photographs with that camera, too. And hopefully get back into a good financial position and find a permanent place to live, etc..

It's not too hard to understand 🙂

 

[Takkun]

Agreed on the above. There's a list of gear I regret selling, but nothing I can't get back.
You could think of it this way: sell it now and you'll get a high price, buy one in a year and you'll get it low.
My ex moved out unexpectedly and took all my canon gear, the previous ex trashed one of my bodies in a light-leak-inspired craze. I learned my lesson enough that when my current SO asked to borrow one for a 6-week trip to Asia, she got the holga...

 

[noisycheese]

@ Louis -

I looked at your Flickr images - you do have talent. Whatever you do, don't give up on photography...

Hmmm, you have a job so you do have some sort of income.

Do you have any other assets you could part with in order to be able to keep your M9? What about Leica M lenses? If you have more than one, you could sell off one and keep your favorite(s) to use. If you have only one M lens, you could sell it and keep the M9; it will be easier to replace a lens than an M9.

I understand your great reluctance to part with your M9.

We must have a bunch of rich people around here. There are alot of "Hey it's just a camera, it can be easily replaced down the road whenever you want" type comments. That's not the case for some of us; not everyone here vomits $1000 dollar bills and poops gold nuggets.

I wish you all the best and hope everything will be resolved in your favor. We all have dark days and tough times; just remember that those times are temporary.

 

[VertovSvilova]

We must have a bunch of rich people around here. There are alot of "Hey it's just a camera, it can be easily replaced down the road whenever you want" type comments. That's not the case for some of us; not everyone here vomits $1000 dollar bills and poops gold nuggets.

I think you might have misinterpreted "it's just a camera." I certainly can't poop gold nuggets and I wouldn't have bought a $7k camera body unless I was financially secure enough to afford contingency plans for unexpected emergencies. The OP says he has to sell the camera in order to get an apartment. That means there's no other resources that he has (no reserve in the bank.) So I think it's appropriate to remind him that "it's only a camera." Which means life and security (shelter) is more important. A camera can be replaced (he did buy one in the first place, and so he could do it again after he gets his more important ducks in a row.) A camera is an object that is replaceable (even if it takes some effort to replace it.)

I think people are just trying to be empathetic when they say "it's only a camera." In other words, look out for your own well-being first; a particular camera (i.e., an expensive Leica M9) isn't as important as one's health and psyche. And the fact is the OP can still make great photographs with something else less expensive (e.g., the Fuji he mentions.) At least that was my whole point..... I can't speak for the others. But I assume that's what they were meaning, too.

 

[noisycheese]

I think you might have misinterpreted "it's just a camera."

Hmmm, maybe so. It did sound rather cavalier but I get what you are saying now.

I was trying to present some other options that might help him get an apartment without him having to part with his M9. I know how hard it would be to replace an asset of that value (for me, at least...)

 

[YYV_146]

I think you might have misinterpreted "it's just a camera." I certainly can't poop gold nuggets and I wouldn't have bought a $7k camera body unless I was financially secure enough to afford contingency plans for unexpected emergencies. The OP says he has to sell the camera in order to get an apartment. That means there's no other resources that he has (no reserve in the bank.) So I think it's appropriate to remind him that "it's only a camera." Which means life and security (shelter) is more important. A camera can be replaced (he did buy one in the first place, and so he could do it again after he gets his more important ducks in a row.) A camera is an object that is replaceable (even if it takes some effort to replace it.)

I think people are just trying to be empathetic when they say "it's only a camera." In other words, look out for your own well-being first; a particular camera (i.e., an expensive Leica M9) isn't as important as one's health and psyche. And the fact is the OP can still make great photographs with something else less expensive (e.g., the Fuji he mentions.) At least that was my whole point..... I can't speak for the others. But I assume that's what they were meaning, too.

This.

Between a place to live and an M9, the choice is all too obvious. On the plus side, if the OP buys another M9 a few years down the road, he'll probably pay less than what he sold the camera for...

 

[Thardy]

One good is that the sale of the M9 could generate a good amount of cash to help take care of business. If it comes to that.

What about staying with (good) friends just long enough to save for an apartment and keep the camera?

 

[Phil_F_NM]

Going with film is very romantic.
Reality, more expenditure.
Sure it's expensive.
So if it works what else would do it for you?

While film may be viewed as more romantic, in many circumstances, it's far more practical.

Film may seem more expensive but the equity tied in an M9 is an incredible amount of money, especially if one has a film camera that works already.

Here in the Philly, the cost of an M9 is equal to 778 rolls of Tri-X with professional development at Philly Photographics. That's 28,000 images. Most folks don't shoot an insane amount of images like professionals do so the choice of the M9 has to be one of desire, not because it's cheaper. The camera would pay for itself in three to four years of savings against the film use. Then there's the computer, software, long-term storage, SD cards, battery replacement. All those things add up to both monetary and opportunity cost. By the time the average Leica shooter had their M9 start to save them over film images, the MM and ME were being released to the market. If you take a used M9 from a dealer then you're still in it for upwards of 20,000 frames before it becomes cost effective with respect to the camera alone.

I got my M9 on the student discount so I only had to shoot about 21,000 frames to begin to see my savings but I never got close to that figure. I reached about 7500 frames over the ten months of actual use (ten months the camera was at Leica for repair.) Add to that the 4TB of storage I built in a tower server, several 1TB external drives, eight or so 2 and 4GB SD cards and I was back up to the cost of a brand new M9 sans discount. I didn't even pay for software either because I'm an open source user, choosing to do all my work on programs ported to Linux such as UFRAW, GIMP and Darktable.

That all added up makes my beat up old Leica M4 and Nikon LS4000 scanner seem almost free in comparison. Between the camera, 50mm Summicron and the scanner, the total outlay was $1800. They paid for themselves about nine years ago.

These days my digital is a D3 with a set of AiS lenses that have paid for themselves in the space of ten months. I don't shoot a ton of frames but I can. When I'm shooting a sports match, I'll shoot far more than usual but most of the time I'm shooting very conservatively because I hate editing. it slows me down and keeps me indoors.

When it worked well, I loved my M9 (I despised it and Leica when it wasn't working) so I'm only playing the film devil's advocate because of the life situation that the OP is in.

Phil Forrest

 

[jsrockit]

Here in the Philly, the cost of an M9 is equal to 778 rolls of Tri-X with professional development at Philly Photographics. That's 28,000 images.

Seems like some funny math is going on here Phil... 😉

 

[Thardy]

Seems like some funny math is going on here Phil... 😉

The assumption is M9 cost about $7000. I guess when new it did.

The film $4.00 roll maybe a little light on this assumption
Develop only - $5.00 per website

So $7000/$9per roll = 777.77 rolls of film

Fascinating.

 

[Phil_F_NM]

I buy bulk Tri-X which is where I got that figure. I "fudge" averaged the cost of about 16 rolls of 36ex Tri-X against the bulk stuff which really isn't much cheaper these days, erring on the more expensive side per-roll to give the M9 a fighting chance. Against religiously bulk loaded film with good reusable canisters like IXMOOs or NKK cans, it would take a decade of shooting with the M9 to make up that kind of cost savings. Right now the OP is looking to save money though so if he has a changing bag, bulk loading is the way to go.

But even at used-from-dealer prices the M9 is going to cost in excess of $4,000USD and at $9/roll (film+processing) that's still more images than most of the folks who own an M9 will take in several years.

I'm only contending that the cost of the camera + ancillary gear is much higher than most folks admit and to rationalize the purchase they see the savings in opportunity cost (developing immediately in their computer) and daily production cost, since there appears to be none. Therefore the purchase of an M9 or ME or MM or 240 or pretty much anything over the $3000 mark has to be one of desire if the photographer is not a very prolific amateur or professional whose business can write the purchase off.

This is all before printing begins too. Once you take into account a printer that can give you hard copies that are up to snuff, inks and time learning that gear then it's definitely more expensive. Even in one's own bathroom/basement/kitchen, a decent wet print can be made much less expensively these days considering darkroom gear is practically being given away on craigslist. Again, there are the give and take of costs/benefits to wet printing as well.

I guess a more fair comparison would have been to price the film production from purchase to contact print per-roll, since the assumption is that the analogous point on the digital workflow side is the ingestion of images into LR or Silverfast or some other PP program where one can look at them. In that case, each roll from start to finish comes out to $15.25 at the pro lab here in Philly. That's 459 rolls of film against the cost of a new M9. Average cost online of a used M9 body is $4000. Put against film, that's still over 9,400 frames.

We can go on and on about this and it's not a film v. digital thread so much as a cost effectiveness one in lieu of the OP's position in life. One I know too well to be comfortable. I still wish him the best of luck regardless of his choice.

Phil Forrest

 

[stompyq]

I went through something very similar 3 years ago. Except it happened with my wife of 7 years. A women I dearly and faithfully loved. It happened so suddenly as well and right after I moved cities and jobs. Within a few weeks I lost my wife, the roof over my head and my job. Almost all my so called "friends" completely turned a blind eye on me (all except 2). On top of all this I had over $10K of debt added on and some significant health issues (which turned out to all be false alarms).

3 years on, I have a wonderful job, a nice apartment, good friends that I genuinely like and with very little debt. Sell the gear. I know it's hard but you have other priorities. Get your life back on track. You'll be able to buy back all of it again. I sold every single piece of gear that I owned save for one lens (which was going to be my plane ticket home to my parents if all else had failed) just to stay afloat

 

[cz23]

OP, if it does come to parting with the M9, maybe give the Ricoh GR a try. $650 gets you what is among the best B&W output available. Or a GXR. Lots of options to keep the creativity flowing. And that can be important during stressful times. Good luck.

John

 

[noisycheese]

"Homeless with an M9" could be a documentary photo project...

Still, I get it: If you gotta sell the M9 to survive, you gotta do what you gotta do. Living on the streets with a $7000 camera (and a $5000 lens) in your coat pocket could be hazardous to your health.

Regarding the girlfriend who unilaterally and with no warning forced you out onto the streets with no place to live just because she wanted to love alone, well... Let's just say that IMHO she's not a very nice person or a very good girlfriend. 🙄 To force another person out onto the streets of NYC during a record cold winter for no reason other than "I want to live alone for a change" is the very definition of arrogance, heartlessness and narcissism.

You deserve better.

Any human being does, provided they are not endangering, mistreating or abusing the other person in the equation.

 

[__--]

Rather harsh, not having heard the other side of the story, wouldn't you say? Ever hear of "he said, she said?"

Also, with all respect, there are greater existential choices than whether to sell or not to sell an M9 — not to diminish what the witzansky is going through — although I thought there was some humor and élan in his original post that I would not have thought would bring out as much pontificating as some of the posts above exhibit.

—Mitch/Bangkok
Chiang Tung Days [direct download link for pdf file for book project]