How Do You Afford This Addiction/Affliction?

How Do You Afford This Addiction/Affliction?

Strange question .... I think of it more as an affection and if I couldn't afford it, I wouldn't.

I probably have more than the value of one M9 and 35/1.4 FLE in various film cameras and lenses. Then again, walking around with two M9 bodies, and at least two Summilux FLE priced lenses in a single bag would seem strange to me ....

I also don't understand how people can be satisfied with owning a single M9, given the risk of failure of any Leica, and the time it would take to repair it.

Roland.
 
For me, that's easy: (1) it's been reliable enough for my amateur, non-pro, use (at least as reliable as my film M bodies & certainly more reliable than the M8); & (2) it would not be difficult to find a new or used replacement (unlike the case when it was 1st introduced, or any of the current lenses even now), even on short notice.

ferider said:
I also don't understand how people can be satisfied with owning a single M9, given the risk of failure of any Leica, and the time it would take to repair it.

Roland.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Quite simply: I no longer do. There was a brief time when the trend lines of my earning power and Leica's prices crossed. But I look at the current prices of Leica lenses and I think that moment is loooong gone. $3,100 for a 35/2 lens? $5,000 for a 35/1.4? Game over for the moment. When I did have the scratch, I rationalized by telling myself that I had no other expensive vices (clothes, watches, cars, boats, houses, drugs, floozies etc.). It was my beloved boring life that allowed me these specific toys. Now when I want to buy a new camera (Fuuuuji, where are you?) I have to think about what to sell: cameras are easier to sell than lenses.

Edit: at the moment, abstention (clothes, watches, cars, boats, houses, drugs, floozies etc.) is immaterial. I don't have the cash to spend on EITHER these things OR a $5,000 lens. But proof of my sickness is that when I play the "what if I won the lottery" game, there is some pretty nice gear that lines the shelves.
 
ferider said:
I also don't understand how people can be satisfied with owning a single M9, given the risk of failure of any Leica, and the time it would take to repair it.

Roland.
Click to expand...


Dear Roland,

Possibly because (a) they're serious about rangefinder photography and (b) want to use digital as well as film and (c) they can't afford two and (d) Leicas are nothing like as unreliable as you seem to think. I realize it's tempting fate but in 43 years of Leica use (6 of them digital) I've had precisely one problem that I couldn't fix on the spot, a jammed, 40-year-old M2.

Cheers,

R.
 
benlees said:
Well, I'm a working class stiff with a family and a mortgage and I have a nicely beat up M4P that I really like. I won't own any Leica lenses because their prices don't accurately reflect their superiority to other lenses. Ditto for digital Leica. When you don't have a lot of money compromise is not such a dirty word!
Click to expand...

Me too.

But I have so much fun with my beat up M4-P and that one non-leica lens welded to it. The rest is between my skill and vision, which won't change an ounce had I wielded two M9's + Noctilux.

It's not so much as a compromise, for me, a choice rather.
I'd rather use the money for M9 to take my family (and my favorite cameras) to visit new places.
 
Roger Hicks said:
Possibly because (a) they're serious about rangefinder photography and (b) want to use digital as well as film and (c) they can't afford two and (d) Leicas are nothing like as unreliable as you seem to think. I realize it's tempting fate but in 43 years of Leica use (6 of them digital) I've had precisely one problem that I couldn't fix on the spot, a jammed, 40-year-old M2.
Click to expand...

Let me rephrase then, Roger. I own more than 2 film Ms. And occasionally things happen (broken light meter, burnt shutter curtains, etc). As you said, rarely anything very serious and maybe because the cameras are > 20 years old. But (1) I have multiple bodies and (2) many things can be adjusted DIY or fixed out of the house by a certified Leica technician with a maximum of 14 days return. That just wouldn't work for the M9. It would have to go to Solms or NY, and likely not be back for months. My film Ms are pretty sturdy but not military grade. Why should the M9 be more reliable ?

What I'm trying to say, for me, if you cann't afford two M9 bodies, you cann't afford one.

furcafe said:
(2) it would not be difficult to find a new or used replacement (unlike the case when it was 1st introduced, or any of the current lenses even now), even on short notice.
Click to expand...

I didn't think about that; makes sense to me :)

Roland.
 
1) No wife or kids for the past 25+ years.

2) I buy good reasonably priced used equipment.

Quote: "I Spent Most of My Money on Whiskey and Women. The Rest I Just Wasted."
 
My first new M gear was a Zeiss lens. I now have three. I have bought four second hand film Leicas in 27 years, the last a relatively cheap M5 and one M4 stolen and one M4-2 traded in for an M6. I don't smoke and I don't drink much and I don't play golf. I could possibly afford a new Leica lens or two but hardly think I would choose to do it. Maybe the 50 Summarit. I would like a 50 Summilux again to replace the one stolen 26 years ago, but I simply couldn't justify the money, yet. But I just spent even more than that on an M9-P. This keeps me in the M system and reduces my near term lens requirements to nothing. It saves me an hour of precious weekend time each week going across town for film and scans. I have a scanner but I work long hours and don't have time for scanning or darkroom. The beauty of digital is that some of the batch work can be done in disconnected pockets of time.

My backup for my son's rowing event was the M2 loaded with Ektar. It wasn't used. If this works out well in the medium term I might even get a second digital M but I have no intention of keeping up to date. For evening stuff my backup can be the X100. The cost of photography is all about prioritization, of time and money. If I hadn't bought an M9 I would have got an X Pro 1 and the three lenses, and others to come. I think I've made a reasonable decision for me. My family does not disapprove. My son was with me and gave his permission. Having recently got the guitar of his choice he had no argument and did not mount one. My wife approved. And now I am spending nothing for some time.
 
My stuff is either old or acquired during Leica's dark days of '05.

I could never justify spending those bucks on new Leica today, just on principle, -- their stuff is good, but not that good -- w/ the possible exception of a digital rangefinder, because there's no other choice, but fortunately I still shoot film and have no desire for a digital M. Even if I wanted a digital M, I would have to feel strong about it; there are so many other fine digital options.

And there're viable alternatives in terms of lenses too, especially from Zeiss. So if I were purchasing a new lens today, it wouldn't have 'Leica' printed on it.

But generally in my rather limited collection of 8-9 film cameras, I don't get something unless I part with something. It's not growing; there' not none of that equipment hoarding. And I'm acquiring to find what works for me and my life, and I'm pretty brutal about getting rid of something if it doesn't.

Plus, like other, no bad habits, and no kids.
 
Come to think of it, I consider Leica gear as rental. I will likely recover my cash expenditure on selling it. I can't do that with any other gear.

So with Leica stuff, it isn't so much as a purchase as it is a very expensive refundable deposit, to the time that I "sell/return" the item.

Well, for lenses anyone. Not sure that the money I spent on an M9 will be recoverable.


....Vick
 
I work hard and play hard :)

Seriously, 4 years ago, I was in Selfridges looking wantingly at an M9 which had just been left behind by someone who had ordered it and for whatever reason decided not to take it and, my wonderfully supporting fiancée (girlfriend back then) said to me, go on, you work hard enough, treat yourself... An hour later I was home with one of my childhood dreams. I'm still in love, with both ladies :)
 
He he he. Well, I've got a wife, a mortgage, a car (a couple, actually), fortunately few debts, but a daughter who I just put through college and who's now planning on getting married in a couple of years :eek:, so ... no surprises ... I don't own a 'lux, or an M9, and am not likely to. But I don't care. :)

In fact, I don't think I've ever spent much more than $300 on a single lens, but through careful shopping have a small collection of nice Leica, Canon, and CV lenses and film bodies (including a couple of Ms) that give me a lot of pleasure. So, as much by choice as by necessity, I'm a bottom feeder in the RF/Leica used market... I guess this sort of proves the Dave's original point... :D
 
As a pastor, I afford camera great through selling indulgences. That's how St. Peter's was built, so why not and M9 and Noctilux?
 
With a mortgage as my only debt, I just save up for the gear that I really want. Not having a lot of gear ( and owning only one Leica lens ) helps out. If I could get rid of my other vices ( good food and wine, and travel ) then I could afford more. But then I'd probably put the saved money into a better stereo system...
 
I think it was Wes Anderson who proclaimed that he couldn't have done Bottle Rocket without credit cards. When I was younger and more foolish, I took that to heart and put lots of stuff on credit, as if I were going to do something "great" with photography. Well, it's all paid off, and the Leica stuff is worth more, but I haven't bought anything in a few years. But the real reason is that I got re-married, and there's no WAY I could get away with that now. We're adopting a kid from China, in cash, at a cost of about 4 M9's, and I'm looking forward to that trip in the fall. And I prefer film, so I'm out of the game anyway :)
 
Yes, I am joking about the indulgences. I am the chaplain at my gun club and tried a sideline in blessing targets and ammo before matches, for a small fee of course. I drew the line when some asked me to curse their opponents ammo though.

Seriously, I love the hunt. I have relatively deep but narrow knowledge of a few things and an EBay account. Given enough time and searching you can afford some nice things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom