Is the M9 price falling with the stock market?

People who trade in Leica are putting them? If I'm not mistaken a few years back they were going for firesale prices

Leica may be a good like Hermes...really good return on investment...I wouldn't recommend investing in cameras though unless one had the wheelbase to buy the very best items and sit on them long term
 
I Holland they fell too, a mint M9-P copy with steel/grey leather offered for €2500 looked nice too.
They are eight-ten years old now. That puts the trade-in value at below € 1.200 I think for a regular M9 with rubber finish and heavy signs of usage.
 
jaapv said:
It is the popularity of the CL.
Click to expand...

Have my doubts here, a camera with EVF is in no way a replacement for a Rangefinder-Leica.

I think it's the popularity of the M10, I know many user with zero interest in the M240/262 who switched in the last year from the M9 to the M10 or M10-P, means more M9 on the market, means lower prices. Also quite important, the low priced M9's have often no sensor replacement like the one linked here in the first post(assuming the seller would have mentioned it if the sensor was replaced).

I would always choose a M9 with replaced sensor over a CL in this price league. Real RF and for my taste better output of the FF-CCD (don't need High-Iso). But again, thats just me.

Juergen
 
My M8 and M9 both came back to me from Leica after being repaired, and this is what I am using these days. I am now complementing these two cameras with film cameras.
I believe that the M10 made many M9 users sell their M9 cameras at lower prices. The sensor issue will always limit the selling price of an M9.
 
jaapv said:
It is the popularity of the CL. A cheaper "real Leica" with better image quality, new at a similar price.
Click to expand...

New at similar price is true. The rest is "real" indeed.
It is cropper with EVF, just so-so and from many.
But I guess for snobs it is label, not camera.

Its seller from Rissia, with 23 transactions and 95 % positive.
"Matrix untested for corrosion because no lens" means it is here. Owner knows it is another thousand bucks, so he is selling it 3500-1000=2500.
 
I agree! You get what you pay for. Here, you will get a sensor that is corroded.

"Matrix untested for corrosion because no lens" means it is here. Owner knows it is another thousand bucks, so he is selling it 3500-1000=2500.
 
Contarama said:
People who trade in Leica are putting them? If I'm not mistaken a few years back they were going for firesale prices

Leica may be a good like Hermes...really good return on investment...I wouldn't recommend investing in cameras though unless one had the wheelbase to buy the very best items and sit on them long term
Click to expand...

One could invest on a mechanical collector´s Leica and come up safe. A late model digital camera as an investment? LOL.:D:eek::rolleyes:;)
 
raid said:
My M8 and M9 both came back to me from Leica after being repaired, and this is what I am using these days. I am now complementing these two cameras with film cameras.
I believe that the M10 made many M9 users sell their M9 cameras at lower prices. The sensor issue will always limit the selling price of an M9.
Click to expand...

A digital camera is about sensor performance. Sensor performance changed dramatically every 5 yrs.

A Leica M9 is part beautiful camera in your hands but part outdated electronic device just like an iPhone 5. To make matters worse it´s electronics corrode.
 
I bought a Hasselblad SWC at one stage , after getting the M9. The main goal was to keep me linked to film. I needed a special film camera, and the SWC is special. Then I bought the Zeiss Hologon 16/8, knowing that it would not work very well on digital cameras. So am I now using this lens on the M3- a film camera! Then I dug up my Standard Leica, and I am seeing myself using it again.
 
...or, you know, that it's a 9 year old camera with multiple quality of life issues. ;)

At its core its still a piece of technology, and one that has certainly been outpaced in the almost decade since its launch.
 
colker said:
Sensor performance changed dramatically every 5 yrs.
Click to expand...

For people shooting black cats in a moonless night and want to push shadows +5 and print it in 10m size probably an argument. But for sure not for the majority of the typical M-user. Still can't see why a digital camera which was good enough 5 years ago to shoot wonderful photos isn't good enough today to do the same. But nice to see that marketing obviously works.

colker said:
To make matters worse its electronics corrode.
Click to expand...

sure, thats why all my old digital and analog cams with electronics still work as also my still in use iPhone 5 as also my much much oder hifi stuff. And I'm absolut confident that the majority of M8/9's will work flawlessly the next 10 years too.

Juergen
 
mod2001 said:
Have my doubts here, a camera with EVF is in no way a replacement for a Rangefinder-Leica.

Juergen
Click to expand...
Not to a dyed-in-the-wool Leica connoisseur. However, a new entrant to the brand does not think our way. Having said that, I sold my M 240 and my M9 is sitting unused since I bought the CL. And me a Leica M user since 1976...:rolleyes:
 
Yes, but it is in a different price range, and the M240 and M9 are outstanding products as well.
 
On European used markets M9's with freshly changed sensors are regularly around 2500 EUR. I had a very bad case of GAS when there was one selling for 1950 EUR (2230 USD) that had a serviced sensor with papers. Had to pass it mainly because didn't want to give in to the GAS.
 
mod2001 said:
For people shooting black cats in a moonless night and want to push shadows +5 and print it in 10m size probably an argument. But for sure not for the majority of the typical M-user. Still can't see why a digital camera which was good enough 5 years ago to shoot wonderful photos isn't good enough today to do the same. But nice to see that marketing obviously works.

sure, that's why all my old digital and analog cams with electronics still work as also my still in use iPhone 5 as also my much much older hifi stuff. And I'm absolutely confident that the majority of M8/9's will work flawlessly the next 10 years too.

Fully agree, but doesn't really fit your first counter argument against a digital cam with an older sensor.

Juergen
Click to expand...

It´s not marketing: it´s technology. It´s a better camera from a functional viewpoint.
I can shoot ballet and freeze movement at 4000 asa using original theater lightning when 5 yrs a go i would have to light the entire set w/ strobes!

Deny all you want but old digital is worth nothing for good reason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom