M10 has destroyed the used M10 market

[Huss]

There's still a waiting list at a lot of places for new M10s.
So why is it that almost new barely used M10s are not selling at $6000, $900 less than new?

It reflects the avg Leica customer - they want the latest NEW toy.
And great news for the rest of 'us' once they realize they can't tell any difference in their cat pics and have become bored, waiting for the M11 cuz THAT one will be the must have be all and end all..

😀

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Leica is good company. It gives something else while next M is not ready yet. Like CL for now.

 

[splitimageview]

avg Leica customer = avg Nikon customer = avg Canon customer = avg Sony customer = avg Fujifilm customer = ad infinitum.

Everyone prefers the new one, until the gap is large enough...the only difference between brands is the size of the gap.

(I don't know if used M10s are selling at $900 off, or not.)

 

[michaelwj]

avg Leica customer = avg Nikon customer = avg Canon customer = avg Sony customer = avg Fujifilm customer = ad infinitum.

Everyone prefers the new one, until the gap is large enough...the only difference between brands is the size of the gap.

(I don't know if used M10s are selling at $900 off, or not.)

I agree, the gap is not large enough yet for an item that will depreciate rapidly anyway. $900 barely covers a service if it's out of alignment. In general, it needs to be closer to 20% for the masses to see value.

 

[raid]

A used M240 is a much better deal than a used M10. They are very similar in capabilities.

 

[FrozenInTime]

Changing world - I believe Volvo and Porsche now offer subscription purchase for their cars ... and we know how Leica was keen to draw comparisons between the Leica M typ 240 and the Porsche 911.

 

[airfrogusmc]

A used M240 is a much better deal than a used M10. They are very similar in capabilities.

Raid the M 10 is as different in low light to the M 262 as the M 262 is to the M-E. I have all three of those cameras.

 

[raid]

How different are M10 and M240 for low light, practically?
I hardly ever use ISO greater than 640, say.

 

[airfrogusmc]

I live in that world both for my personal work and a lot of my pro work. Great to have the ability to shoot in low light or with really fast shutter speeds and small apertures for DoF. And that doesn't even address how immediate the M 10 is when shooting even at high ISO. No buffer lag.

 

[Chris101]

There's still a waiting list at a lot of places for new M10s.
So why is it that almost new barely used M10s are not selling at $6000, $900 less than new?
...

I would think that a mere 15% off for used is the reason. When you are spending close to $10,000 for a camera, a few hundred dollars more for a brand new one is not much of a stretch.

 

[willie_901]

How different are M10 and M240 for low light, practically?
I hardly ever use ISO greater than 640, say.

Based on empirical measurements of un-renderd raw data, the M10 is significantly better (~1 EV) than the M-240 in low light.[1] This difference also affects shadow region rendering when the dynamic range of a scene's light levels exceeds the sensor's maximum analog dynamic range.

I think a 1 EV difference is a practical advantage. Whether or not this is worth the price difference is another matter.

It turns out the M-246 monochrome's low light performance is about 1/2 stop better than the M10's and is only 1/3 stop below the Leica S.

Here's a comparison of the sensor noise levels vs. ISO.

It's interesting to note the M-246 monochrome's low-light advantage is only partially due to its noise level. It seems reasonable to assume monochrome's low-light performance is primarily due to an increase in signal level as there is no color-filter array.

[1] It is necessary to zoom the chart to see differences in data column for cameras with 24 x 36 mm sensors.

 

[Huss]

I would think that a mere 15% off for used is the reason. When you are spending close to $10,000 for a camera, a few hundred dollars more for a brand new one is not much of a stretch.

People are paying over sticker for used Nikon D850s, because they are very scarce new.
The M10 is also very scarce new, but people are not paying 15% off for used ones.

I think that is explained by who uses these cameras, and shows that there is little interest in used M10s unless they are heavily discounted.

 

[airfrogusmc]

Huss the M 10 is the finest 135 format digital camera I have shot with. I would imagine the masses that want all the bells and whistles and all the things folks like me don't want are not happy with the things that the M 10 doesn't have. And back in Feb they (M 10s) were getting more than sticker price. They have been out for what 11 months now? How long have the Nikons been out? Lets talk again in 9 moths or so.

Also I was just on eBay and almost every M 10 I saw listed had a buy it now of over 8K.

 

[airfrogusmc]

Based on empirical measurements of un-renderd raw data, the M10 is significantly better (~1 EV) than the M-240 in low light.[1] This difference also affects shadow region rendering when the dynamic range of a scene's light levels exceeds the sensor's maximum analog dynamic range.

I think a 1 EV difference is a practical advantage. Whether or not this is worth the price difference is another matter.

It turns out the M-246 monochrome's low light performance is about 1/2 stop better than the M10's and is only 1/3 stop below the Leica S.

Here's a comparison of the sensor noise levels vs. ISO.

It's interesting to note the M-246 monochrome's low-light advantage is only partially due to its noise level. It seems reasonable to assume monochrome's low-light performance is primarily due to an increase in signal level as there is no color-filter array.

[1] It is necessary to zoom the chart to see differences in data column for cameras with 24 x 36 mm sensors.

It will be interesting to see how the M 10 MM will perform.

 

[ptpdprinter]

The M10s I have seen for sale go for at least MSRP and over, both new and used. A number of people bought them with no intention of keeping them, and flippped them for a profit once they had them in hand. I handled one at the SF Leica store last February and was quite taken with it, though not so taken I dropped $10K with lens. I'm not expecting a glut of M10s on the used market any time soon.

 

[MCTuomey]

.... And that doesn't even address how immediate the M 10 is when shooting even at high ISO. No buffer lag.

No buffer lag?

One of two reasons I stopped using Leica for my club shooting was buffer lag (the other being restricted focal lengths for use in larger venues).

Though the M9/240 bodies are gone, might be smart of me to hold on to the lenses a bit longer for a try with an M10 at some point.

 

[airfrogusmc]

No buffer lag?

One of two reasons I stopped using Leica for my club shooting was buffer lag (the other being restricted focal lengths for use in larger venues).

Though the M9/240 bodies are gone, might be smart of me to hold on to the lenses a bit longer for a try with an M10 at some point.

It's insanely responsive.

 

[Keith]

It's insanely responsive.

What! More than an M3 with a roll of Tri-X? 😱

sorry ... the devil made me say that 😛

 

[raid]

It must have been the Analogue-Devil, Keith.

 

[airfrogusmc]

What! More than an M3 with a roll of Tri-X? 😱

sorry ... the devil made me say that 😛

Ha ha. You all know I love film. This is the first digital M that has had M 3 like response. I like the fact I can go from 100 ISO to 6400 in the next frame and my 6400 ISO is really good. 13 X 19s are spectacular.