M10 has destroyed the used market
- Thread starter AusDLK
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 247
- Views 25K
pyeh
Member of good standing
Hap, answering your question about Australian import taxes: in fact Australia taxes very few imported goods and certainly not photographic equipment. There is a national Goods and Services Tax of 10% and we have a weak dollar at the moment. If you take Leica's published price, whether in Euros (without VAT) or US dollars, apply the conversion rate at the time the M10 was announced, and add 10% you will get the figure that Fireblade announced.
hap
Well-known
M10
M10
Thanks for explanation.
M10
Thanks for explanation.
Popey
Member
It's a sad fact of life that used digital camera prices plunge when a new model arrives on the scene. It doesn't mean that what you currently have has suddenly got 'worse'. I have tended to refresh my digital cameras on a 3-5 year cycle and accept that the resale value of any old equipment is going to be low.
The way I look at it is that the weekly cost of owning a[n] [insert camera model here] works out to be fairly low. Especially if savings from not having to buy, process and scan film is taken into account as well.
Buying a new digital camera body is a bit like buying a new car - as soon as you take it home, its value will plummet. It doesn't take away the pleasure of ownership though.
The way I look at it is that the weekly cost of owning a[n] [insert camera model here] works out to be fairly low. Especially if savings from not having to buy, process and scan film is taken into account as well.
Buying a new digital camera body is a bit like buying a new car - as soon as you take it home, its value will plummet. It doesn't take away the pleasure of ownership though.
ChrisLivsey
Veteran
Here's an etc. for you:
2008 Hasselblad H3DII 39 body only £21,502.50
2017 e-bay sales around £3,000, those asking £5,000+ don't sell unless lots of extras, like a lens 😉
Mute-on
Well-known
This is certainly true in relation to a leica film cameras. I have seen a steady escalation in film M prices over the last 12 months, such that what was once $1,000 to $1,200 is now closer to $1,400 to $1,600. Of course this is in AUD, so the exchange rate plays a part. Nevertheless, even local sales of film Ms are showing the same trend.
J
Fraser
Well-known
As others have said its just like buying all the film upfront, as for the prices of film cameras going up I don't see that, maybe leica Ms have increased slightly but most others seem to be falling, cameras like eos 5 and f90s are selling for £20-£40 when new they were high end expensive.
ian_watts
Ian Watts
Yes, it really depends upon the camera. AF film bodies, apart from the F6, do seem to be absurdly cheap but Hasselblad V cameras and, to a lesser extent, Leica M do seem have increased in price in recent years.
Steve M.
Veteran
I have to agree, digital is sorta stuck w/ the same look no matter what you do, and a digital camera is more of a commodity than an actual photographic tool. If someone cannot take a decent pic w/ the cameras that are already out there, and have been out there since, oh, about 1937, they should just give it up.
We are talking Leica here anyway, and today, this is just about acquisition, consumer status, wanting to own the latest and greatest new bobble. That should not be confused w/ photography. Even worrying about camera resale value is a curious thing on a photography forum. May as well be discussing the price you can get for your new beamer when you trade it in.
We are talking Leica here anyway, and today, this is just about acquisition, consumer status, wanting to own the latest and greatest new bobble. That should not be confused w/ photography. Even worrying about camera resale value is a curious thing on a photography forum. May as well be discussing the price you can get for your new beamer when you trade it in.
willie_901
Veteran
How come?
I agree.
Which brings up a really interesting question. How come Leica did not continue to use CCD sensors?
One reason could be CMOS technologies (photodiode arrays, on-chip DC signal amplification and analog-to-digital converters) provide superior signal-to-noise ratios and analog dynamic range. But these sensor assembly attributes are only part of the story. The cover glass, IR filter characteristics, micro-lens array and (most importantly) the color-filter array band-pass characteristics also play a significant role in perceived image quality. The Nikon D200 (among others) has a CCD sensor. Is the Nikon D200 IQ (or another CCD camera) equal to the M8's?
Another reason could be Leica could not find a manufacturer who would make a 24 x 36 mm CCD sensor at a practical price. Why would no one be interested in supplying a 24 X36 mm CCD photodiode chip? If a 24 X 36mm CCD photodiode array technology provides some unique benefit, how come no one makes them?
Or, Leica just settled for second best (CMOS). Why would Leica compromise their optical engineering excellence with an inferior sensor technology?
Gregm61
Well-known
Having both a CCD camera in the M9-P, and CMOS with the M262, the "superior" image maker, and over a much wider set of lighting conditions, is the later CMOS technology. Urban legends die hard.
I'll take the up-front cost of a digital M and and several years use over shooting film with my M6 and the subsequent PITA scanning process every day. I still use the M6, but only enough to change things up every once and a while, and my appreciation for the digital bodies is always enhanced after just a few rolls.
I'll take the up-front cost of a digital M and and several years use over shooting film with my M6 and the subsequent PITA scanning process every day. I still use the M6, but only enough to change things up every once and a while, and my appreciation for the digital bodies is always enhanced after just a few rolls.
benlees
Well-known
I had a Pentax K200D awhile back that had a CCD sensor. It made lovely pictures, but it is unlikely someone in the future will be able to pick this fact out, just by looking at a random assortment of pictures, mixed with others from CMOS cameras.
An urban legend of the "CCD wonder sensors" will no doubt influence prices of those Leica that possess them.
An urban legend of the "CCD wonder sensors" will no doubt influence prices of those Leica that possess them.
nobbylon
Veteran
Destroyed 240 prices maybe but M9 prices appear to be higher in the last year. Urban legend or not, CCD is keeping prices at a high and stable level and unless a new CCD camera is released then I can't see that changing.
Anyone who bought an M9 new would probably have seen a 50% reduction in resale and 240 will probably be the same now the M10 has been released. If you buy new then you lose money, it's that simple.
Maybe the perception that the M9 is as close to a film Leica in digital format is keeping prices up ie no gizmos, video etc just basically a digi M7?
Anyone who bought an M9 new would probably have seen a 50% reduction in resale and 240 will probably be the same now the M10 has been released. If you buy new then you lose money, it's that simple.
Maybe the perception that the M9 is as close to a film Leica in digital format is keeping prices up ie no gizmos, video etc just basically a digi M7?
DanskDynamit
Well-known
jarski
Veteran
funny you mention two 10mp CCD cameras am having. D200 has the "d2x mode III" for jpeg rendering, that I like for nature, greenery and landscape type of photos. M8 obviously has its IR-sensitivity which can help with b&w photos. and with filter in front of lens, good for colour as well. both cameras perform bad in low light situations, by todays standards. would I prefer one over the other, cannot tell because am using them in different situations. the Nikon's jpeg mode I mentioned can be installed in some of their CMOS models as well such as D700, but haven't tried it. probably could not tell the difference, if all other variables were the same, a shot from D200 vs. D700.
michaelwj
----------------
We had our glory days when the A$ was worth US$1.1. Ah, what a time, we could live like kings!
Another note, Australia is just expensive in terms of numbers, but in reality everything is more. Housing, food, cameras, film, but also wages. I get paid 50% more than my US colleagues in the same jobs at the same point in our careers, but we live similar lives with similar budgets - we talk about it a little. So by the numbers it seems expensive, but it's no more than anywhere else.
(of course, there are always the very rich, and the very poor, we have both. I'm neither but probably in the upper half by virtue of participating in this forum)
michaelwj
----------------
Check out used M7 prices, through the floor compared to the MP considering they cost the same new!
Huss
Veteran
Yup, some people are asking the same money for a 20 year old M6 as a 2 year old M7.
The M7, not only newer and more featured, is made to a higher standard with the brass top and bottom plates, etc, as well as a better finder, while the M6 was of the zinc cost cutting days.
I think it is because people who want film Ms, want 100% mechanical cameras. The M7 does have 1/125 and 1/60 as mechanical speeds, but I guess that is not enough.
Having used both, and now owning an M7, the M7 is a far better shooter.
nobbylon
Veteran
Huss,
since when does 'being a better camera' ever come into it with Leica shooters? 😉
regards john
since when does 'being a better camera' ever come into it with Leica shooters? 😉
regards john
Huss
Veteran
John.
😉
I think the M6 is the Leica rangefinder equivalent of the Pentax K1000.
People ask what film SLR to get and the standard knee jerk response is K1000. Even though a Nikkormat is far superior. Because of that the K1000 (which was much cheaper new than the Nikon and for good reason) is now more expensive.
Similar threads
- Poll
