Prices of Leicas and motor cars

[Yhbv24]

I don't really understand the comparison.

A Leica M9 will certainly last a long time - but so will a D700, which is about 1/4 the price, and arguably a better camera. Both, however, won't last that long. They can likely be used for the next five or so years, as they will still produce nice images, but by that time, one or maybe even two generations of camera will have left them in the dust.

You can't really compare a digital camera to a film camera when it comes to longevity, as only recently have digital cameras become the standard. An M3, for example, will only become "obsolete" if film production stops.

A car is different, and the higher prices are more for luxury options or using the car as a status symbol.

 

[viv]

The comparison between cars and cameras is problematic, since they are designed to fulfil completely different needs.

That said, and in general terms, an expensive car will give more satisfaction than a cheaper one, even if the cheaper one fulfils the same basic need (transport). There are exceptions. My current VW Scirocco is a far nicer car to drive than my previous Porsche 944.

The same is true of cameras. A Leica M will give more satisfaction than many cheaper cameras (although, personally, I prefer the Zeiss Ikon to the Leica M film cameras; the M9 is another matter).

It is difficult to explain this to someone who has never used an expensive car or camera. If you have never tasted a banana but are familiar with the taste of an apple, no amount of words will convey adequately the difference.

 

[250swb]

Depreciation, insurance, fuel, tax, tyres, servicing

vs

SD card, and perhaps a spare battery.

If you wanted to make it an equal fight between car and camera in running costs you could buy another M9 body or a very nice Summilux to balance it out. Otherwise in the short, medium, or long term a car will continue draining cash where it is theoretically possible to stop spending money on lenses etc.

But I once spent yearly more than the overall running costs and depreciation of my car on film and processing for my Leica's, so an M9 looks darned cheap to me.

Steve

 

[AndySig]

I think it depends where your heart lies. You are less likely to begrudge spending money on something which brings you great pleasure than on something you just need. For instance I have gone top end (not necessarily in terms of money spent as I have been lucky enough to get a couple of real bargains thanks to the financial crisis) in the following areas:

a. Cameras and associated gear incl. ZI, M6, R7, G2 and LF cameras.
b. Bicycle.
c. Guitar.
d. Espresso machine.

I need a car for commuting to work and bought an 8 yr old BMW 3 series. It's now 14 yrs old and although it is a decent car, I begrudge every penny I have to spend on it. I'll use it until just before I retire and will then perhaps buy e.g. a one year old Smart car or similar. I wouldn't mind an Aston Martin but only if I won the lottery and so didn't care about the cost.

It has occurred to me in the past that the material possessions which I value are all in some way connected to production of something as opposed to use (with perhaps the exception of the bicycle although using it generates pleasure and fitness for me). A car is just a tool but unlike a hammer it never stops demanding money.