David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
People buy old things out of nostalgia for their past.
So some of us who would have loved a IIIg when aged 19 or 20 will buy one when aged 60 or 65 or whenever rich enough.
So I guess the digital SLR I paid hundreds for in the 90's, will hit rock bottom and turn up in charity shops. So buying at a charity shop price and saving it carefully with the box, CD manual and card etc might pay off over a long period like 20 years when people start wondering what the old 1 or 2 megapixel cameras were like.
And some early digital cameras have already started to become cult ones. Not all old digitals are in charity shops. One or two on ebay get fought over but the price is not a good return on the original price. But, OTOH, if it was bought in a charity shops for a pound or two...
Regards, David
People buy old things out of nostalgia for their past.
So some of us who would have loved a IIIg when aged 19 or 20 will buy one when aged 60 or 65 or whenever rich enough.
So I guess the digital SLR I paid hundreds for in the 90's, will hit rock bottom and turn up in charity shops. So buying at a charity shop price and saving it carefully with the box, CD manual and card etc might pay off over a long period like 20 years when people start wondering what the old 1 or 2 megapixel cameras were like.
And some early digital cameras have already started to become cult ones. Not all old digitals are in charity shops. One or two on ebay get fought over but the price is not a good return on the original price. But, OTOH, if it was bought in a charity shops for a pound or two...
Regards, David
flip
良かったね！
+1
The only digital exception I can imagine is a camera maker that produces a sensor of uniquely pleasing and not easily replicable qualities for which the production life is short lived, making it a "cult item". Thus far, I think any digital output is pretty easily duplicated by successor technologies.
Along the same lines, if someone finds a particular camera is capable of being used as a "platform" after it has ceased production, I can imagine it at least maintaining value so long as hackers add free features. [This has long been the situation for MP3 players.]
Exactly. Man, that is awesome... in bold.
I have a feeling any digital camera that will hold its value or exceed its MSRP will be based on looks or based on someone capitalizing on its defects... i.e. someone making art with a particular sensor that a lot of other want to emulate due to it looking different.
MikeDimit
Established
Look at R system and think of investing in gear again.
icebear
Veteran
Hi John,
1. na, most likely not but it surely is true for any PC running on Win 2000 with 256MB ram (that has not been shrink wrapped at time of purchase).
2. yeah, sure but I use my M9 and MM and never bought any piece of photo equipment for the collective value or thought about the resale value when using it.
"Oh darn, a cosmetic blemish on that Noctilux barrel just shaved $500 off the resale value" :bang:
.3. That's the only critical point of selling any collector's item, you gotta find that one stupid guy...(and guys mostly, I guess
).
IEDEI
Well-known
well this question is inherently flawed and vague.
firstly there are no film cameras on sale at the moment aside from the M7 and MP. If you buy a NEW M7 or MP, they will both fall in value very quickly the second you start using them.
secondly, if you buy ANY Digital camera, it will fall instantly in price the second you start using it....significantly as well.
thirdly....if you buy USED, then both film and digital hold their value pretty well. I bought an M8.1 (M8U) last summer for $2k....and i still see them selling everywhere for between $2k and $2500. If you buy a Leica film camera USED, then they will likely stay the same price or go up slightly if in good condition.
Bottom line.....cameras aren't a good investment NEW....there are lots of things in this world actually meant for investment...instead you should look at cameras as an investment for your creativity and satisfaction. Screw the money part of the equation.
firstly there are no film cameras on sale at the moment aside from the M7 and MP. If you buy a NEW M7 or MP, they will both fall in value very quickly the second you start using them.
secondly, if you buy ANY Digital camera, it will fall instantly in price the second you start using it....significantly as well.
thirdly....if you buy USED, then both film and digital hold their value pretty well. I bought an M8.1 (M8U) last summer for $2k....and i still see them selling everywhere for between $2k and $2500. If you buy a Leica film camera USED, then they will likely stay the same price or go up slightly if in good condition.
Bottom line.....cameras aren't a good investment NEW....there are lots of things in this world actually meant for investment...instead you should look at cameras as an investment for your creativity and satisfaction. Screw the money part of the equation.
cosmonaut
Well-known
I don't think the digital ones will fair overtime as the film Ms. There is just to many things that can go wrong with any old electronic product. The older they get the the greater the chance they will die and be useless.
You can buy a M film body and most likely sell it for about the same as you paid for it years from now. A win win situation.
hepcat
Former PH, USN
The KS-15s kit was an M2 specially outfitted and engraved for the military. The KE-7A was the black military M4. I used both as a Navy photographer from 1974-1979. There is a mint KE-7A outfit on eBay right now for the paltry sum of $40,399 USD buy-it-now. You can buy a lesser KE-7A for $20k to $30k USD on ebay also.
mugent
Well-known
The value of almost everything is dictated by supply and demand, the value of old PCs is so low because there is zero demand, you literally cannot give them away.
A Leica M9 will always have value where there is demand, and for a working one, there will be demand, just not that much, as there are plenty of them around to satisfy collectors, and the collectors will always prefer a manual camera, just like watch collectors will always prefer mechanical over quartz, it's just a fact of life.
A 'first ever Apple' computer has huge demand, and supply that can be counted on one hand, Apple is a collectable brand just like Leica, and the rare pieces will hold value.
Digital cameras will never be a good investment, even Leica, there are too many of them, and not enough demand to keep prices high, simple as that.
A Leica M9 will always have value where there is demand, and for a working one, there will be demand, just not that much, as there are plenty of them around to satisfy collectors, and the collectors will always prefer a manual camera, just like watch collectors will always prefer mechanical over quartz, it's just a fact of life.
A 'first ever Apple' computer has huge demand, and supply that can be counted on one hand, Apple is a collectable brand just like Leica, and the rare pieces will hold value.
Digital cameras will never be a good investment, even Leica, there are too many of them, and not enough demand to keep prices high, simple as that.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
Lots of interesting points being made but I wonder if I dare point out that the minute the Leica with interchangeable lenses appeared the hockey stick ones and the non-interchangeable lenses versions bombed in value? No one wanted them for obvious reasons.
But those reasons are only obvious with hindsight. I can remember seeing a hockey stick Leica for sale for a pittance many years ago and wondering who would buy it...
And I think my previous point about buying digital in charity shops and waiting is the clue to it all. I've yet to make money on my Leicas, simply because I had to pay a good price for them and, even then, pay out more to get them working as they should.
OTOH, cameras I've bought for the price of (or less than) a cup of coffee in charity shops have been resold to finance repairs to my collection. So buy cheap and sell dear. And that folks, is the art of investment in a nutshell.
Regards, David
Lots of interesting points being made but I wonder if I dare point out that the minute the Leica with interchangeable lenses appeared the hockey stick ones and the non-interchangeable lenses versions bombed in value? No one wanted them for obvious reasons.
But those reasons are only obvious with hindsight. I can remember seeing a hockey stick Leica for sale for a pittance many years ago and wondering who would buy it...
And I think my previous point about buying digital in charity shops and waiting is the clue to it all. I've yet to make money on my Leicas, simply because I had to pay a good price for them and, even then, pay out more to get them working as they should.
OTOH, cameras I've bought for the price of (or less than) a cup of coffee in charity shops have been resold to finance repairs to my collection. So buy cheap and sell dear. And that folks, is the art of investment in a nutshell.
Regards, David
You forget that things break and that there are special edition.
thegman
Veteran
Do you mean Leica cameras? There are loads more new film cameras on the market.
mfogiel
Veteran
To begin with, electronic devices face two laws: Moore's law and obsolescence law. Moore's law makes sure, that every about 18 months your device (even if brand new) should be worth half of what it was 18 months ago, when it was (supposedly) current cutting edge technology (which Leicas hardly ever are). The obsolescence laws says, that every x years, all your software becomes incompatible with current hardware, thus I doubt anyone will be able to use ANY of today's digital cameras 20 years from now.
Although a digital Leica is not a 100% electronic device, it is permanently bundled with its electronics, therefore as an object it is doomed by the same laws. It still might have some collector's value in the future, just like Commodore 64 computers or first plastic digital watches, but that will be it. Will it be different for film cameras? I am not sure in the long term, but it seems that the fascination with obsolescent mechanical devices is superior to that of obsolescent electronic technology. I can still see people driving cars from 1950s or 60s, but nowadays I haven't seen anyone using the first Motorola mobile phone, even if it has been a smash in 1983.
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl...ei=zDqOUdGqKsTwPNP_gfgO&ved=0CEkQ9QEwBQ&dur=0
As for investment in cameras - I believe, that what people like to pay for are "cult" objects - in my book, that would be a Leica M3 with a Rigid/DR Summicron 50, or a Rolleiflex F with the 2.8 Planar, or a Nikon F with the first version prism and a 58/1.4, a Hasselblad SWC any version, etc...
Although a digital Leica is not a 100% electronic device, it is permanently bundled with its electronics, therefore as an object it is doomed by the same laws. It still might have some collector's value in the future, just like Commodore 64 computers or first plastic digital watches, but that will be it. Will it be different for film cameras? I am not sure in the long term, but it seems that the fascination with obsolescent mechanical devices is superior to that of obsolescent electronic technology. I can still see people driving cars from 1950s or 60s, but nowadays I haven't seen anyone using the first Motorola mobile phone, even if it has been a smash in 1983.
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl...ei=zDqOUdGqKsTwPNP_gfgO&ved=0CEkQ9QEwBQ&dur=0
As for investment in cameras - I believe, that what people like to pay for are "cult" objects - in my book, that would be a Leica M3 with a Rigid/DR Summicron 50, or a Rolleiflex F with the 2.8 Planar, or a Nikon F with the first version prism and a 58/1.4, a Hasselblad SWC any version, etc...
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
As for Investment in Gear I never think in terms of $$$$...
its ALL about the Lens & its rendering and the Pleasure in Shooting
Be it Digi or Film not concerened about the Investment Value
More that the Camera/Lens has to move me enough to Buy
its ALL about the Lens & its rendering and the Pleasure in Shooting
Be it Digi or Film not concerened about the Investment Value
More that the Camera/Lens has to move me enough to Buy
noisycheese
Normal(ish) Human
The answer is absolutely no. Check the price of any Leica digital and they are predictably very low. M9? Yours was $3600. M8? $1600. X1? $800. And on and on...
Film Leicas? It depends...M3? $900...how does it compare with, say, 1961? M6? $1400...how does it compare to it's price when new? M7? Low 2K...new $5k.
Smart buying with Leica cameras means you can buy one, use it for free by recouping your original expenditure on resale, but it ain't digital. Just my 2 cents worth.
Based on the information I could find, a new M3 sold for $250 in 1954. Today, an M3 D/S in 8+ condition sells for around $1000; a mint condition/like new M3 would go for $1500-1600.
Next, consider the price of the M8: $4500 "street price" (whatever that term means) when they were new vs. $2250 @ 8+ used rating ( http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?is=USE&Q=&A=details&O=productlist&sku=800923371 ).
In these two examples, the M3 shows a return of +400% compared to the -50% return of the M8.
While this will not hold true for every M3 or M8, I would expect the variation in current prices to be probably 5% or less.
The implications are pretty clear regarding whether film or digital M cameras are the better investment - and that's not even taking into consideration the influence of the collectability factor on the prices of rare and vintage Leica M film cameras.
Leica M lenses may well increase in value and digital cameras do seem to drop like the proverbial rock in terms of value - but the claim that film cameras are "doomed" just does not add up.
How much is a 1954 dollar worth today?
Or perhaps better stated, how little is today's dollar worth compared to a 1954 dollar?
Or perhaps better stated, how little is today's dollar worth compared to a 1954 dollar?
Well, perhaps give some time for the digital Leicas to become vintage and grow a following that allows its users to keep their value up to date? You've given the M3 60 years to gain a following and show its usefulness.
You guys are comparing one of the best film cameras of all time to contemporary digital cameras. How much did a used M3 sell for in 1970? You cannot predict which digital cameras will be sought after in the future. Many of you are assuming none will be desirable in the future because you are only thinking in terms of pure specs and not user attachment. There WILL be digital cameras that outsell their initial MSRP in the future. It's happened in every other digital / electronic product, so why wouldn't it in digital cameras? I'm sure many people thought the M rangefinder was doomed (and would drop in price substantially) once SLRs hit the scene.
Sounds a lot like the people who threw away their toys only to find that they are super valuable 30 years later. History shows that people are hooked on nostalgia and will over pay to reconnect simply because they can.