Relative cost of M9 today to M3 in 1954

The comparison's a little tricky IMO. Back in 54 there was any amount of cameras with rangefinders that used silver halide to capture light ... the M3 was just one of them. Not so many full frame digital RF's in the M9's arena ... it's pretty damned unique and that's what you're paying for.

What was Fuji offering back in 54 ... where do the X100's roots extend to? 😀
 
chris00nj said:
If $250 in 1954 is worth $2175 (CPI) today, that indicates a year on year growth of 3.94%.

The average salary index (US) in 1954 was 3,155. In 2009, it was 40,711. However 3,155 at 55 years of 3.94% growth would only equal 26,408. So my original assumption on labor costs outpacing inflation holds true.
http://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/AWI.html
Click to expand...

$250/$3155 = 8% while $7,000/$40,711 = 17%. Looks like the M3 was more affordable back in the day than the M9 is today, measured as a percent of annual income.

The "outpacing" of inflation by wages is likely due to productivity gains, driven by technological investment and simply working more hours per year. If you feel better about being able to afford an M9 now than in 1954 because your annual earnings have outpaced inflation, ask yourself whether you would have had more time to shoot in 1954 versus 2011 ...

The answer suggests one obvious reason why a digital workflow is so attractive: it provides necessarily faster gratification than analog can provide to our perennially short-of-time culture. Couple faster gratification and the cache of having "the best" and there we have it: a premium price. I'm surprised it's only $7K these days, actually.
 
Last edited:
rover said:
Figure out a way to make it a business expense then depreciate it, take deductions and all that stuff.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately the US Internal Revenue Service has Section 183 that prevents the deduction of "hobby losses". Very complex issue but essentially it says you cannot deduct expenses unless there is reasonable expectation you will report taxable income from that endeavor.
 
Anyone able to compare and share Leica's profit margin on an M3 in 1954/1966 vs. Leica's current profit margin on an M9? This aside, any marketeer will confirm that 'value' has nothing much to do with 'cost'.
 
Bob Michaels said:
Unfortunately the US Internal Revenue Service has Section 183 that prevents the deduction of "hobby losses". Very complex issue but essentially it says you cannot deduct expenses unless there is reasonable expectation you will report taxable income from that endeavor.
Click to expand...

Well, of course. I can't deduct my hobby, but a professional perhaps can make a case to do so.
 
Bingo! The M9 comes with its own supply of film & development (& scanning). For anyone who shoots a decent amount, that can easily make up the difference in price between the M9 & MP or M7 over even a much shorter time period.

Per Ronald H's post (#20), I think a more useful comparison would be between the difference in prices of an M3 or M2 in 1959 v. a Nikon F and the spread between an M9 & D3 today.

mabelsound said:
My feeling is it's a ten-year investment, anything else is gravy. I would have spent that on slide film easy.
Click to expand...
 
mabelsound said:
Well, Brian, how do you like it?
Click to expand...

I love it. Cloudy and raining, not too much time outside. First lens used on it is the Summarit-M, 1955 vintage. Very nice quality.

The menu system is improved over the M8, and Manual Lens selection is fantastic for someone like me- lots of unusual lenses. Using the lens without worry about IR cut filter, a real plus. Although I did pick up 14 of them for under $300.

The "Discrete-Soft" mode is nice, however- my M8 in discrete mode is not much louder. I use a half-case for both. Maybe I got lucky, and the very late M8's are quieter.

Already had the Summarit, uncoated 5cm F1.5 Sonnar, 50/1.1 Nokton, and 35/1.2 Nokton on it.

The nicest thing- no guilt camera. Paid for fully with check/Paypal from selling camera gear. Did not sell anything newer than 35 years old, and the oldest was 75 years old.
 
I am super envious that you had enough stuff to sell! Glad you're enjoying it.

Decided to cancel my X100 order and save up for the M9 instead. If my financial fortunes don't change as much as I hope/semi-expect, I'll have to wait a while, but that's OK, I like my M8 a great deal.
 
Roger Hicks said:
... managers and bean-counters who ... regard themselves as cleverer and more skilled than the people who make things, and pay themselves accordingly.
Click to expand...

You forgot product and investor marketing (direct and indirect), Roger .... 🙂
 
Last edited by a moderator:
These price comparisons are difficult since there's so many things they can be judged by and most of them are very variable.

I once spent a lot of time trying to discover a job that people could do then that they can still do nowadays and in the same way and circumstances. All I could come up with was the postman's job. So getting their pay scales over the years for say a small town might just give a valid comparison.

Has anyone else an idea or suggestion about a job with published pay scales that hasn't changed at all over the years?

Regards, David

PS I could not afford (or justify) the M2, M3, M4, m8 or M9 when I first saw them new and that makes them all the same to me...
 
furcafe said:
Bingo! The M9 comes with its own supply of film & development (& scanning). For anyone who shoots a decent amount, that can easily make up the difference in price between the M9 & MP or M7 over even a much shorter time period.
Click to expand...


This is a false analogy. If you're going to tally those costs, then you have to include costs of software (upgraded regularly) and hardware (every 4 or 5 years, tops) as well as the materials needed to archive and backup your digital images. This is not insubstantial.

I'm also thinking you should include the cost of your time - time spent setting up all this infrastructure but also time spent working on your digital images after the button's pushed...this is also not 'free'.

Not to get into the tired old 'film vs. digital' debate...just to remind you in the context of this thread that work and cost don't magically disappear with digital -- it just takes a different form. It's still there!
 
mabelsound said:
I am super envious that you had enough stuff to sell! Glad you're enjoying it.
Click to expand...

I did keep both M3's. What is really scary- how much stuff has been accumulated over 40 years of collecting camera gear. Started when I was 12. I will be selling off some more equipment, and some lenses.

There are hidden costs in using any camera. I'm not one that feels the requirement to upgrade hardware and software very often. I went through that phase in the 80s. I upgrade when required. I will be upgrading from my CF-50 Panasonic Toughbook for the M9. It's max'd out at 768MBytes of RAM. I bought a new HP Laptop for Nikki with 3GB RAM and 250GB disk, 17" screen for less than the 320KByte Floppy Drive cost on my first home computer. It ran CP/m.
 
Too Funny.

So my Xerox 820-II CP/M computer with 64KBytes of RAM and two 320KByte floppy drives and character-only monochrome CRT, with Keyboard:

What cost $2500 in 1980 would cost $6424.94 in 2009.

Is about the same cost as an M9. And the price for the computer- was with my cousin's Employee Discount of 40%. The Xerox had a 4Mhz Z80a processor. I processed digital images from LANDSAT on it, using Microsoft FORTRAN-80.
 
David Hughes said:
These price comparisons are difficult since there's so many things they can be judged by and most of them are very variable.

I once spent a lot of time trying to discover a job that people could do then that they can still do nowadays and in the same way and circumstances. All I could come up with was the postman's job. So getting their pay scales over the years for say a small town might just give a valid comparison.

Has anyone else an idea or suggestion about a job with published pay scales that hasn't changed at all over the years?

Regards, David

PS I could not afford (or justify) the M2, M3, M4, m8 or M9 when I first saw them new and that makes them all the same to me...
Click to expand...

Auditing, accountancy, teaching and various other white-collar professions are essentially the same. The material they work with has changed a bit (more computers), but the skills are much the same.

Stuff like manufacturing, engineering and working in a bank branch has changed a lot more, anyway.
 
Mortician? Yeah, slow changes I expect. The mortician in the comic strip Tumbleweeds had a sign outside his shack that read "You plug 'em, I plant 'em". Might work in some neighborhoods even today.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom