Sub-$2000 M8's, what's next?

PKR said:
I think it's become clear that digital cameras have the same economic model as a laptop. Once a standard sensor size for better-than-equal-to 35mm, and the light bandwidth issue is fixed, I think a standard will be reached for the expected quality of a given format size.. and then, maybe a bottom line value will be established for the value of a quality used-older camera.

I've noticed that film camera prices are going up locally (SF west coast) as the photo students at the local art schools are shooting more film and scanning the images. A local film camera repair shop/ camera dealer, thought he was going out of business a couple of years ago. He has seen a fresh influx of film camera users in the last two years and is prospering. p.
Click to expand...

I find film camera prices are dropping faster than ever while film prices at B&H for example are up 200% from last year. This makes being a film shooter quite frustrating because you can get a cheap camera that it costs a bundle to load and shoot. In the last month I bought a $350 M2 and a $800 Nikon SP, both are some of the lowest prices I've ever seen and they weren't anomalies.
 
<desperate> :bang: What should I do??? I bought a new car six years ago for 50.000 Euro and now it only worth 10.000!!😱:bang:

Come on guys, a camera is a tool and not an economic proposition! For an amateur it is written off the moment it leaves the shop as pleasure cannot be expressed in money, for a pro the writeoff is balanced against the profits made with it and the lower running costs than film. End of story.

Ps. I found the solution for the car. It is a pretty good one. I'll just drive it till it falls to pieces....:angel:
Another ten years I guess 🙂
 
Last edited:
A 5 year old M9 is likely to have less financial value than a 5 year old 1Ds3 - i.e. not much - but it will probably go on making nice pictures for nearly as long, and surely that's why you buy it?

I have a strong suspicion that a Photokina announcement will lead to further falls in the price of M8/9s, other than if you buy them as a badge😉

Mike
 
_mark__ said:
Lets face it people are greedy and obsessed by money, it f****** sickens me but thats life!

You should buy a camera and use it into the ground. Who cares about paint and chips and scratches etc What I would be more concerned about is Leica charging £4100 for a 24mm lens that becomes a 31.92mm lens on a £4000 camera! Is it only me that thinks this is just insane!
Click to expand...
How do you do that?? My focal lengths are pretty constant on all my lenses...🙄
 
All once-expensive devices share one problem. Even if their price has went down with time significantly - the price for a repair does not. So it is like with older high-end scanners. You can get a great scanner (drum of flatbed) for around 2 - 4 thousand , but if a problem develops that can only be fixed by an authorized service, you will "feel" the original price.

Therefore I would like to see similar digital rangefinders being introduced at lover prices - even if I could get a used M9 in 5 years for $2000 - I might hesitate as repair price (should a problem appear) might be just too high.

well, just an opinion, not a personal experience ...
 
Mister E said:
I find film camera prices are dropping faster than ever while film prices at B&H for example are up 200% from last year. This makes being a film shooter quite frustrating because you can get a cheap camera that it costs a bundle to load and shoot. In the last month I bought a $350 M2 and a $800 Nikon SP, both are some of the lowest prices I've ever seen and they weren't anomalies.
Click to expand...

The cost of film is determined by the price of silver. Look at the value of silver since 06. In the old daze kodak would keep film costs down as it was a vehicle for selling printing paper. I'm thinking large scale here 500 ft rolls. Many labs would by a $m of paper in a year. With digital photography, few prints are silver based. The whole model went down. So, this also contributes to the increased cost. When I was a student, I bulk loaded my B+W film. I guess if you go through a lot of film and cost is a big factor, that may be (become) an option. p.

I checked Kitco: Silver was $11.08 in 7-06 This month the high (so far) was $ 18.54 but generally abt 17.85. Film is made with silver QED
 
Last edited:
Sub $2000 M8's , I can only wait in anticipation at this point. I want one to use until it quits working. I use my M4-P daily so Id imagine id use an M8 daily if I had one. Repair costs aside , an M8 would be my only choice for a digital RF unless the M9 suddenly became affordable.

I think its funny since when I started into RF's the M8 seemed totally out of reach, now the prices are coming down to a point where they're affordable . All this in 2 years time , so who is to say the M9 wont be affordable to those in the 2,000 to 2,500 range in about four years.
 
Roger Hicks said:
And mine has many thousands of actuations. What conclusions can we draw from these two examples? That all Leica users are fondlers? Or that all Leica users take lots of pictures with their cameras?

There's no logic in this. People think what they want to think. "My mind is made up: do not confuse me with the facts."

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

I've shot 5000 pictures with the M8 since buying it in January. No complaints, no problems. The results at ISO 2500 are cleaner than what I got with Kodacolor 800. I have only shot about a dozen rolls of film since then. Before, it was a dozen rolls of film a month. I also picked up an Olympus EP2 in a trade for my Bessa R2.
 
ashfaque said:
Unlike film Leicas digital Leicas' price will go down over time mainly for two reasons:
(1) Depreciation - electronics tend to have more problems as the circuitry gets less responsive/more problems.
(2) new system boards, processors and other forms of 'upgrade' will increase the demand of the new model, reduction in the demand of the relatively older models. Consequently, the price of older models (used ones) will go down. This is a common trend for almost all electronics.
Click to expand...

I made a similar comment on another thread, and this is spot on. The "Leica model" - or any "precision mechanical" model does not translate to electronics. In the pre-microelectronics era, high-end precision mechanical systems, like Leica cameras, were designed and marketed "to last a lifetime". The logic being - you paid top dollar for the "best of the best" but only paid once, and that item "lasts a lifetime". The value proposition was in the total cost of ownership over the life of the item and its high resale value. The exact opposite is true of electronic items, which are rendered obsolete with each annual "generation" ("next gen") of processor, chip, CCD - what have you. They get "better, faster, cheaper" every year.

So, paying top dollar for a digital M8 was like paying top dollar for a PC XT "built to last a lifetime". - Or even buying a PC now that's "built to last a lifetime". Who in their right mind would do that?
 
-doomed- said:
I think its funny since when I started into RF's the M8 seemed totally out of reach, now the prices are coming down to a point where they're affordable . All this in 2 years time , so who is to say the M9 wont be affordable to those in the 2,000 to 2,500 range in about four years.
Click to expand...

Four years? Oh I'm betting the M9 reaches that affordable range faster than that. Every one of these cameras is going to follow the same depreciation path we're watching with the M8. It is inevitable with this type of electronic device. I'm guessing that within two years, M9s will be dropping into the $2,500 range.
 
What an argument!

I love my M8 no matter what i paid for it or how much it is worth. The depreciation of it makes no difference to me at all. I plan to use it until it is too far gone to fix...if it ever gets to that point.

I bought my M8 with my eyes wide open knowng full well it would drop in value very quickly.

Remember, as well, we are still talking +/- $2,000 for a used camera with possibly very expensive lenses (at least the Leica lenses are 🙂!

The average consumer thinks $500 for a DSLR is crazy expensive!

I have read of the relative cost of early M bodies and how they depreciated over time. I wonder how different the rate is for the M8? I am sure it is faster but how much?

Almost every asset will lose money over time; some faster than others.
 
The electronic deprecation curve is interesting. Its just supply and demand, just like film gear. As there isn't really any competition in digital rangefinders, either:

Demand for digital rangefinders is down over all.
- Replaced by other types of cameras or other hobbies?
- People not buying camera over all/recession/etc.

Supply is up
- Leica made too many
- People moved on to the M9 and flooded the market with M8s.

The traditional electronic camera depreciation comes from competition between venders who constantly one-up each other with higher spec items, rapidly driving down value. If the Leica market is small enough, this may happen entirely internal to Leica products?

Or is the perceived lifetime of the camera (ie idea of when it will cease to be functional) really that short? If we're just talking about supply and demand, how does an improved sensor compare to unifying the rangefinder and focus window, etc? Why didn't LTM cameras perform similar when the M series came out?
 
M9 technology approximates stability

M9 technology approximates stability

Once a standard sensor size for better-than-equal-to 35mm, and the light bandwidth issue is fixed, I think a standard will be reached for the expected quality of a given format size.. and then, maybe a bottom line value will be established for the value of a quality used-older camera.
Click to expand...

I think the M9 has reached the technical image level where we don't need many more improvements, and pricing can mature like a fine wine rather than go into digital rot. Having finally optimized digital to film and up to meet the quality of their lenses, Leica can amortize the R&D over a longer life cycle, and improve production technology to bring the price down a bit. A mature business strategy might be sell lots of M9s to drive lens sales.

Specifically, the M9 has about 6 micron sensor cell sizes at Full Frame. (Film grain runs 2-8 microns, so we're in the same ballpark) You don't want smaller sensor cells or else you start running into diffraction effects above f/8. 18 Mpixels (without bayer filter!) gives you native resolution to 12x18 inches; any larger and you have to go to more expensive printing. Maybe we'll see marginal improvements, perhaps in ISO, but not if Mpixels increase (sensor cell size decreases).

If you really need high MPIX images (landscape and fashion), you want to jump to medium format.

Notice that in the DSLR market, we've reached 24mpix in FF, and the camera makers are now competing on bells and whistle, and menus and menus and menus. Possibly we'll see DSLR body sizes decrease... back to Pentax ME or Nikon EM would be nice.
 
I wish M8's were that cheap here in China! Every time I save up enough money to get one in the states I end up having to use it for some other crap. Here in China the Chinese have no concept of second hand value so things like cameras...lenses....cars....second hand are only about 10-15% cheaper than new, sometimes less.....

I found a user M8 in working order, 10000 clicks, but with some pretty good wear on it once with a private party, he would not go a cent under 4200 dollars for it which is BS because new they were only a little more.

Heck I even looked into an RD1 a few times, but used they stay around the 19000 yuan mark which is 2800 dollars for decent shape ones.
 
tstermitz said:
I think the M9 has reached the technical image level where we don't need many more improvements, and pricing can mature like a fine wine rather than go into digital rot. Having finally optimized digital to film and up to meet the quality of their lenses, Leica can amortize the R&D over a longer life cycle, and improve production technology to bring the price down a bit. A mature business strategy might be sell lots of M9s to drive lens sales.

Specifically, the M9 has about 6 micron sensor cell sizes at Full Frame. (Film grain runs 2-8 microns, so we're in the same ballpark) You don't want smaller sensor cells or else you start running into diffraction effects above f/8. 18 Mpixels (without bayer filter!) gives you native resolution to 12x18 inches; any larger and you have to go to more expensive printing. Maybe we'll see marginal improvements, perhaps in ISO, but not if Mpixels increase (sensor cell size decreases).

If you really need high MPIX images (landscape and fashion), you want to jump to medium format.

Notice that in the DSLR market, we've reached 24mpix in FF, and the camera makers are now competing on bells and whistle, and menus and menus and menus. Possibly we'll see DSLR body sizes decrease... back to Pentax ME or Nikon EM would be nice.
Click to expand...

I am no expert but I would be surprised if sensor technology will not be better in the future......

I would also be surprised if Leicas business strategy is anything else than sell a lot of M9s.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom