Bill Pierce
Well-known
My favorite generalist photo web site, one that has fresh content almost every day, is TOP. Here’s a teaser, one of the replies to a column by Mike Johnston from his friend and knowledgable photographer, Oren Grad.
“POPULAR PHOTOGRAPHY, SEPT. 1988, B&H PHOTO AD:
Leica 50mm Summicron M: $649.00
AIS Nikkor 50mm f/1.8: $68.00
AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8: $56.95
OM Zuiko 50mm f/1.8: $66.00
SMC Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7: $$65.00
SMC Pentax-F 50mm f/1.7: $67.95
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8: $64.00
TODAY, B&H PHOTO WEB SITE:
Leica 50mm Apo-Summicron-M ASPH: $7350.00
Leica 50mm Summicron-M: $2350.00
AF_S Nikkor G 50mm f/1.8 special edition: #276.95
AF-S Nikkor G 50mm f/1.8: $216.95
AF Nikkor D 50mm f/1.8: $129.00
Canon EF II 50mm f/1.8: $110.00”
Pretty amazing. Read the article that prompted this reply at
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2014/06/the-perfect-lens.html
“POPULAR PHOTOGRAPHY, SEPT. 1988, B&H PHOTO AD:
Leica 50mm Summicron M: $649.00
AIS Nikkor 50mm f/1.8: $68.00
AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8: $56.95
OM Zuiko 50mm f/1.8: $66.00
SMC Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7: $$65.00
SMC Pentax-F 50mm f/1.7: $67.95
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8: $64.00
TODAY, B&H PHOTO WEB SITE:
Leica 50mm Apo-Summicron-M ASPH: $7350.00
Leica 50mm Summicron-M: $2350.00
AF_S Nikkor G 50mm f/1.8 special edition: #276.95
AF-S Nikkor G 50mm f/1.8: $216.95
AF Nikkor D 50mm f/1.8: $129.00
Canon EF II 50mm f/1.8: $110.00”
Pretty amazing. Read the article that prompted this reply at
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2014/06/the-perfect-lens.html
kshapero
South Florida Man
1956
Leica M3 chrome - $297
Leica M3 black - $327
smoke on that!!!
Leica M3 chrome - $297
Leica M3 black - $327
smoke on that!!!
coelacanth
Ride, dive, shoot.
So APO-Summicron aside, Leica vs Nikon (assuming many other Japanese makes as well) price difference is roughly the same? (10x) Expensive then, expensive now. 
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
You could have bought a used 5cm Summar lens for 17 dollars from Olden in the early 70s.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
Those were the days, all right. Some time around 1960 or '61, I bought my Leica M2s body brand new for $249.00. Then I took it home and kept it until I could afford my first lens, a 35/2.8 Summaron, which was around $125.00 or so. It seems cheap, now, but these were fairly pricey for the time. I still have them by the way.
hendriphile
Well-known
That really is the bottom line, isn't it? As it used to be said, "The quality is enjoyed long after the price is forgotten."
Pioneer
Veteran
In 1972 I walked into a downtown Minneapolis camera shop and paid $50 to put a new Minolta SRT101 with MC 58.1.4 and case on layaway. The kit was a demo unit on sale for $300.
Once a week for the next several weeks I walked back into that store and laid $25 on the counter until I was finally able to carry it out.
I wish I could give you a great finale to the story but the truth is my car was stolen a month later with the camera in the trunk. Hennepin was a touch rougher back in those days. The police were able to recover the car, but not the camera.
Life does go on however, and I now own three beautiful SRT101s.
Once a week for the next several weeks I walked back into that store and laid $25 on the counter until I was finally able to carry it out.
I wish I could give you a great finale to the story but the truth is my car was stolen a month later with the camera in the trunk. Hennepin was a touch rougher back in those days. The police were able to recover the car, but not the camera.
Life does go on however, and I now own three beautiful SRT101s.
Lauffray
Invisible Cities
I hate to be that guy, but since I wasn't born yet, were those figures a lot of money back then for a median salary ? or even for a working photographer to afford ?
I mean, what would that compare to today ?
I mean, what would that compare to today ?
Pioneer
Veteran
I don't now about anyone else but I was making $1.90 per hour working as a busboy when I bought my Minolta. I also worked pumping gas at a Clark Gas Station 3 nights a week. As I remember I was bringing home about $75 every week after taxes.
Needless to say, $300 was a LOT of money. I was renting a room for $10 a week at a rundown Hotel near the river and living primarily on loaves of bread bought from the day old bread store and peanut butter in an institutional can. Once a week I would treat myself to a can of Tuna, or some hamburgers from the White Castle on East Lake St if I had somehow convinced a girl to go out with me that night.
$25 per week to pay off that camera was a big commitment for me and having it stolen seemed to be the end of the world for me at the time.
Yeah, those were the good old days. Let's see. Prices were high, wages were low. Nixon was President. And I would be caught up in the tail end of the draft in a few months. At least the Paris Peace Agreement was signed before I had to go to Vietnam.
semi-ambivalent
Little to say
Layaway. Now you're dating yourself. In 1977 I bought a Rolex SS Datejust using layaway. A fair bit under $900.00 with tax. Wearing it now. In my more curmudgeonly moods I feel it would be a good thing if credit wasn't so easy and layaway made a comeback, but so much of what people think they need would be obsolete or out of fashion before it was paid off. <shrug>
s-a
kshapero
South Florida Man
Wish I bought a Leica M3 black back then (I was just a small fry then, a dime was big money for a 6 year old.) Saw a black M3 go for $14,000 on eBay a month ago.
YYV_146
Well-known
If I'm not mistaken the 80s 50mm F1.8 Canon was a metal lens, and performed considerably better than the current plastic version. The newer Nikon lenses have also skimped on build quality, and I'm sure none of them would last as long as a screw-driven AF-D lens.
Once you correct for inflation, both the price difference and absolute price in terms of purchasing power has actually stayed more or less the same. Today a flagship Nikon 50mm (58mm F1.4) is upwards of $1,500, and the Noctilux ASPH isn't ten times as expensive (but close). Leica is as unaffordable as ever, and vice versa.
On the other hand. Had you purchased the 50cron in 88' and kept it in good condition, you can get upwards of $1,000 from selling it in 2014. The net cost of using the lens for 25 years is therefore ~$150. A used 50mm 1.8 AIS Nikon is worth practically nothing these days - so you pay $140 in 2014 dollars for it in 1988, and lose almost all of it over the quarter-decade. Of course, during the entire period the Leica owner has access to a better-performing, smaller lens with greater build quality.
Once you correct for inflation, both the price difference and absolute price in terms of purchasing power has actually stayed more or less the same. Today a flagship Nikon 50mm (58mm F1.4) is upwards of $1,500, and the Noctilux ASPH isn't ten times as expensive (but close). Leica is as unaffordable as ever, and vice versa.
On the other hand. Had you purchased the 50cron in 88' and kept it in good condition, you can get upwards of $1,000 from selling it in 2014. The net cost of using the lens for 25 years is therefore ~$150. A used 50mm 1.8 AIS Nikon is worth practically nothing these days - so you pay $140 in 2014 dollars for it in 1988, and lose almost all of it over the quarter-decade. Of course, during the entire period the Leica owner has access to a better-performing, smaller lens with greater build quality.
Monochrom
Well-known
Contax tvs
Contax tvs
Today i received a magazine from 1993 in which it was published the review of the contax tvs...
1.000 pounds!!!
Today it costs less than 150 usd!
In teh same magazine a summitar costed 79 pounds and a canon 50 mm f1.8 almost the same price!
Contax tvs
Today i received a magazine from 1993 in which it was published the review of the contax tvs...
1.000 pounds!!!
Today it costs less than 150 usd!
In teh same magazine a summitar costed 79 pounds and a canon 50 mm f1.8 almost the same price!
Corran
Well-known
I remember when I got my job a couple of years ago, my dad remarked how much better paid I was at this point in my life, compared to his. I was skeptical.
It turns out he was making something like $15k in 1980, which according to the inflation calculator comes out equal to over $43k in 2014, almost 30% more than I am making fresh out of college with a Master's (he was working at a gas station with just a HS degree in 1980).
It seems to me that real wages and purchasing power hasn't kept up with inflation, while goods have just about, or more, so all-in-all things are more expensive today in relation to wages. There is also a huge disparity in earnings and cost of living across the USA, while prices for luxury goods are relatively fixed. My salary would be terrible in certain areas of the country but for my location, it's way above average, and my living expenses are very low.
This of course is compared to new items, while the used market is a different ballgame...especially with the major switch to digital for most.
It turns out he was making something like $15k in 1980, which according to the inflation calculator comes out equal to over $43k in 2014, almost 30% more than I am making fresh out of college with a Master's (he was working at a gas station with just a HS degree in 1980).
It seems to me that real wages and purchasing power hasn't kept up with inflation, while goods have just about, or more, so all-in-all things are more expensive today in relation to wages. There is also a huge disparity in earnings and cost of living across the USA, while prices for luxury goods are relatively fixed. My salary would be terrible in certain areas of the country but for my location, it's way above average, and my living expenses are very low.
This of course is compared to new items, while the used market is a different ballgame...especially with the major switch to digital for most.
Ronald M
Veteran
But your pay was also less.
All the result of inflation, which is controlled by the government, and the falling value of the dollar against other currency, which is also the result of government policy.
Put simply, inflation is an increase in the money supply beyond increases in productivity of the labor force with some component of velocity or movement.
The Federal Reserve prints the money.
We will see real disaster when the dollar is no longer the world reserve currency.
Now they want to raise the minimum wage. The min wage has been raised multiple times from $.50 to $8.00. I wonder why we are not all rich.
All the result of inflation, which is controlled by the government, and the falling value of the dollar against other currency, which is also the result of government policy.
Put simply, inflation is an increase in the money supply beyond increases in productivity of the labor force with some component of velocity or movement.
The Federal Reserve prints the money.
We will see real disaster when the dollar is no longer the world reserve currency.
Now they want to raise the minimum wage. The min wage has been raised multiple times from $.50 to $8.00. I wonder why we are not all rich.
Ansel
Well-known
Inflation is the result of the increase in the money supply. Government has no control over this (or rather chooses not to exercise any). The money supply is controlled by private banks and has been inflated massively over the past 30 years, so much so that when the bubble burst it almost crashed the entire system.
There is no point comparing prices to 30 years ago - money isn't worth what it was back then.
slidesandthecity
Established
Rodchenko
Olympian
The only meaningful comparison would be against average earnings (or average earnings less housing costs).
mwoenv
Well-known
The U.S. Consumer Price Index was 118.3 in 1988 and 237 in April 2014, for a ratio of 2.0, so it's reasonable if the same items today cost around twice as much as they did in 1988. The Nikon and Canon lenses are in line with this but the Leica lenses are much more expensive.
Looking at the price of film this way, an Adorama ad from 1978 (CPI = 65.2) showed TriX 135/36 cost $1.25, equivalent to $4.50 today, which is close to what it costs today.
Looking at the price of film this way, an Adorama ad from 1978 (CPI = 65.2) showed TriX 135/36 cost $1.25, equivalent to $4.50 today, which is close to what it costs today.
Gray Fox
Well-known
I 1970 while in Viet Nam for the festivities there, I managed to get out of the boonies to where a PX trailer was set up. The Minolta SRT 101, the Pentax Spotmatic, a Nikkormat, a Mamiya-Sekor 1000, and I think a Canon ftb--all with a 1.8 or so 50mm lens were $12(Post Exchange store)9. A full line of Nikon cameras and lenses were available by special order from the big PX warehouse in Japan. Based on the tenuous nature of existence we all thought we were facing few of us had the confidence to order anything we couldn't plan to get back to claim. If I recall I was making less than $500 a month as a sergeant with combat and hazardous duty pay thrown in. Most of it went by direct deposit to my wife and baby in the States. Camera gear and possibly life itself were cheaper for many of us back then. GF