To collect or not to collect...

To collect or not to collect...

  • are among the most admirable, respectable people on Earth.

    Votes: 40 42.6%
  • should have their collections confiscated, used, scratched, scuffed & dinged until they fall apart.

    Votes: 41 43.6%
  • should be scratched, scuffed and dinged until they fall apart.

    Votes: 13 13.8%

  • Total voters
    94
being disdainful requires remarkably little energy. and being self-righteous feels pretty nice. 😉

if i had a huge camera budget, i wouldn't have any pretty cameras that just sit there - they would all be used. i'm thinking a couple of custom a la carte MPs with different magnification finders for different focal lengths. and some funky, self-righteous lizard skins.

i have quite a few cameras and they all get used, even the expensive ones! but if i decide to leave one of them in the vault at the bank, where one of them actually lives, isn't it my own business?

it seems like this thread was started to get a war going...

bob
 
Generally, no. But only an unfortunate sort of person would claim that there's no moral line. Would you fly to the Sudan in a private jet carrying your very own Range Rover, drive up to a refugee camp, walk out chewing on a thousand-dollar truffle, and wave ten thousand dollars in front of a refugee who will die tomorrow of starvation before setting it on fire?

Of course you wouldn't. Of course not. So there is a line somewhere. I can't tell you not to do it, but the rest of us humans can decide you're scum and ostracize you.

That said... I don't think you, Bill, would do that (obviously), and I think this collecting thing is probably on the okay side of that line. I mean, we all spend money on things we don't need. But it's important to make the point, I feel.

You and I are both guilty of being wealthy, well-fed, healthy, educated, free, and having access to technology compared to the majority of people on the planet. No moral sword of judgment that takes my head will miss yours, if that is the point you are making. We (those who can read these words) are all equally obscenely well-off compared to the rest of the world.

So yes, there are lines - and we're all on the wrong side of them, if you really want to go there.
 
and i don't think there is any jealousy or curmudgeoniness in saying that a camera on a shelf is a waste of a camera.

No, no jealousy or "curmudgeoniness," just some judgmentalism that you're not entitled to. If it's your opinion, that's one thing. But you continue to insist it is an objective fact. You speak English well enough to know the difference.
 
it seems like this thread was started to get a war going...

Aren't about 3/4 of the threads here of that nature? Digital versus film, B&W versus color, prime lenses versus zooms, and all of them begin with the premise that if a person prefers A, and another person prefers B, then A is not only wrong, but stupid, evil, or treasonous, according to B; but so is B, according to A.
 
Don't get me wrong, I like to have nice things, too but I just hate watching stuff I could use go for a small fortune on eBay only to then grace the glass cabinets of the well-to-do.

Mint Vintage stuff deserve to sit on a shelf. You will discover that in time!

What's wrong with using the regular used stuff? Why would someone use a never-used camera or lens from 30 years ago?

Kiu
 
Walk into any camera store. Tell them you have cash and wish to buy the latest M8 (or whatever the most expensive camera they happen sell might be). Tell them that you intend to place it on a shelf and look at it, maybe dust it from time to time.

Let me know if they tell you they refuse to sell it to you on the basis that you won't use it as they intended.

Manufacturers make items to sell. They make them with a particular purpose in mind, but if you want to wear them on your head like a hat or back over them with your SUV, they don't care, as long as you've paid in full.

I have never in my life been asked how I intended to use something before someone else would sell it to me.

Ah, I see. You speculated and issue a challenge to others prove your point. Got it. For a minute there I thought you represented a camera manufacturer/wholesaler/retailer and knew what they thought first-hand. Your belief may not be any more believeable than anyone else's belief about "intention". I was just wondering, BTW, and don't really care if you are right or not.

But speaking as a former manufacturer of a consumer product... I cared. I couldn't control what people did with my product, but I had pride in what I made, the quality to which it was manufactured, the manner in which it fulfilled the market niche and the accomplishement of the "end" by which my product was the "means". Oh, yes, I liked the money and probably wouldn't refuse to sell you one even if you told me you're only interest was to make me rich by buying one and running over with your SUV... but I still would care. That, amigo, is first-hand report! 🙂

But who cares, really, about speculation of who really knows "intention"...it's really rather immaterial to the discussion, eh?
 
Last edited:
No, no jealousy or "curmudgeoniness," just some judgmentalism that you're not entitled to. If it's your opinion, that's one thing. But you continue to insist it is an objective fact. You speak English well enough to know the difference.

😱

One "objective fact" following another... the making of a flame war!
 
i actually like collectors! They buy mint, boxed and plastic wrapped stuff and usually sell of the stuff they have that is not boxed, mint or plastic wrapped at reasonable prices!
I cant say that understand them - but I like the trickle down effect of mint stuff!
 
😱

One "objective fact" following another... the making of a flame war!

Not at all.

One person speaks and says "Anyone who collects cameras is doing the wrong thing."

Another says, "In my opinion, not using cameras as they were meant to be used is wrong."

These are very different statements.

And calling attention to them is neither subjective, nor inviting a flame war.

If the analysis I made of the English usage is correct - please feel free to jump in if not - then I have indeed made an factual and objective statement. A statement of fact is not the same as a statement of opinion.

One is permitted to demonstrate in what fashion the argument of one's opponent is full of crap, using logic, intellect, reason, and persuasion. I occasionally throw in some humor.
 
I have about 10 cameras ... just because I am too lazy to sell the ones I don't use anymore.
I don't understand people that collect, except women of course 😉
 
Ah, I see. You speculated and issue a challenge to others prove your point.

Let me do your work for you, then, lazybones.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leica_M6

M6J - 1994. A collector's edition of 1,640 cameras to celebrate the 40th anniversary of the Leica M System. Notable for its introduction of the 0.85 magnification finder, the first high-magnification finder since 1966, and the basis for the 0.85 cameras to follow starting in 1998.

I'm sorry, what was that again? A 'collector's edition' Lieca? You mean to tell me that they made it JUST to sell to collectors? That was actually their INTENT?

Well, I hope no one bought one and put it to use as a camera, then. My God, the horror! It would be contravening the INTENT of Leica, and we can't have that, now, can we?

Well, thank goodness that Leica only did it that one time. I mean, that is the only collector's edition they've ever issued, right?

Right?

Oh, you mean they've done it hundreds of times, for events ranging from the birthday of a Sultan's dog to a commemoration of a bridge in a former Soviet state not falling down after six months?

Oh, my. Gosh.

Leica M6 special editions

* Leica M6 Cutaway
* Leica M6 150 Jahre Photographie - 1989 - 75 Jahre Leica Photographie: 1250 cameras
* Leica M6 Colombo '92 (1492 - 1992: 500° Scoperta dell'America - Italia): 200 cameras
* Leica M6 Royal-Foto Austria (1968 - 1993): 101 cameras
* Leica M6J 40 Jahre Leica M (1954 - 1994): 1640 cameras
* Leica M6 Dragon (gold plated): 300 cameras
* Leica M6 Historica (1975 - 1995): 150 cameras
* Leica M6 Royal Wedding: 200 cameras
* Leica M6 Thai Jubilee (50th year of the reign of His Majesty King Bhumiphol Adulyadej): 700 cameras
* Leica M6 Anton Bruckner (1824 - 1896): 200 cameras
* Leica M6 Brunei: 200 platinum plated cameras (125 platinum plated with diamonds) and 350 gold plated cameras
* Leica M6 Partners: 500 cameras
* Leica M6 Leica Demo Ausrüstung Benelux '96: 70 cameras
* Leica M6 Ein Stück Leica: 996 cameras
* Leica M6 Jaguar XK (1948 - 1998): 50 cameras
* Leica M6 Millennium: only 2000 cameras (300 with 0.85× viewfinder and green leatherette)
* Leica M6 Dragon (viewfinder 0.85x, black painted): 500 cameras
* Leica M6 ICS: 200 cameras
* Leica M6 LHSA (Leica Historical Society of America)
* Leica M6 Øresundsbron: 150 cameras
* Leica M6 Henri Cartier-Bresson (with Vuitton case): only 1 camera
* Leica M6 William Klein: only 1 camera
* Leica M6 Swiss Demo (Test the best): 40 cameras
* Leica M6 Zurich Photographic Center: 100 cameras
* Leica M6 Royal Photographic Society: 100 cameras
* Leica M6 Platinum Optics: 150 cameras
* Leica M6 Schmidt Centenary: 151 cameras
* Leica M6 Canada: 270 cameras
* Leica M6 Year of Rooster: 300 cameras
* Leica M6 999: 999 cameras
* Leica M6 Titanium: circa 6000 and 1000 in TTL-version

It would appear - correct me if I am wrong - that Leica actually makes cameras and intends for them to be purchased by some people just for the purpose of collecting them.

So much for the 'intent of the manufacturer', huh?
 
It's not "my work" you twit... it's YOUR work. You make statements like you are speaking first hand then challenge others to prove or disprove you. Talk about "lazybones". 🙂

Manufacturers do not have just ONE intent... and you know it. Of course Leica made collectors items. So did I. Now back on "ignore" for you. I have neither the time nor interest to spar today. Adios
 
The so called collectors are the ones keeping Leica-Camera AG in business. They buy to collect, to wear as neck jewelry, as status symbol, to fondle, whatever. Because these wonderful collectors are out there ready to buy anything Leica puts out you can be sure there will be stuff for you to buy and use.

I was not able to buy Leica cameras until the 90's so if not for the collectors there would not have been all those mint M2, M3, M4, M5's and all those cool lenses for me to buy and enjoy. Got to love those collectors.
 
That makes you a collector!
Collectors are always looking for better examples!!

What was wrong with the first one? Not clean enough??

Kiu

No. 1 - Cracked viewfinder
No. 2 - Film counter didn't work
No. 3 - Large piece of vulcanite missing (afraid it would get worse)
No. 4 - Pretty good but still full of bright marks and minor scratches (and now a dented lug)

But I guess the fact that you are 'accusing' me of being a collector means you share the 'disdain' widely expressed in this poll. To be honest, there is something of a collector in me (and I suspect in every Leica user). Functionality and efficiency of design (something Leicas have a lot of) are elements of, or at least foundations for, aesthetic appreciation as well.

Jeremy
 
Back
Top Bottom