When should you sell old equipment and get new stuff

[raid]

I always wondered whether I was doing the "right thing" when looking back to my collecting and using of camera equipment. I started out with Canon SLR's (the FD line) with additional Nikon SLR equipment and lenses until there were news that Canon was coming out with a new AF line that is incompatible with the older FD line. I had to make up my mind then to either sell my Canon FD equipment or the Nikon equipment. I decided not only to keep my FD lenses and cameras but to expand the system as many people began to sell first class lenses at relatively low prices. I traded my Nikkors very well for Canon FD lenses (L lenses). Then the prices fell down and down when the digital revolution took over. I am still "analog".

Later on, I began to fancy rangefinders. I have now quite a few Leitz and Canon rangefinder lenses (mostly the older models in very clean condition) and several camera bodies (Leica M3, CL, Canon P, VI-L, Bessa L, T). Now I am again thinking, should I sell and get new equipment or should I keep and enjoy what I have? I can't keep all my lenses and get many more expensive ones. This would be irresponsible on my side as I have other obligations to my family.

If Life were perfect (like in the Walgreen TV commercials), someone would swap with me lenses and no money is exchanged, but realistically, finding a perfect match between lenses and system is not easy.


I wonder sometimes if I am not doing my best in photography when I am not using any of the newer lenses, but this has not bothered me a lot. My main interest still is taking photos and not collecting. The reason to write all of the above was my considering one of the new Bessa R cameras (R3 or R3A ...) for Leitz lenses. It would be reasonably priced, but shouldn't I rather first sell my mintish Canon VI-L that doesn't get used much?

Do you also go sometimes through such a thought process and it makes you think "should I or shouldn't I" ?

I hope I have not bored too many viewers here ... 😎

 

[yossarian]

Raid, I've lost count of how many times I've had this battle with myself. Nearly every
time I divested myself of a camera (or worse, a system), I've regretted it.

I think this is undeniable--the Bessas are nice, and as well built as a modern camera
of that price can be. But not as well built as what you have. I don't have a Canon P,
but I think it's one of the most elegant designs ever. I often compare things to cars,
and the P would be like the classic 1956-57 Lincoln Continental--subtle, understated
timeless design. I wish I still had my 7S, but I don't think it's as nice as the P.

This may seem a little like "do as I say, not as I do", but the Bessas will be around, used, for a few years, and unless something you have is about to give out, I'd say
hang tight for a little while.

I like to have nice equipment--that's the materialist in me. But I prefer to use older,
sometimes obscure stuff, partly because you don't attract onlookers. If you're in the middle of a bunch of people shooting Nikons, Canons (I'm talking SLRs here), and
you've got a Ricoh, everybody stays away--and you get the shot you want without
a peanut gallery.

But that's just the view of one contrarian.

Fred

 

[RJBender]

Raid,

If you can adapt your lenses to a DSLR you will do ok. Last August, someone sold a 35mm f/1.4 Rollei Distagon with the Canon EOS adapter for $600 on eBay (18 bids with $100 starting bid).

(I have a .pdf file of the auction if you want to see it. )

R.J.

 

[remrf]

As I was reading this post I remembered an essay length piece I read on another camera forum. The particualr forum concerned large format cameras and the piece was titled,"The silver bullet". The author was warning newcomers to the format that one could easily be diverted from the goal of well shot photographs by the plethora of equiptment available. He warned againts the thought process that went like this", Well, my last photos were blaw. A waste of film. Maybe if I had one of the( insert any lens, body or new toy here) I would get better results". Other than defective pieces of gear and plastic lensed junk almost any camera one can imagine is capable of producing "THE PHOTO". It all depends upon the mind and eye behind said camera.

I agreed totally with the author and then immediately went out and tried to find my own personal silver bullets . 🙄 The list of gear below were almost all silver bullets at the time of purchase. With the exception of the Leica IIIa which I bought mostly for nostalgia. And the Minolta digital which I bought to use as a digital Polaroid when shooting large format multiple strobe shots.

In my opinion the lens only has to be good enough to equal the ability of the human eye to see detail when the print/image is viewed at a normal viewing distance. This level of lens quality has been around for many years now and the newest, latest,fastest, sharpest lens is not going to take any better a picture than the eye behind the camera can imagine and then execute.

This last year I spent gathering my cameras. The next few years I will attempt to do them justice by the quality of the photos I produce with them.

 

[amateriat]

I like to have nice equipment--that's the materialist in me.
Fred

Only by the Alan Watts definition of "materialist", which IMO is nothing to be ashamed of. 🙂

- Barrett

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Does buying a new S3 count?

I have new stuff at work. At home, I want the equipment to be fun.

 

[ChrisPlatt]

*Twice* I have sold a Pentax Spotmatic F with SMC Takumar lenses,
vowing never to get another "obsolete" screwmount camera.

I now have a third SP-F, and several lenses.
I plan to hang onto them this time, no matter what... 😉

"Excelsior, you fathead!"
-Chris-

 

[back alley]

i think one has to go with the 'gut feeling', one way or another and not look back after the deed the done.
joe

 

[amateriat]

Goodness knows I've had attacks of equipment lust, most of which occurred in the first 15 years of my serious photographic involvement. I'm not sure how instructive it is to rationalize one's decision to switch from Brand X to Brand Y - it seems more rational when switching from one format to another (and that isn't limited to moving from "smaller" to "larger", IMO). With SLRs, I've gone from Canon (F-1) to Pentax (LX) to Nikon (in a panic when my LX bodies kept breaking down - there's a lesson there under "early adopter"), to Minolta (9000 AF...see Pentax LX) to Rollei (2000F...very, very briefly), to Olympus and then back to Minolta (9xi, which lasted for over ten years), to where I am now, in Rangefinderville (which is how I got started in all this, so maybe it makes sense to have "come back")

We get different gear when we feel the need/desire/excuse to. If it works in terms of getting out there and photographing, how bad a choice can it be? My only rule for equipment is that it not get in the way of my mind's eye.


- Barrett

 

[raid]

The digital route with something like an EPSON seems a way into the digital-Leitz world as I have many execllent Leitz lenses.

 

[Finder]

I only get a piece of equipment when I have a problem that cannot be solved with my current equipment. I don't understand buying multiple 35mm systems as one is not really better than another.

I don't look either. I find the more you "window" shop stores and auctions, the more you WANT, but don't actually need. So to simply stop looking will save you a lot of consumer lust, as I think most purchases are based on that no matter how well we rationalize them.

What is the saying? The images are always better in the other kind of camera.

 

[sf]

I go through the same thing. I usually get rid of anything that is redundant or which doesn't have anything over another camera. Right now I have the RF645, an Electro 35 GS, and a Konica C35. Medium format, fast yashica lens, and super compact. Each camera has its own value. I don't have money for collecting much of the same thing, so I buy for utility. I often switch around within a format, though. Like I've owned several 645 cameras and many many compact 35mms.

 

[Byuphoto]

I have somewhat of a dilema also. Since I have a full time wedding/studio business i must balance the old with the new. I still use film for all my work but my pro cameras have to be counted on. In my studio I use a Mamiya 645 manual focus and use it for groups and posed wedding shots. For weddings I now use two Canon Elan 7's and EF L lenses and the 580 flash but when it is my time I like my old cameras. The A, F, and T series Canon SLR's the Yashica 124 G the Kowa Super 66 and my favorite Leica and Zorki RF's I just have a connection to fine old machinery better than plastic. I loved the Bessa R but it can't compare to a Zeiss Ikon Nettar or a fine Leica. and an F1N with a 300 f2.8 is a joy to this old nature photographers heart. What I mean is "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" If it works leave it alone and enjoy

 

[Kat]

What timing, I just sold off my first RF (my first time to sell, too) yesterday, and I sort of had a sad, empty feeling afterwards. I was gonna put it back here in the forum (I think I would have felt better if I had sold it to someone here), but since I'm in SE Asia, I tried selling it locally first to skip the hassle, risks and costs of international shipping and surprisingly a lot of people showed interest. It went to someone who was going to give it as a gift to her dad, I think. I'm gonna miss it, definitely. I really loved it, but knew it wasn't going to see much use with me nowadays due to the size and weight (Yashica GS), esp now that I have my Oly RC.

 

[VinceC]

Ovet the years I've gotten to where I hate to change systems. As a teenager, I was given a Pentax ME-Super as a gift. When I started shooting pictures for the Army, they used Canon F1s (original versions) and I bought a body and some FD lenses of my own. I then bought a Nikomat FTn with a 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor, and for several years I shot with a Canon F1 plus the Nikomat for all my 50 shots. Then someone loaned me a Nikon F and a couple of lenses when I was shooting some sporting events (this was the mid-late 1980s, so the F was already old). I fell in love with the Nikkor 85mm f/2 lens and the 180mm f/2.8; plus my favorite FD lens, a Vivitar 35-85 f/2.8, seized up. So I traded my remaining Canon gear for Nikon -- a couple of Fs, an F2 and an FM-2 (for its flash sync with color film) -- and had no regrets. About 1988-89, on a fluke, I bought an old Kiev RF camera at a German camera shop. The shop-keeper said old Nikon rangefinders also used a similar mount. It was an intriguing little camera that I really enjoyed for its minimalism. Over the next year or so, I bought a couple of Jupiter lenses for it, then a couple of Nikkor lenses and then very quickly put together the Nikon rangefinder kit that I still use, though no longer professionally. One of the things I really appreciated about the Nikon RFs was that their handling was nearly identical to my Nikon Fs, so I could go back and forth between them quite easily. Shutters and focus and aperature all turned in the same direction. I've now been using the Nikon RFs for so long -- more than 15 years -- that I have kind of a Zen relationship with them. Yes, I carry a digital point-and-shoot. But I haven't put film in one of my SLRs in half a decade, and the RFs get used every week if not nearly every day. These cameras aren't better than SLRs, but I've achieved a comfort level with them that leaves me very satisfied.

I used to think that one advantage of using Nikon RFs was that you were more or less immune to fits of gear-acquisition syndrome. Once you get a couple bodies and an assortment of lenses, there wasn't anything else to get, as the system was abandoned in the early 1960s and the really exotic stuff was too heavy and too expensive for mortal use. Then along came Cosina-Voigtlaender lenses and Nikon reissued S3s and SPs. So, much to my surprise, I have recently upgradeed my badly aging system.

I don't think you risk missing good photos by using older equipment. Anything made from the 1950s on has outstanding optical quality. Improvments since 1960 have largely been to automate the process or to help the photographer in some way overcome a lack of skills, knowledge or preparation. After years of being both a journalist and photojournalist, I recently spent six years in a job that involved only writing, so on business trips I'd travel with a company photographer who was decked out with digital SLRS while I carried my Nikon SP and a few lenses to take my own personal photos. There was no quality difference, and I'd argue that the less intimidating RF allowed me to put people a little more at ease than the photographer with the pro SLR and huge, fast zoom.

 

[amateriat]

*Twice* I have sold a Pentax Spotmatic F with SMC Takumar lenses, vowing never to get another "obsolete" screwmount camera.

I now have a third SP-F, and several lenses.
I plan to hang onto them this time, no matter what... 😉

Chris: in a way, you had it easy (or at least easier). It took me about two decades to figure out I should've stayed with rangefinders. In fact, if only I had gone from my Yashica to Leica (instead of a too-long career of top-end SLR "sampling") when I finally got a little money, I'd have saved a ton (in both dollars and relative frustration), and just gotten on with the picture-taking. But that's hindsight for you...


- Barrett

 

[amateriat]

Vince: the important thing is that you know what works for you (and that's damned rare, IMO). The fact that Nikon has unexpectedly bestowed upon you the opportunity to obtain a new RF (wow, someone who's actually going to use his new Nikon RF as it was intended!) is just a lovely, lucky coincidence. The camera(s) becomes second nature to you...and, at that point, great (or at least pretty good) things happen on film, which is all that matters.


- Barrett

 

[Peter Klein]

Raid: For me, the bottom line is, do I actually use a camera or lens? If I do, and it helps a significant amount of my pictures, I keep it. If I don't, or it doesn't, I sell it. I make exceptions for a couple of classic Leitz lenses, just because they're so nice to use, even occasionally. Also because when I was in my 20s and poor, I sold my M2 and DR Summicron, and it was one of the stupidest things I've ever done.

If you shoot mostly at middle to small apertures, then indeed most lenses from the 50s or 60s will do just fine. If you do a lot of available light and are shooting at f/2.8 and wider, the newer lenses have a distinct benefit. I am an available light hound. The Leica aspherics, such as the 35/1.4 are unbelievable good wide open. The V/C 50/1.5 is also better wide open than the classic 50 Summilux. The trade-off is harsher bokeh and a more "clinical" look at all apertures. When I need f/1.4 or 1.5, for me the trade-off is well worth it.

On the other hand, I prefer the rendition of the older classic lenses at medium apertures. I prefer to carry them when I'm not shooting available light. So I didn't sell my 1980's 50 and 35 Summicrons when I got the faster lenses. Many people would have. Not me. You just don't sell your last Summicron.

I *have* sold several lenses that were truly superceded by another. I had a 50/1.4 Nikkor for years. The 50 Nokton blows it away wide open, and the Summicron is better across the frame stopped down. So I sold the Nikkor. I also sold my 85/2 Nikkor when I got a 90/2 Summicron (pre-ASPH). The 'Cron was only a little sharper than the Nikkor, but it is better across the frame, and it has much smoother bokeh. I also sold a IIIf and a couple of slower LTM lenses several years ago. I just wasn't using them once I had an M body and Summicrons.

I have, however, gotten a couple of extra, older 50mm lenses. I just like to play around with the different renditions. I can think of much more harmful and expensive hobbies than to have a few hundred dollars in a couple of extra 50s. If it turns out after a few years that I really don't use them, then I may sell them.

That's my rationale, anyway. So I would say that if you truly want something new, look seriously at what you have. Maybe you only use one or two of your bodies, and the rest just sit. Or there's a lens that you stopped using when you got a better one. Those can go to fund the new toy. But if your heart tells you, "don't sell this one," listen. Especially if it's a Summicron. 🙂

--Peter

 

[Oldprof]

More often than not, dumping one system for another leads to regrets, especially if the old system was giving great results, but you still decided to go for something newer and flashier. It is the triumph of consumerism over art.

 

[AGN]

As I was reading this post I remembered an essay length piece I read on another camera forum. The particualr forum concerned large format cameras and the piece was titled,"The silver bullet". The author was warning newcomers to the format that one could easily be diverted from the goal of well shot photographs by the plethora of equiptment available. He warned againts the thought process that went like this", Well, my last photos were blaw. A waste of film. Maybe if I had one of the( insert any lens, body or new toy here) I would get better results". Other than defective pieces of gear and plastic lensed junk almost any camera one can imagine is capable of producing "THE PHOTO". It all depends upon the mind and eye behind said camera.

I agreed totally with the author and then immediately went out and tried to find my own personal silver bullets . 🙄 The list of gear below were almost all silver bullets at the time of purchase. With the exception of the Leica IIIa which I bought mostly for nostalgia. And the Minolta digital which I bought to use as a digital Polaroid when shooting large format multiple strobe shots.

In my opinion the lens only has to be good enough to equal the ability of the human eye to see detail when the print/image is viewed at a normal viewing distance. This level of lens quality has been around for many years now and the newest, latest,fastest, sharpest lens is not going to take any better a picture than the eye behind the camera can imagine and then execute.

This last year I spent gathering my cameras. The next few years I will attempt to do them justice by the quality of the photos I produce with them.

I once read, enjoyed, saved, an article titled, Confessions of a recovering magic bullet chaser. I wonder if this is the same article you are referring to? It really changed my mind about acquisitions. This is the link.
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/chasing-magic-bullet.html
Sorry, I don't know how to make it hot.
Best, Art