When should you sell old equipment and get new stuff

[AGN]

Whoops, it is hot.

 

[remrf]

Thats probably it. I was going from memory on the title.

 

[Mike Stoesz]

I am also going through this problem of what to keep and what to find new homes for and what to add to the collection/users. After 40+ years of accumulating/collecting I now have about 20 cubic feet of used photographic stuff. I am slowly finding homes for some of it, and narrowing down my keepers to what I can use. So, out go most of the old collectables and strays; and in come new to me Canon RF cameras and lenses. My systems now will be limited to Canon RF, Pentax 645, a couple Barnak Leicas, a couple Voigtlander folders, Konica Hexar AF and RF and perhaps I will keep my Canon F-1 and EF. This is more than enough for any thing I now photograph and I cannot any longer use lenses longer than 135 without some sort of camera support (just too shaky). Some of the cameras I am keeping are for sentimental reasons, I used them when I was a working PJ (Canon RF and F1).
Regards to all, Mike

 

[GeneW]

Sometimes you just get a little tired of the old stuff. I recently sold or traded all my Olympus OM-1 bodies and lenses just so I could try something new. Ended up with a Nikon F3, FM2, and a bunch of Nikkor AI and AIS lenses.

I've moved from the 70's directly into the 80's. Ah, progress ...

Gene

 

[peter_n]

I'm with Peter Klein. I purchase for use and will only keep if it gets used. I use Leica Ms and enjoy using a wide range of lenses but if something doesn't get used I sell it; I had a terrific 21/2.8 Kobalux but it wasn't getting used so I sold it to a PN member. I didn't replace the lens with a different 21.

I think changing your equipment a lot doesn't help with the pictures, at least that's what I find. However other people just seem to love trying out different equipment and that is a lot of the fun in photography for them. Whatever floats your boat as one of my kids says. I wouldn't stress about it.

 

[raid]

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

Peter: I have not used any of the newer lenses except a CV 25/4 lens, so I don't have the luxury of comparing results myself. I also go by what you are using as your measuring stick; what do I use and what do I want to keep regardless. I also am not selling items because their selling price is so low these days.

I hardly use my Canon VI-L and it could be sold at any time. This will free some cash for something that I will use each week. I could sell all of my Nikon SLR system, including 5-6 bodies and as many lenses. I am not using them, but I still love my Canon FD system a lot and use it also often.

I agree with you that something nice such as a Summicron better be kept and enjoyed.

I wrote my posting from the heart as I was going through such a thought process. I thought that many of the people on this forum will have similar feelings.

 

[raid]

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

Fred: It is good to be reminded that equipment like the P actually is built rock solid and may be better for heavy use than a Bessa. And I also have the materialist in me, as you have. It is nice to own nice things. I am not an angel here.

 

[raid]

*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-

Chris: I have a couple of Spotmatic F bodies and several SMC lenses. The lenses are wonderful, but then again, how much film can I shoot in a given time?! I guess, such equipment does not bring but pennies these days, unless the SMC lens is one of the exotic ones.

 

[dostacos]

When should you sell old equipment and get new stuff....SNIP excess

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 ... 😎

never sell, just add to the collection 😀

I have not sold any gear for the last 30 years, sold a KOWA 6 and Mamiya 22o and wished I had not sold either so now I collect "shooters"

I have acquired a few extra things [a couple of M42 135mm lenses, one I gave away here and the other went to Gordy for a strap THAT lens was MINT 😀 ] and I currently have a NIKKOR 85 that I will rid myself of BUT it does not fit my needs [anal retentive or slightly complusive, I only want voightlander lenses on the Bessa's 😱 ]

I do give away cameras however. oldest and second sons both got ME SUPERs and youngest got a spotmatic and Kiev 60 and the OM1n that I "won" here was given to a high school student for his photography class [I ebayd a couple of extra lenses for him too]

but sell no, not me but then again I am a pack rat and have the first camera I ever owned, and old Brownie, with flash attachment....

 

[raid]

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

Joe: This is easier said than done, but actually I am also thinking along these lines and let "bad experiences" in the past go. Among my losses is a user M4-MOT body and a mint M5. I had no clue how much old Leicas are worth these days. Another loss was a rare Nikkor 500/5.0 mirror lens that I let go for little. That's life.

 

[dr.kollig]

Traveling thru Equipment...

Traveling thru Equipment...

I went from Nikon, a mixture of AF and MF, to Leica R and than to Leica M/SM. Till 2004 basically I kept all things, in 2005 I decided to cut down on Leica R. Why you may ask? Leica M is what I use most these days, so one RF System should be enough. When I moved from Nikon to Leica R certain lenses were better like 100/2.8 APO Macro, others not 80/1.4 compared to 85/1.4 AF, so the gain in a sense of optical resolution was smaller than exspected. BUT the prices for s/h Nikon are so low that it did not make any senses to throw out a system, which gives say 90% in optics but only 20% in price. Leica R went on sale, I still keep the 100 Macro and 35/2 with the R 8. By the way I felt the gain from using M compared to R much larger than R vs. Nikon. Ok, 35/1.4 Asph and 90/2 Asph are not too bad lenses to start out..😀

I sell at dealers on commision, so if I like something I put up a higher price, so I can actually keep it, by saying it would not bring enough money, sometimes prices were too low like that cloudy Summarit 50/1.5 :bang:

One more reason to keep Nikon over R: a reasonable digital body would be 1500 € instead of 4000 😱

What was the question again, what would you gain by using the latest lenses?

As a B/W shooter I say, if using 400 ASA film up, it hardly matters, the resolution is more restricted by the film, than by the lens. I think it takes a good 100 ASA film to spot the difference between a first generation Summilux and a ASPH Summilux at medium f numbers, wide open the difference between lenses is more obvious. If using Forte 200 old emulsion nothing really matters....

For shooting high contrast scenes I stick with lenses from 1950 because they smooth out the contrast a bit. Uncoated 1930 lenses do not work too well for this, they are great for portraits...

Wolfram, who sold his third M3 just to get another M3 three weeks later

 

[lushd]

About magic bullets - I got my Leica M6 a few months ago. I was astounded by the leap in technical quality, and I do mean astounded. However, the pictures you folks look at most in my gallery are from Zorkis and Kievs. One of my most popular pictures is with a Kiev 35a that is a pretty basic (though good) camera). I feel very comfortable with a Zorki 4k in my hand and I end up with pictures I like. I hope to feel just as comfortable with the Leica but want to spend 20 years getting there. I wouldn't part with Leica, Zorki, Kiev or Fed. They all do different (nice) things for me.

The really big gear change was switching from SLR to rangefinder ...

 

[back alley]

Joe: This is easier said than done, but actually I am also thinking along these lines and let "bad experiences" in the past go. Among my losses is a user M4-MOT body and a mint M5. I had no clue how much old Leicas are worth these days. Another loss was a rare Nikkor 500/5.0 mirror lens that I let go for little. That's life.

i like to collect a bit and much prefer to use.
this is my hobby and i do it for the love & joy of it.
i like getting a deal but i am not into all this for profit. i rarely make a profit on a sale and sometimes lose a few dollars.

if i looked at this hobby as an investment it would lose so much of the appeal for me.

if you can't enjoy the whole of it then why bother?
that's my simple philosophy.
joe

 

[x-ray]

I would say materialism is only bad when it takes away from important things in life like taking care of your family or if it creates debt. If toys become an obsession then it's a bad thing. Funding toys from the sale of toys is a great way to do things. I'm funding some new leica gear from the same of a small collection of WWI and WWII firearms.

Eventhough I no longer make my living with my M cameras I still use them from time to time in my work but most of all they provide a great deal of enjoyment for my personal work. I'm a very driven person and an extreme perfectionist that never turns out an assignment that's not the very best I can do. I've been doing photography this way for over fourty years. To me there's more satisfaction is delivering the best than receiving payment for what I do. I don't know whether it's good or bad but I'm the same way with my personal photography. There's no question I could shoot with much less and lesser equipment than I have but the equipment I have enhances they pleasure of making my images. There's no question it's all in my head but the fun and relaxation factors have more than a dollar sign attached to them. MY loving wife has finally convinced me that you sometimes need to reward yourself for a life of hard work.

Leica gear is a very good investment, even current equipment. I've bought and used equipment for many years and then sold it and bought more. I have never lost a penny and have always made money on Leicas. Use the equipment for ten years and sell it for more than you paid. I have however regretted a few items that I;ve sold like my 50mm 1.2 Noctilux. Bad move!!! I'm concerned that Leica is going away. Because of my fear I'm gathering new equipment that will carry me for the rest of my life. When I'm finished I will have added four lenses and two new MP a la cart bodies. I still have mey 70's and 80's lenses and a beauty of an M2 and M6. I had plans to sell my 50 tabbed summicron and M6 but have since deceided to keep everything. If I should deceide to sell later they will only be worth more (not likely to sell).

One thing I will say is new equipment won't make you a better photographer. I made some of my best images with my old M2 and M3 with state of the art 50's and 60's glass. I wouldn't say new equipment has made me anybetter or made better images but I will say it has added to the enjoyment. My wife tells me that we need to give ourselves a grand gift sometimes. Don't you just love my wife!

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/pho...ry.php?cat=5045

 

[raid]

X-Ray: My wife says the same. Life can be so wonderful.

"My wife tells me that we need to give ourselves a grand gift sometimes."

 

[x-ray]

You've got a great one too. Doesn't it make life enjoyable?


http://www.rangefinderforum.com/pho...ry.php?cat=5045

 

[ErnestoJL]

Many years ago I´ve learned that a good tool would become irreplaceable if one is able and willing to learn how to obtain the most of it.
Then, I was allways buying what I´ve chosen as the right tools for what I´m interested to do since I started (seriously) in 1970.
It means that every purchase I did later on photo items was based upon the information I got or other people´s comments as wel as my own thoughts (and budget).
That´s the reason why I didn´t sell anything yet. I didn´t regret any purchase i did or I didn´t have to, but things are changing slowly and I decided to part with some cameras which I honestly do not use since a long time ago.

 

[XAos]

Then, I was allways buying what I´ve chosen as the right tools for what I´m interested to do since I started (seriously) in 1970.

Having been through a number of expensive hobbies (aren't they all) - I really don't think you can short circuit the process of buy A, grow out of it, buy B, regret it, buy C because it's a step up, then finally buy D that you wanted all along. I recall as a youngster wanting a Les Paul something awful. I saved and scrimped and searched and I finally found a well loved LP Studio (back eons ago). And it took me about a year to decide that I absolutely hate LP's and pretty much all Gibson electrics, the neck angle is all wrong, the scale length, the bridges, the sound, the pickups. This doesn't mean that I don't like stuff other people have done with them. But I'm a Strat man through and through and through. Had I plunked down the 2-3 grand Gibson wanted for it, I'd have only been sorely and bitterly dissaspointed.

You can make try to make careful decisions, but the people that I know that just dive into a hobby with the credit card blazing from square one with zero knowledge often never 'get it'. So many times it ends up being just a rich snob who still can't play, or take photographs, or <fill in the blank>. While I do try to be careful with my money, I don't think you really can short circuit the upgrade process.

 

[wlewisiii]

Nah, Telecaster. The Strats are so stereotyped...

Huh? Oh _photography_ ...

Oops. Sorry... Though I suppose we could plop in Tessar for Telecaster and Summicron for Stratocaster... 😀 :bang: 😀

<LOL>

William

 

[raid]

You've got a great one too. Doesn't it make life enjoyable?


http://www.rangefinderforum.com/pho...ry.php?cat=5045

Life would be different. She encourages me in photography, and thank God she dislikes digital photography ("is looks unreal"). She wishes that I sell everything and buy with the money a "perfect system where all photos are in focus and no errors are ever made". I just smile and keep on shooting and collecting.