No such thing as an investment if you plan on using it, every time its off the shelf its subject to wear and chance of damage.
true, its unlikely that todays dslr plastic blobs will be worth anything down the road, we've already seen what happens with AF 35mm slrs. A beat to death manual camera will bring more than a 90s AF slr.
The saving grace with digital is that it medium is not in danger of being discontinued anytime soon and therefore destroying any value it has.
Proper batteries for Nikon Fs etc is why the prices on them is staying low and F2's are staying up there, stop film production and all film cameras value will go through the floor overnight.
Collect original photographs. Not the tools that make them.
Only cameras you like are required in a collection surely? If I had a particular dislike for Leicas, I should not feel compelled to collect them simply because they are "legendary". I agree with others though, it seems a shame to collect cameras which don't get used *at all*, so start with the ones you'd like to use.
An excellent observation. A fine silver print is worth more than the camera that took it.
Originally Posted by X. Phot.
A lot of truth in that statement, but equipment still holds people interest and fascination. I don't think its in the best interest of the hobby to discourage collecting.Its all part of it.
Originally Posted by blockend
Its a free market, if you to buy then buy, if you don't want to buy then don't, but don't criticize those who choose to collect cameras.