Are Expensive point and Shoot cameras really worth the $?
I see some Point and Shoot cameras that seem to marketed as "premium" and demand fairly high prices. Considering all the great P&S cameras made by Pentax, Canon, Olympus and Nikon, I dont see what all the fuss is about.
Some of these expensive P&S cameras are even going for $500-$700 or more!
Is anyone actually buying these to use or are they all crazy collectors?
And if anyone is using them, are they really that much better than say an olympus stylus or canon sureshot?
Please give me an idea of the point and shoot cameras to which you are referring.
I know the ones you're talking about like the Contax T, T2, T3.. Nikon 35Ti, 28Ti and some models from Minolta that I know. I think those are nice to have and they have better built quality but still they don't offer much in term of controls.
Contax T3 Camera - Mint - $500
Fuji Fujifilm Natura S Lavender F1.9 24mm camera $489
Ricoh GR1s Date Black Camera w/ GR 28mm Lens $450
Olympus Pen W Olympus-Pen W $416
Leica Minilux Titanium 40 f2.4 Summarit LN $369
Yashica T4 Super Date Black ( Like New) $299
Minolta TC-1 $574.00
Leica CM zoom , condition superb $749!
MINOLTA TC-1 G-Rokkor 28mm f/3.5 MINT- IN BOX *RARE* $836
Contax T3 Titanium Black 70th Limited Edition *RARE* $999!
The more expensive P&S models, including -- but not limited to -- those made by Leica, Kyocera (Contax) and Rollei (QZ series and Rollei 35 AFM) still seem to command a very high price. With some, it's about the lens or manual controls or quality of construction. With others, it's more about the reputation of the brand.
With a couple of exceptions, the Japanese camera makers (Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, Kyocera (Yashica and Kyocera), Canon, Konica, Minolta and others) pushed so many lower-priced models onto the market with such great frequency that it diminished the value of the existing products. Similar to what is happening with the digital P&S market -- used P&S models are essentially valueless when compared with their original sales price.
The Nikon 35Ti (and siblings) and the Konica Hexar and a couple of others were higher-spec'ed products aimed at a different buyer.
As well, much of the consumer-level product was -- to put it rather unkindly -- crap. Thrift shops are full of plastic P&S models for $3 or less, and if you were to cover up the nameplate, you'd be hard-pressed to tell who made it. Nor would you care, because most are constructed from a low grade of plastic, which didn't wear well.
Now, that doesn't mean that they aren't good cameras. Over the years, I've bought some of these here and there. This summer, I gave a Chinon (don't know the model and don't care) to let my daughter take on her summer camp. If it was dropped or got lost or stolen -- I didn't care. There were plenty more if that happened.
The photos were suitably sharp, and in the end that's all that mattered to her. And in the end, that's all that mattered to most of the people who bought these cameras. These are the '80s and '90s versions of the Instamatics, 110 cartridge and plastic 127 cameras of yesteryear.
But I agree that most of the higher-priced P&S models sell for too much. And that's because the market will bear what people are willing to pay.
Some were absurdly expensive when they arrived on the market. The Rollei QZ 35T, for example, retailed for $1,500. Excellent camera, but an entry-level SLR would give you equally good photos and more flexibility.
By the way, the word "mint" is inaccurately used most of the time on eBay and in photo forums.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I read "mint" on ebay as "I expect you to pay a mint for my product"
With regard to the term, "mint," I could not agree more. My favorite, though, is the term, "mint+"--a designation I see used on occasion. What can this possibly mean? Is it better than new?...or do they just sell you a mint camera and give you a ten-dollar bill, too?
I love Mintish or mint-ish.
By the way I have an older Leica point and shoot. It cost me about $300.00. I bought it to replace an Olympus I gave to my daughter. The lens is nice, it is sharper and has more contrast than the $65.00 Oly.
DIGITAL IS FOR THOSE AFRAID OF THE DARK.
I like the picture quality possible from some of the older "high-end" pocketable cameras, especially if they have manual exposure controls or manual over ride. But the word here is "pocketable." I loved my Rollei 35 with a Sonnar, but it never felt comfortable in a pocket. A really pocketable camera with a "professional" quality lens would be very desirable to me--if the price were right. And some of the less expensive ones I have owned could cut a pretty sharp image--I remember a little Konica that did a nice job, despite costing about 125 bucks new. Don't remember the model number, though. It was stolen in Greece years back. But I am not one for "cachet."
John, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA
I consider that my Minolta Maxxum SLRs are in mint condition, but I can only get 5% of their original value. They will probably keep working longer than my new DSLRs. Only the death of lab services will finally put them out of action. I find it a mystery how P&S models are valued more highly. I wonder sometimes, if manufactures are crushing the old analog cameras and accessories, that are sold/traded to camera dealers.