Photograph machines are not wallstreet investment. If you want to invest money , you missed the train , you could buy stocks hit the bottom. If you think you will be a millionaire with your camera... you have higher expectations than many Leica collectors. But you can seach the thrift stores to find a forgotten serial number less than 50. You can reach to the villa when you are dreaming listening that important speeches.
Is the Leica an "Investment?"
Lens prices are certainly going nuts. I sold a summicron recently and it did very well compared to what I paid a few years ago. Investment? I don't know but it was nice to have a transaction go that way for a change.
actually, if you read "the millionaire next door" you will discover that MOST people who have money get that way by (ta-DA) not spending it on junque.
Originally Posted by jovo
People like Herr Trump are show=offs who don't have any money because they spent it all trying to look rich.
Is the Leica an "Investment?"
Make some famous photographs with your Leica, and it will be worth a fortune when you're dead, brassing and all.
I don't see camera gear as an "investment." I have a pretty nice little collection containing pre-Civil War lenses, some really nice "big name" cameras from the 1930s, a 1940s Leica IIIc and three lenses, and a nice selection of LF lenses vintage 1895--1930. These are toys, not investments. At best I just expect to break about even when I resell.
Kent in SD
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
No, collectors love people like you, because it means fewer in top cosmetic condition!
Originally Posted by cliveh
I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.
Buying a Leica so you'll have something to talk about seems a bit much. But people buy things -- including cameras -- as status symbols all of the time.
Buying a camera as an investment only makes sense if you can flip it for a quick profit and then reinvest the money either in another camera to flip or to put the cash into some other type of investment.
A camera as a long-term investment is usually an "iffy" proposition because the market can be finicky. What's hot today can be surplus goods tomorrow. You should buy it only if you can pick it up very inexpensively -- less than half of its market value, I would say.
I don't look at that sort of thing as an investment. It something one can and should use and enjoy. I look at classic cars the same way...if theoretically , I even went to the Barrett-Jackson classic car auction as a bidder (I've been as a "civillian") I'd be looking for a nice driver....don't see the point of stuff you have to just look at for fear of killing it's value.
Houses as "investments" got the world's economy in trouble. Camera are for making pictures, houses are shelter. We should have learned something from the Dutch after their tulip craze.
We are buried beneath the weight of information, which is being confused with knowledge; quantity is being confused with abundance and wealth with happiness.
We are monkeys with money and guns.
― Tom Waits
the biggest problem with looking for any leica as an investment is, sorry, you are not going to have one that is.
Want an investment leica? You need one of those special model M3s leica made for David Douglas Duncan and a few others. They are investment-grade because (a) they are unique and (b) got used by someone.
Find a genuine Luxus leica I -- good luck, the real are outnumbered by fakes probably 20 to 1.
Find a genuine Leica 72.
Find the one you can prove was used by hitler's personal photographer.
and so on. Modern "limited edition" cameras are not investments -- they are manufactured rarities, collectors are not fooled.
Buying any other Leica as an "investment" is going to disappoint you -- the ultimate return is not that good. You have cost of storage, cost of maintenance, cost of purchase.
Ultimately, unless you find a mint IIIG at a yard sale for $10, the return will not be worth the candle. Camera dealers make money at this sort of thing because they are camera dealers.
you are not a camera dealer.
I have IIIf RD that is spotless, totally unused, and i took a chance and had it serviced and it came back spotless and so on, and i never touch it except to exercise it, but even that, mint, beautiful, whatever, is only worth about $700 or so. Maybe a thousand on a good day.
It cost me $400 (with some accessories, it is true) plus $200 to have serviced. So my ultimate profit? I could do better in the stock market.
or the IIIF RD-ST that i use now with an abrahamson winder -- it also was mint when i bought , had it serviced, let it sit, and the servicer dinged screw head and eventually (10 years) it needed service again, had it serviced again by someone else, second service wasn't done right, had it done a 3rd time by someone ELSE again.
And it finally came back right but, let's be honest, a camera that had been serviced 3 times.
Did the math, pondered re-sale value, said "screw it" and I use it.
It's dirty, it's got a few scratches, it has a piece or two of leather missing, but it's pure magic on that abrahmson winder and makes pretty pictures. How often, really, to you get to use what is, essentially, a brand-new Leica?
Best investment i could have made.
Last edited by summicron1; 12-23-2012 at 08:14 PM. Click to view previous post history.