It's all a matter of perspective:
I consider plastic-auto-everything-wonders-with-all-the-bells-and-whistles (which when new, probably equalled Leica prices and their digital offstring still do) to be the real mystique and wate-of-money objects.
A leica is simply a very nice tool which lasts a lifetime and which isn't even so expensive when bought used.
Of course those who are convinced that price should be only correlated to "functions" and gadgets won't get it.
M6, SL, SL2, R5, P6x7, SL3003, SL35-E, F, F2, FM, FE-2, Varex IIa
Sorry, an M7 thru M9 is Waaaaaaaay too rich for my blood and my wallet!
Originally Posted by budrichard
M4 prices now run the gamut anywhere from $900 to $3-4K.
Originally Posted by Jim Jones
I've seen some local examples recently of an M3 and a M4-P. Clearly needing some work; clearly overpriced and targeting collectors or as they say in the marketplace:
Offered at whatever the market will bear ...
So unless you're a collector, or prepared to drop an additional $600 to who knows how much to get the camera into good operating condition, it just might be a crap shoot.
Too bad collectors have driven up the market. I'd love to be able to buy a M4 at that price. Now for $200, you'd wind-up with something fitting the junk pile, or more likely the user manual, or box sans the camera body.
When you compete with collectors for cameras (or anything else), you're really in a no-win situation.
You almost always end up overpaying, because collectors are buying for one reason and you're buying for another reason.
Drives me crazy.
Here's how I look at the M4 I bought last year -- for $1400 including a 50mm Summicron: in 2 years if I tire of the lovely images it produces (neither better nor worse than the images produced by my Nikons, just different) I can sell it for . . . $1400, as long as it's in similar condition. That means it's essentially free to use.
If I never tire of it, in 20 years my son or daughter will get it or my nephew or whoever, and they'll be able to use it for another 20 or 30 years (if they can find film). This camera has lasted around 50 years by now and it shows very few signs of use and it has another 50 years in it easy, if not abused.
This can be said for other cameras, of course, and good on them. But it cannot be said of most cameras and the bottom line is that a high quality, precision tool that produces consistent, high quality results AND lasts 100 years or more is cheap at that price.
The collector pricing and the talk about mystique is bullship of course, but it is tethered to very real qualities that are worth the user prices most of us pay.
For someone with my level of talent a FED-2 and a handful of FSU glass is just as good.
I don't delude myself that a camera will give me better vision. For some others around here, better gear does give better results. But for me, I still need to get out of the gate.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I sold my M4-p in decent condition for $600. A Leica doesn't have to be all that expensive, and retains its value quite well. I very much prefer the ergonomics of Leica's & lenses to my Nikon SLRs.
check out the latest Ebay Lecia M owned by famous photographer(?) wold fit the ugly category only $104,000....!!!!
Never owed a Lecia , couldn't afford one and now I never will .
Here's a prime example of the Leica name pushing up the price on a piece of junk.
eBay auction here
I also so this over on RFF.
Originally Posted by elekm
They're just as befuddled and amused as we are
7 bids $100! Please
+10 So true, so true
Originally Posted by Zathras
Those who know, shoot film