Everybody buys things they don't need, but when Leica is mentioned it's conflated with snobbery or status. Thats nature of life, people, and a lack of insight. For instance why don't they buy some cheaper shoes, buy a cheaper car, eat a burger not a lobster, downsize their house? They don't because it never occurs to them, criticism starts at somebody elses front door.

I, and many other people are happy and proud and boasting that they bought a car that isn't the base model. But the padded luxury and go faster stripes are devaluing as you drive away from the lot. I have Leica lenses that are worth more than I paid for them. My Leica MP, which I bought in 2003 has been productive and well used for ten years, but if I sold it now I'd get more than I paid for it. Compare that with the other photographic equipment we all buy and take a massive hit on. Of course the type of photography makes a difference between buying a quick to devalue DSLR or a Leica MP. You aren't going to be doing bird photography with an MP. But to say Leica equipment is expensive is kind of missing the point by a country mile. It holds its value better than nearly all other photographic equipment, in some cases it goes up in value, and in the long term you know that what you bought five, ten, twenty, thirty, or more years ago can still be used now (and into the future) alongside current products. A 1950's 50mm Elmar can still be used on a modern MP or M9 without adapters. How does that fit with Nikon or Canon and the amount they make you pay in new equipment to remain 'upgraded'. But I can appreciate the alternative point of view from people who see photography as a short term dalliance, it doesn't pay to spend too much.

Steve