Say it Isn't So!!!!

Started Jan 4, 2012 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
stevielee OP Senior Member • Posts: 1,137
Re: not a competitor, but

PJ711 wrote:

I tend to agree with the view that the Leica lenses are quite capable of holding up their value in the long run, but their M8 and M9 bodies depreciate just like every other digital body, fast.

Even the examples above show that to be true. The M8, which by the way I owned and happily used for 2 years, has clearly depreciated by 70% since its introduction at a list of $5K. Comparing it to the NEX5 doesn't make much sense to me, frankly, because while it may be true that in percentage ownership the NEX has depreciated even more quickly, in absolute dollars the M8 has lost 4x the total price of the NEX. At the same time, new Leica lenses bought 4 years ago, when the M8 came out, have probably appreciated rather than depreciated. So, like the equipment or love it or whatever your feelings about it, there is an unavoidable fact that the market doesn't particularly value a digital M any more highly than a last-generation FF. You will lose thousands of dollars if you buy it new, use it for 2 years and then sell it.

BTW, I haven't been on here much but was interested in this thread since I'm quite interested in the upcoming Fuji. I'm not sure calling someone a troll because he disagrees with your views is such a good thing. Is this one of those forums?

Kudos to you for the post above. You've eloquently said what I have been trying to say here, but much more succinctly.

The reason some of the Leicaphile posters on this particulate thread have glammed onto the Sony Nex5 -- is simply because (depreciation, or not), it's a superior digital imaging tool (in overall IQ output) as compared to the fading M8. And for what it's worth (in the real-world resale market valuation scheme of things), most higher end digital cameras obviously depreciate much more slowly than the most of the lower-end cameras (ala NEX5 vs M8). which is do to the basic fact that there are longer release cycles for higher end cameras (once every 2-3 years), and much shorter release cycles for mid-to-lower end cameras (12-18months ), as is the case for Sony's NX compact series. So it only makes sense that cameras like the NEX5n will depreciate faster than a full-fledged Flagship DSLR might, since it will most likely be obsoleted much quicker with the release of a newer, improved model - as is the case for the NEX7 now handily eclipsing it's older sibling: the NEX5n. The M8 (and M82), have had only one new M-Series camera eclipsing it since it was first released way back in 2007, nearly 4 1/2years ago. If Leica had the ability and wherewithal to be able to put out new cameras anywhere near the pace that Sony is able to do, then the M8 would be trumped at least 4 to 5 x times by newer M-series Leicas by now. Such is not the case.

And, as pointed out by you, and other here, losing a couple of hundred $$$US on a camera is far more financial absorbable for most of us than losing many thousands of $$$US, as has been the case with the M8. If you consider the 3-3.5K loss (the actual depreciation in dollars the M8 has suffered since it's initial release) that large amount of money (for some of us) could have purchased a heck of alot of very nice photo gear

instead of holding onto a 4+ year old camera body that has been majorly neo-obsoleted since it was first available. If given the option between the two, I'd much rather own one of the Epson RD1's for less than 1.5K, than own a IR contaminated, and seriously eclipsed Leica M8. The RD1 is just as well built (if not better), but with superior overall IQ, and also with a native M-mount.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow