[Leica] Price of each M9 photo...but there comes a point where...

Tue Feb 18 14:11:51 PST 2020

The ability of the camera (system) to deliver satisfactory images to the user year after year makes the upgrade process in itself obsolete

I regularly shoot with ancient digital cameras...

Nikon D3 FX Bodies (a couple with sky high counts most recent addition was a year or so ago $250...)
Nikon D700 Body (originally a back up for my then new D3 same sensor…now waaaaaay over spec life with 1.2m shots)
Leica M9 Bodies (one with new sensor one with original sensor average 30K)
Leica M8-2 Body these days mainly B&W (thanks BR)
Fuji X Pro 1 s (three- two beat to crap one pristine upgraded firmware)
Fuji X100 (upgraded firmware) 

Any one of these bodies can generate superb 13 x 19’s from my stack of Canon Pro-100 printers…the D3s and M9s were the backbone for a couple coffee table books on Oregon wineries

Nikon D4 FM 16 MP why bother upgrading? Video? (I use Fujis for the rare occasions when I need it) No…maybe D6 

M10r maybe sensor difference may be big enough (when I need sky high ISOs I use Nikon or Fuji) reason to upgrade (but I do like the M9 CCD colors)

Fuji X Pro 2/3? Why? 

Better to put the upgrade money into a kit of lenses or a trip where you use them…

Does the average iPhone toting Joe or Jane look down upon me for using an “ancient” M9 or D3 or XPro1? Nope

Drive them until the wheels fall off...

> On Feb 18, 2020, at 1:55 PM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote:
> 
> I'm not throwing my Nikon D200 out either and might do the conversion as well.
> When you see the grades Dxomark gives it compared to what we're shooting now it's disheartening.
> Literally converts an Aspheric Modern Leica lens to a $40 mid 1970's Soligar special.
> It's like you could do better with a pencil and paper.
> I'll tell you when I got a compact cheaper D40x a few years later I felt the sensor was a noticeable improvement.
> 
> Having just done a Nikon D200 Bing search and came up with:
> " The D200 has been superseded by the far superior D300, even though you certainly buy all the new D200s you want. This review is now an historical artifact, mostly written back in 2005. 2005 is ancient history in digital camera years."
> Rockwell.
> "Comparing a CCD sensor driven camera with a modern CMOS sensor is apples and oranges"
> Rabs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Mark William Rabiner
> Photographer
> 
> On 2/18/20, 11:50 AM, "LUG on behalf of Frank Filippone via LUG" <lug-bounces+mark=rabinergroup.com at leica-users.org on behalf of lug at leica-users.org> wrote:
> 
>    I have a Nikon D200 with about 1000 exposures on it.  I got it from my
>    son.  It is worth less than $200.
>    It was introduced in 2005.  I keep it with the thought to convert it to IR.
>    Maybe I will......
> 
>    Frank Filippone
>    BMWRed735i at gmail.com
> 
> 
>    On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 5:09 AM chris williams via LUG <lug at leica-users.org>
>    wrote:
> 
>> Don’t you would even get $700 out of a used 10 yr  Canon or Nikon. Leica
>> still holds value.
>> 
>> Chris Williams
>> www.dcdocumentaryphotographers.com
>> www.zoeicaimages.net
>> 504-231-6261
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Feb 18, 2020, at 6:11 AM, Don Dory via LUG <lug at leica-users.org>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I'm glad that you could put a price on the usage of your M9.  Most of us
>>> remember when Leica's went up in value; I knew one gentleman that would
>> buy
>>> two of everything leaving one in an unopened box.  After 5-10 years would
>>> sell the pristine one to pay for both.  Digital has pretty much ruined
>> that
>>> as you called out.  I am waiting for the day when a body has enough
>>> technology to be good enough for ten years; 40+mp, built in IS, ISO good
>> to
>>> 50,000.  Surely that would be sufficient to be competitive for ten years.
>>> 
>>>> On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 3:20 AM Richard Man <richard at richardman.photo>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> So I just sold my M9 with corroded sensor for $700 to someone who wants
>> a
>>>> spare donor body when his m9 dies.
>>>> 
>>>> I bought it for $5000, as a demo model, in Feb 2010. Just 10 years ago.
>> So
>>>> cost per month is $36.
>>>> 
>>>> I have taken just over 40,000 pics with it, so cost per image is 11
>> cents.
>>>> 
>>>> On average, I have taken 333 images per month, just over 11 images per
>> day.
>>>> 
>>>> As they say in the commercials, some images are priceless, to me. So
>> well
>>>> worth it.
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> "Some People Drive, We Are Driven"
>>>> https://richardman.photo
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Leica Users Group.
>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Don
>>> don.dory at gmail.com
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
>    _______________________________________________
>    Leica Users Group.
>    See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information