should I keep the Leica?

[photo@mich.com (C. Fitzgerald)]

Hi, I'm curious what you on this list think.
1) What's your opinion of using Leica, versus collecting?  Am I correct to
assume my Leica equipment will 'depreciate', if the use shows, and on the
other hand it will 'appreciate' if held and not used?

2)  Why do prices of used Leica drop astronomically if there is a tiny mark
or two on the equipment?  It seems it should be more important to a buyer
that a piece of equipment functions--ie the body has been used regularly or
recently gone over by Leica technicians.

3)  Is a photographer crazy to sell Leica equip they love but doesn't meet
needs--cost versus return--of a 9-5 photography business?

4)  How do I figure out how much equip is worth, should I actually sell it?

5) Background you can ignore:
Leica I use: M4--with a ding on top that was there 15 years ago when I
bought it and has functioned well--dedicated to a 21/3.4 lens; an M4P used
5 years, gets least use and in best condition of the three bodies I own;
M6--I use the most;
35/1.4 canadian; 50/2 chrome wetzler; 90/2.8 elmarit.

I do use Leica becasue it feels nice in hand, it's quiet, compact and takes
sharp photos.
I don't use Leica because I can't do macro and telephoto work as
efficiently as the Nikon the macro 55, and the 180/2.8--and because I
really like the Nikon 85/1.4; and because I don't want to devalue the
Leica.


thanks in advance for your thoughts,
Colleen
photo@mich.com