Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/02/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>I don't buy cameras to collect. I buy them to use and create >photographs >with. The idea of spending $8000 for a camera is ludicrous. That is >what >my daughter's high school tuition runs. I own a Leica CL that I bought >many years ago. Yes, it is not as accurate as the M series. Yes, it >may >feel like a toy a times, but I love the damn thing. I can take it >anywhere effortlessly. The 40mm is for me a perfect compromise between >the 35 and 50, especially when I take along the 28mm. The cost of most >camera equipment has gotten way out of hand, but the fact that this >particular brand is so highly sought after by collectors has made the >costs absurd. To each his own. If it makes you happy to spend a >fortune >for a camera, suit yourself. Personally I'd rather feed my children. >If >I had to replace the CL today, I'd opt for the Contax. It's pricey >also, >but I have yet to see the fanatical following that drives prices >through >the roof. > Good Day! The prices of new Leicas have virtually nothing to do with collectors. It is simply that if the market is willing to pay an amount for something, you are well within your rights to charge that much for it. Until the US standard of living increased exponentially in the 1950's Leicas cost every bit as much as a basic automobile. The reality is that the US standard of living has lost a little ground, but, what manner of automobile can you buy for $8000 today? One could say that the fact that M3's and their accessories are such pricy COLLECTIBLES is due to the number of Leica USERS, who, at $1200 a body, consider them to be "cheap". Compare other high-quality cameras of the 1950's, and you will see that the M3-- not rare by any means, is obsurdly expensive. This is due to its durability and popularity as a user, if anything. Sincerely, Thomas P. Myro Photology@juno.com