Where do you think the future of collecting cameras will go everyone going digital. Will rollei and hasselblads still hold value in the years ahead? I sure there are a lot of hassy 500c 's and rollei 2.8f 's out there still.
collecting cameras future value
-
A
- Thread starter randy6
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale FS: Tamron 150mm f/6.3 Lens
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale FS: Royal Soft Focus 150mm f/4.5 Lens
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale Kodak Aerochrome 1443 Offcuts, the last I'll be selling
- Started by MCB18
-
For Sale 9 Rolls FUJI Fujifilm SUPERIA PREMIUM 400 27 exp 3 pro packs
- Started by orbitaldebris
-
For Sale Nikon Nikkor-H 85mm f1.8 AI'd
- Started by Oldwino
Forum statistics
A little hard to tell, but I think that "the best model" and "as mint as possible" and "rare model" and "old" will make most known brands more and more valuable over time.
The past 5-6 years has seen an increase in pricing for old cameras like the Bessa II with the color heliar (I know, I just got one
), the Ikontas, heck, even the zorki's and the optics, like Jupiter 3 and 8 lenses have all increased in price. (not by much, but still significant enough).
- Collectible Leica's are and have always been sickeningly expensive.
If you buy for collection and profit, I believe it's a different ballgame, because you always look for mint-oddball-cases, rarity and exclusiveness, these are already expensive. Those aren't always bought to be used either, but more for display-purposes, so they are more or less independent of anyone shooting film or not.
Perversion in practise lol
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/technol...ca-world-most-expensive-camera-202354222.html
and
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ed-Leica-Luxus-II-camera-sell-1-7million.html
The past 5-6 years has seen an increase in pricing for old cameras like the Bessa II with the color heliar (I know, I just got one
), the Ikontas, heck, even the zorki's and the optics, like Jupiter 3 and 8 lenses have all increased in price. (not by much, but still significant enough).- Collectible Leica's are and have always been sickeningly expensive.
If you buy for collection and profit, I believe it's a different ballgame, because you always look for mint-oddball-cases, rarity and exclusiveness, these are already expensive. Those aren't always bought to be used either, but more for display-purposes, so they are more or less independent of anyone shooting film or not.
Perversion in practise lol
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/technol...ca-world-most-expensive-camera-202354222.html
and
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ed-Leica-Luxus-II-camera-sell-1-7million.html
Last edited by a moderator:
Everyone has already "gone digital" in the last 2 or 3 years, and film sales have stabillized, so I would expect the price of collectible cameras to remain as it is. I expect film to be around for at least 20 years from now. And if more people "return" to film, which might happen, then the price will go up a little bit.
On the other hand, I don't like collecting cameras... they're there to be used, not to be sitting on a shelf.
On the other hand, I don't like collecting cameras... they're there to be used, not to be sitting on a shelf.
Most of us can't buy film locally. We also can't buy old classic cameras locally. That doesn't mean much. Anyone w/ a phone or an internet connection is in business.
Obviously collecting cameras for investments is not sound investing, whether there's film available or not, and there is. Lots and lots of it.
Obviously collecting cameras for investments is not sound investing, whether there's film available or not, and there is. Lots and lots of it.
Some of you think cameras will not hold value in the future okay lets say there is a gazillion hasselbald 500cm's selling around $800 or so today maybe worth half that in a couple years? How about a gold leica luxus worth a fortune now will it be in the future?
As others have said, it depends if you are collecting classic cameras for the enjoyment of using them or for investment, Rare classics, the ones for investment, have shot up in recent years, at least over this side of the pond they have, but usable classics are fairly stable, Personally I collect good usable classic cameras because I prefer using them to more modern cameras, I believe black and white film will be around for my lifetime, and these old cameras add something to the photographs I produce, so much so that my ''Modern'' Bronica etrsi sits gathering dust, but I have seen a small rise in the prices of my type of usable classic cameras, and looking at dealers lists a steep increase in cameras collected for display/investment, but the same applys to my other main love, Classic Cars, they seem to be increasing in price steeply, so it all depends on what you wnt to do with the camera, plus many cameras that you buy as cameras to use will, in time, as they get scarcer, will become investment cameras, I believe that these cameras, in which the people who built them took so much pride, are meant to be used, and should be used for as long as possible
All of the cameras I have (below) took me about 40 years to acquire. I use each one of them and keep them operational. My reason for buying them was not for investment, but enjoyment, because each one has different characteristics and ways of doing things. The all have their own character and look.
I've always wanted an R3 Safari and its custom lenses but never bought one because of the R3's reputation for unreliability.
I've always wanted an R3 Safari and its custom lenses but never bought one because of the R3's reputation for unreliability.
To me its always the value of use. A beautiful camera that doesnt hold the film flat or leaks light or has inconsistent shutter times has little practical value. Luckily, mechanical devices can be repaired in most cases contrary to electronic gear.
Im at home with movie equipment. As a reminder only, there are well made projectors and cameras around from the thirties and forties that can be kept alive with relatively little work. Younger products from the fifties on have plastic parts, bad electrics, and more, so that theyre better recycled. The ARRIFLEX for instance had the first mirror shutter behind a lens turret but the shutter doesnt protect the film entirely from light. Lens caps or turret port caps are needed when handling the camera over longer time. It is a fact that many motion-picture cameras have non-perfect shutters. Only one model has a built-in sliding cover for complete closure of the film chamber, the Ciné-Kodak Special. Thats a good camera in many respects.
Projectors must be so designed that the film path can be cleaned quickly. A good projector takes a little swollen or shrunk film, is gentle to the film, has a cooling of the gate and holds the lens safely in position. It should be possible to lubricate the moving parts during the run from outside. Only few products offer such convenience. The Bell & Howell Filmo and Filmosound from before WWII belong to this class.
As long as perforated film shall be projected or viewed there is a market for its machinery. Perforators are needed and the last word is not yet spoken on them. Film perforators have been unseen, almost secret products for 129 years now*. There are a few secrets about perforators. They still cost tens of thousands today. Theyre not made of plastic.
________________
* William Green claimed to have paper film perforated in 1885. Louis Le Prince mentioned perforation in his 1886 patent. Georges Démény invented a combined projector-camera which runs perforated film in 1893. William Dickson at the Edison labs used perforated film in 1893 at the latest.
Im at home with movie equipment. As a reminder only, there are well made projectors and cameras around from the thirties and forties that can be kept alive with relatively little work. Younger products from the fifties on have plastic parts, bad electrics, and more, so that theyre better recycled. The ARRIFLEX for instance had the first mirror shutter behind a lens turret but the shutter doesnt protect the film entirely from light. Lens caps or turret port caps are needed when handling the camera over longer time. It is a fact that many motion-picture cameras have non-perfect shutters. Only one model has a built-in sliding cover for complete closure of the film chamber, the Ciné-Kodak Special. Thats a good camera in many respects.
Projectors must be so designed that the film path can be cleaned quickly. A good projector takes a little swollen or shrunk film, is gentle to the film, has a cooling of the gate and holds the lens safely in position. It should be possible to lubricate the moving parts during the run from outside. Only few products offer such convenience. The Bell & Howell Filmo and Filmosound from before WWII belong to this class.
As long as perforated film shall be projected or viewed there is a market for its machinery. Perforators are needed and the last word is not yet spoken on them. Film perforators have been unseen, almost secret products for 129 years now*. There are a few secrets about perforators. They still cost tens of thousands today. Theyre not made of plastic.
________________
* William Green claimed to have paper film perforated in 1885. Louis Le Prince mentioned perforation in his 1886 patent. Georges Démény invented a combined projector-camera which runs perforated film in 1893. William Dickson at the Edison labs used perforated film in 1893 at the latest.
Personally, I don't care. I buy cameras because I like them and want to use them.
I have never bought anything wondering or caring what its future value will be.
Steve.
I have never bought anything wondering or caring what its future value will be.
Steve.
I buy with the assumption that the future value will be zero. With few exceptions, for cameras like 35mm SLR's, that is more or less the case already.
Hasselblads have held their own against comparable MF system cameras, and seem to have bottomed out. Rolleis were expensive, and still are. But, there are many more that sell for pennies on the dollar of what they used to command. Mamiya RB/RZ's are a good example.
Collector grade items will probably retain their value well, but to keep them collector grade, you can't use them, so the "value" is questionable if it's something you want to actually use.
From what I have seen, the younger generations are not much into collecting anything, so I would be very shy about considering anything that might be a collectable now to be any sort of investment.
Hasselblads have held their own against comparable MF system cameras, and seem to have bottomed out. Rolleis were expensive, and still are. But, there are many more that sell for pennies on the dollar of what they used to command. Mamiya RB/RZ's are a good example.
Collector grade items will probably retain their value well, but to keep them collector grade, you can't use them, so the "value" is questionable if it's something you want to actually use.
From what I have seen, the younger generations are not much into collecting anything, so I would be very shy about considering anything that might be a collectable now to be any sort of investment.
Cameras are no more of an investment than cars are. As soon as you drive it off the lot, you've lost 10% You open a camera box and put a roll of film through the camera, you've decreased it's "value". If I want to get richer, I invest in a mutual fund. If I just want to preserve my cash, I buy a bond. If I want to have fun and exercise my creative muscle, I buy a camera. If I cannot afford to lose value in a camera (if I were to sell it), I wouldn't buy it in the first place. In any case, it is always a trade off. I may not sell the camera for what I bought it for, but in the course of ownership, I *used* it. That's worth something.
Leica lenses seem to appreciate over time.
I have a serious collection of Leica and Contax cameras and lenses. None bought new. All could be sold for the same amount I bought them at least, and some much more. I call that a good investment.
The only thing I have to add to this is that even fantastic glass can suddenly go moldy and the most beautiful camera can fail and corrode unless they are kept unused in a controlled environment. In that case, why bother with cameras?
If you thought your fantastic Leica lens was going to retain value or appreciate, would you use it or leave in a jewel case on the shelf? In other words, does such a lens need to remain in mint condition to hold its value?
I don't think anybody did in the film age either.
You're probably right Richard, but like any antique or art dealer you need to have a great deal of specialized and detailed knowledge to not get your fingers burned.
Mint cameras and lenses, may gain in value, if they are not used, but for me, along with many others here, the point of any camera is to use it, I buy cameras, not for their intrinsic value, not for the possible value that they may accrue in the future, not as any form of investment, but because I want to use them for what they were made for, with a lot of pride by their(mainly) German makers, to take photographs, I have a fairly large and growing collection of classic cameras, from 1938 to 1961,all usable and they all get used, some more than others, but I use them all, and I prefer the resulting photographs witm them to ''Modern''cameras, and that is my sole reason to buy them
Richard
Richard
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2009
- Messages
- 6,297
- Format
- Multi Format
Cameras May or may not be good investment vehicles. I buy film cameras to take pictures. I buy art because I enjoy the artist. I don't buy houses to flip but as shelter. For me, it's that simple.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |