Market effect of the new Leica M6

[Pieter12]

a longitudinal study of adults in the USofA found that greater than 99.9% of all people who had died in the prior two decades had also consumed at least 1 liter of water per day, every day of their adult lives....

I'm safe then.

 

[grat]

A whole lot of photographers on Youtube or other social media are out there to promote themselves as photographers or "influencers," or a brand that sponsors them. Most photographers I know don't waste their time making self-serving videos testing equipment, they'd rather spend the time shooting photos.

I grant there are some questionable photographers on YouTube who are "influencers"-- but that doesn't mean anyone with a youtube channel is a hack. Not so long ago, that attitude drove a very nice photographer who'd posted many useful videos are articles to delete his photrio account because he'd been incessantly harassed by a number of "established" photographers on here-- should I then conclude that all photrio forum members are intolerant Luddites?

By the way, all the photographers I listed post videos because they enjoy making videos, and generally hope that their videos are useful. Stereotypes should be limited to stereo, quadraphonic and surround.

 

[Radost]

At $20/roll I can understand Leica being reluctant to use real film for testing...

Ha. I laughed out loud.

 

[Moose22]

should I then conclude that all photrio forum members are intolerant Luddites?

I'll be honest here, there are days when I operate under that assumption.

I run into a lot of "photography enthusiasts" as I call them, and they want to fight, argue, gatekeep way more than they seem to like making photographs... and it's not just here, the same thing used to happen in photography clubs back in the 90s. I remember showing one coworker photographs I'd taken, not the originals but the ones in the magazine, the magazine which had purchased them from me, and being told I wasn't a real professional because one had been taken with a 4004 instead of a "pro" camera. I knew, and have met since, lots of people like that and this hobby seems to have its fair share.

I think we all know you can run into the whole gamut, from trendy equipment whores to beginners to experienced folks who just like the hobby and love to help others learn a thing or two. The you tubes adds the inducement of money and the tyranny of the algorithms to the mix, so you might be served an awful lot of the former.

But, my initial point, the problem with crushing stereotypes is that there is so often someone out there to reinforce them. Click on one youtube popular idiot and you're likely to be served up tons of similarly popular idiots every time you return to the you tubes. This is true for photography enthusiasts as it is for everything else google wants you to click on, so it is easy to get jaded.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I'll be honest here, there are days when I operate under that assumption.

I run into a lot of "photography enthusiasts" as I call them, and they want to fight, argue, gatekeep way more than they seem to like making photographs... and it's not just here, the same thing used to happen in photography clubs back in the 90s. I remember showing one coworker photographs I'd taken, not the originals but the ones in the magazine, the magazine which had purchased them from me, and being told I wasn't a real professional because one had been taken with a 4004 instead of a "pro" camera. I knew, and have met since, lots of people like that and this hobby seems to have its fair share.

I think we all know you can run into the whole gamut, from trendy equipment whores to beginners to experienced folks who just like the hobby and love to help others learn a thing or two. The you tubes adds the inducement of money and the tyranny of the algorithms to the mix, so you might be served an awful lot of the former.

But, my initial point, the problem with crushing stereotypes is that there is so often someone out there to reinforce them. Click on one youtube popular idiot and you're likely to be served up tons of similarly popular idiots every time you return to the you tubes. This is true for photography enthusiasts as it is for everything else google wants you to click on, so it is easy to get jaded.

Idiots on the internet are like wire hangers in a closet. Close the door and they will duplicate. They do not have to be two different sexes, they are hermaphroditic.

 

[Moose22]

Idiots on the internet are like wire hangers in a closet. Close the door and they will duplicate. They do not have to be two different sexes, they are hermaphroditic.

Astute, Sirius. Very astute.

 

[Pieter12]

I am certainly not a Luddite. I am in favor of mechanized textile fabrication. And fairly tolerant, too.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I am certainly not a Luddite. I am in favor of mechanized textile fabrication. And fairly tolerant, too.

What did Eli Whitney say to his wife? "Keep your cotton picking hands off my gin!"

 

[grat]

I am certainly not a Luddite. I am in favor of mechanized textile fabrication. And fairly tolerant, too.

Sorry, didn't mean to imply you are, but I appreciate that you know about the Luddites.

I suppose I could have fallen back to my old standard: "All generalizations are false. Including this one."

 

[Ko.Fe.]

It looks like M film series where promoted to Kardashian's category.

Good thing what money can't buy brains and this is why better made Barnacks are still affordable to photogs.

 

[Huss]

It looks like M film series where promoted to Kardashian's category.

Good thing what money can't buy brains and this is why better made Barnacks are still affordable to photogs.

Yes a Barnack is a much better camera than an M. Strange that Leica gave up on it and introduced the M3. What were they thinking?

 

[NB23]

Yes a Barnack is a much better camera than an M. Strange that Leica gave up on it and introduced the M3. What were they thinking?

Mechanically, Barnacks are better, and overall as cameras they are the quintessential Leica.
Barnacks are undestructible cameras (as are the Nikon S). The M3 was manufactured alongside the IIIf, and the its advantage was the bigger viewfinder and a new Mount. Disadvantages were that it was bigger. On quality alone, the IIIf was the pinnacle and seen as the better camera. The departure from the Barnacks had to be done for marketing reasons. Same for Nikon who had to depart from the rfs to SLRs. Once they created tue Nikon F, rangefinders were totally out of the game. Totally destroyed.

The Leica glory years were the Barnack years. Absolutely. The groundbreaking cameras are the Barnacks.

Here is a small part of William Eggleston’s collection of Barbacks. Legendary cameras.

Get your Leica game straight.

 

[snusmumriken]

Mechanically, Barnacks are better, and overall as cameras they are the quintessential Leica.
Barnacks are undestructible cameras (as are the Nikon S). The M3 was manufactured alongside the IIIf, and the its advantage was the bigger viewfinder and a new Mount. Disadvantages were that it was bigger. On quality alone, the IIIf was the pinnacle and seen as the better camera. The departure from the Barnacks had to be done for marketing reasons. Same for Nikon who had to depart from the rfs to SLRs. Once they created tue Nikon F, rangefinders were totally out of the game. Totally destroyed.

The Leica glory years were the Barnack years. Absolutely. The groundbreaking cameras are the Barnacks.

Here is a small part of William Eggleston’s collection of Barbacks. Legendary cameras.

Get your Leica game straight.

Why did he need so many indestructible cameras?

 

[Huss]

Why did he need so many indestructible cameras?

Because some were more indestructible than others.

 

[Huss]

Mechanically, Barnacks are better, and overall as cameras they are the quintessential Leica.
Barnacks are undestructible cameras (as are the Nikon S). The M3 was manufactured alongside the IIIf, and the its advantage was the bigger viewfinder and a new Mount. Disadvantages were that it was bigger. On quality alone, the IIIf was the pinnacle and seen as the better camera. The departure from the Barnacks had to be done for marketing reasons. Same for Nikon who had to depart from the rfs to SLRs. Once they created tue Nikon F, rangefinders were totally out of the game. Totally destroyed.

The Leica glory years were the Barnack years. Absolutely. The groundbreaking cameras are the Barnacks.

Here is a small part of William Eggleston’s collection of Barbacks. Legendary cameras.

Get your Leica game straight.

some splendid navel gazing there. But if you are actually concerned about taking photos, all of a sudden the M3‘s waaaay better viewfinder, and focusing, and film loading, and film advance comes into play.

I mean, some people like peering into one peephole to focus, then peep into another to compose, then play w that little lever to adjust the focus of the viewfinder, then wonder where everyone went to….

but but back in the day that was how blah blah… who cares? but if that is your bag, baby, knock yourself out.

 

[Oldwino]

Mechanically, Barnacks are better, and overall as cameras they are the quintessential Leica.
Barnacks are undestructible cameras (as are the Nikon S). The M3 was manufactured alongside the IIIf, and the its advantage was the bigger viewfinder and a new Mount.

Not to be picky (but this is Photrio after all, so why not?)...The sole advantage of the M3 was the combined viewfinder/rangefinder. Everything else was just a refinement, many of which would have found their way onto a future IIIh or whatever.

 

[tahomaphoto]

Yeah. like the $1500 Contax T2. Thank you Kendall Jenner.

Prices on the T2 seem to be coming down. Maybe. I bid recently on an eBay offering; I think the market clearing price was $1,100 (I didn't win it).

 

[4season]

It does look like typical selling price of a non-TTL M6 has fallen from $3K+ to around 2500, but this is still almost 2x what I recalled before the start of the pandemic.

I also see a pretty big disconnect between the price of a new 50/0.95 Noctilux (almost 13K USD) versus used (as low as 6K USD).

Sometimes, the Leica M market hands you a cheap/free rental, or maybe you even make a few bucks in resale when you move onto something shinier. But usually, they depreciate: Even that minty M3 outfit purchased decades ago for a couple of hundred bucks starts to look a lot less impressive as an "investment" when inflation is factored in.

 

[mshchem]

Screw mount cameras if maintained can host Voigtlander (Cosina) optics. This is an inexpensive way to get into world class glass in a stealthy 35mm rangefinder. Zone focusing at f 5.6 and above gets you into the classic Leica experience.

Don't forget to bring your film trimming template and a sharp pocket knife.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

Why did he need so many indestructible cameras?

He actually prefferred the Canons. The Leicas were the backups.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

Anyone that thinks a screw mount Leica is a better camera than an M doesn't actually make photographs. My 2¢. Probably worth a buck with inflation.

In fact, it is a very easy case to make that Canon LTM bodies like the 7 and the P were better photographic tools than LTM Leicas. The old Leicas are for fondlers and those that have nostalgia. Nothing wrong with that either I don't think.

 

[mshchem]

ABLON film trimming template. Absolutely beautiful! Used to sell new for a few dollars, today originals run $200+.

 

[snusmumriken]

He actually prefferred the Canons. The Leicas were the backups.

Belt and braces guy, clearly.

 

[Huss]

It does look like typical selling price of a non-TTL M6 has fallen from $3K+ to around 2500, but this is still almost 2x what I recalled before the start of the pandemic.

I also see a pretty big disconnect between the price of a new 50/0.95 Noctilux (almost 13K USD) versus used (as low as 6K USD).

Sometimes, the Leica M market hands you a cheap/free rental, or maybe you even make a few bucks in resale when you move onto something shinier. But usually, they depreciate: Even that minty M3 outfit purchased decades ago for a couple of hundred bucks starts to look a lot less impressive as an "investment" when inflation is factored in.

Yup. All those Leica snobs who buy the gear because they claim it is an investment? The only time you make money buying new Leica gear is if it is a very limited one off production run. And other standard production Leica - if you buy it new (camera or lens) - the price will plummet by at least 30% the moment you roll it off the lot. Just like other gear.
Most of my gear was bought used and in the worst case scenario I can sell it for what I bought it for. A couple of things I lucked out on.

 

[snusmumriken]

I dont understand the mindset of a photographer who already anticipates the sale of a camera at the time of purchase. I won’t be around when my gear is sold, and it won’t matter if at that stage it is valueless. I have already got my money’s worth of pleasure from it, and anticipate more to come.