I approve of digital (bear with me here...)

[h._p.]

I'm sure others have noticed one effect the digital revolution is

having - film equipment is getting much cheaper. I just picked up a

very nice Leica IIIc body for 125 GBP, less than half what it would

have cost me just a year ago. Today, I needed to replace a flashgun

for my 'new technology' Eos outfit. A 540EZ flashgun in really good

user condition cost me 99 GBP, this time last year, the same gun would

have set me back 250 GBP. Anyone else noticed this useful side effect

(useful, that is, if you're buying)?<div></div>

[SCL]

You bet! In the last year picked up a Leica R8, 2 Bronica MF cameras, 2 Exaktas and 3 Ricoh 500s, all in terrific shape at bargain prices. It has been hard to restrain myself...but honestly, I'm trying.

[kelly_flanigan1]

Cameras go thru cycles of being popular. When out of vogue stuff gets dumped. In the late 1960's folks would trade in a Leica M3 and Summicron and pay to get a Miranda slr, Petri, or Nikkormat Ft with 50mm F2 lens. A 50mm F2 LTM Summicron was only 10 to 25 bucks in the late 1960's; you might get 5 to 10 bucks off that Petri for it in a trade in.

[john_wire]

and ...... have you noticed ...... film is becoming cheaper and better? This has to be almost a religious moment in the universe of time and motion, never to happen again. Enjoy it while you can. Regards.

[weezul]

the bad side to it is that a digital camera is rapidly becoming a 'default' camera => soon we'll all have to say 'goodbye' to films and labs, then all the HQ bargain analog equipment will be left for us completely useless, and - indeed - extremely cheap... pity...

[ben conover]

Nice cameras above, I agree with the post. Found a B&J press camera with perfect lens, film holders, and a good meter, all for $200.

 

My best buy was a Fuji GW69011 I got for $50 last year, I sold it for $500 this year and might try to get a GSW690111 sometime.

 

Cheers.<div></div>

[todd frederick]

Selling film cameras is another issue. I recently sold an N90 Nikon kit with flash, cord and bracket and got only $225. I also have a wonderful OM-1, 5 lens kit that I don't use much, and no one has bid over $150 for the whole thing. I can't afford to keep advertising it! So, I'll just keep it. It's excellent.

[astral]

While I have not benefitted from falling "classic" prices yet - no Leicas for a tenner - I found today that Jessops (the largest UK photo chain) is currently giving 33% off displayed secondhand prices. They appear to be dumping stocks of used film cameras and lenses quite quickly and now even have an EBay store.

 

However much of Jessops' secondhand stock nowadays is in pretty average (often sub-average) condition and is often oddly priced - sometimes ridculously overpriced, sometimes wonderfully underpriced. But there are are some gems to be had. Today I bought an excellent, barely used Nikon FE for 80GBP (140USD) - ok, not the best price ever, but it does have a 1 year warranty & 30 return option.

 

I find that on many dealers' webshops camera and lens prices can often be distinctly lower than I see on EBay - and you get a warranty and full legal protection, and often the price comes down if you're interested rather than up!

[vivek iyer]

I don't know where these falling prices are? Especially films here, in Europe, are higher priced than ever!

 

An used 28mm f/6 Orion-15 (LTM) cost me $150, a Canon 25mm f/3.5 (LTM) $300. Viewfinders for these were another story..

 

Maybe my film gear needs are too expensive?

I am trying to mount a Helios-103 53mm f/1.8 (cheap Russian lens) in contax mount for a Leica thread. If I have to buy an adaptor (only for Leica M mount), it would cost me >$300.

 

Yes, lots of the film SLR gear which have been used for years are flooding the used market because of digital but the rangefinder and such are doing reasonably well.

[david_m]

It's all based on supply and demand. There are still enough collectors to keep up the price of most super classics. But the price of your average classic like the Pentax Spotmatic or Chinon CS has dropped from around $75-$100 2-3 years ago to more like $25 (if you are lucky) now. You can barely give away point and shoot cameras since the type of person who used them have all gone digital. Even expensive ones that cost $200 new like the Pentax PC35AF can be bought for $10 or less.

[Andrew in Austin]

High end classics and lenses whose original production was limited are still holding their value. I guess these are the super classics.

 

For example, a Nicca 5L sells for a premium when compared to Leica IIIc or IIIf, which also seem to be plentiful. On the other hand, if you've ever looked into a Leica IIIg, which does not seem to be as plentiful, then the Nicca 5L starts to look affordable.

 

In my case, I was able to score two recently CLA'd Leica IIIf bodies for under $500 in the past year. By the way, with regards to Leitz lenses that are in excellent shape, you'll still pay a premium, if you want one that is in like-new condition.

 

Thankfully, I sold my Olypmus OM-1 outfit in 2002. The distress prices that I see that they are selling for now is simply amazing. It is a supply and demand situation. You can't have a mass market of people selling 35mm SLR gear all at once and expect prices to hold up.

[Andrew in Austin]

<p><i>the bad side to it is that a digital camera is rapidly becoming a 'default' camera => soon we'll all have to say 'goodbye' to films and labs, .... </i></p>

 

<p>This a valid concern. My recommendation is to build a darkroom now while prices for used darkroom equipment is affordable and selection of gear is plentiful. This is route that I've taken, mainly because I prefer prints to computer screens.</p>

 

<p>Films offerings have and will continue to be reduced, but you have a few good years ahead of you. Make the most of it.</p>

[vivek iyer]

If anyone wants an user OM-2 (i think that is what it is), 50mm, 28mm and a generic zoom, ttl flash and some itsy bits, send me $100 plus shipping.

[gary_watson]

I see Gresham's Law, rather its photo gear variant, at work: crap equipment is driving good stuff out of circulation. Ostensibly, prices are down but on what? The majority of the much-touted bargains are rough, too rough, condition-wise, for my taste. I look for exc+ or better condition as a fairly reliable index of light, careful use. Prices on this grade haven't crashed relative to the schlock. Besides, people are simply hanging on to quality and getting decent prices for it when they sell. I've not been jealous of friends' eBay buys. Junk is junk, even when it's cheap.

[weezul]

Gary, yes and no... take Minolta stuff (which I'm into): Dynax/Maxxum 5 would cost circa 300$ in Poland (where they cost a bit more than say in the USA) not so long ago, I got mine for 120$ second hand mint condition. My X-300s + lens cost me 250$ 10 years ago, now I'd be lucky getting 50 (v. good condition)! Dynax/Maxxum 7 body was available new/boxed/warranty for as little as 400$ a mont ago (I didn't go for it as I simply do not need more than I already have). Of course - top of the shelf equipment will keep high prices but still...

[Andrew in Austin]

Not everyone needs an uber classic or a even a professional-grade camera in mint conditioned.

 

That said, I will agree that when the "perception of quality or rarity" enters the mix, the camera which is perceived to built to the highest standards sells for higher price than its mass market competitor.

 

A case in point, over X-mas holidays, I had two TLR cameras for sale locally. The mint condition Rolleicord V attracted the most interest and sold rather quickly for a fair price to me, which is a $150.

 

My Minolta Autocord L, which is in excellent minus condition, has a working selenium meter and a nicely installed Mamiya focusing screen with a center prism. It receive only a couple of nibbles at the $100 mark even though it is to me a nicer shooter than the Rolleicord V.

 

Anecdotal, but needless to say I still own the Autocord. While not an uber classic, the camera still has a certain value to me even though it gets used about every six months.

 

Is the Autocord L a crap camera or simply out of fashion where I live?

 

It certainly isn't a crap camera, but least where I live there are definitely more takers for the Rollei name than there is for a Minolta TLR which to me at least is a better performer.

[Andrew in Austin]

Let me clarify that I was responding to Gary's post. Yes, the rarest, high-quality gear that is in the best of condition has and will retain much of its vale. No, not every vintage camera that is selling for a pittance is a crap camera.

 

In my case, I really only have room in my fleet of cameras for one TLR. In this case the Minolta Autocord is it. It does what I expect to rather well.

[berk_sirman2]

Some gear is going up in price.

 

Here is a SMC 85/1.8 Takumar that fetched $910 on ebay.

 

<a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7610598735&ru=http://search.ebay.com:80/7610598735_W0QQfrppZ50QQfsopZ1QQmaxrecordsreturnedZ300QQfviZ1">Here's the link</a>

[todd frederick]

I'm only asking $250 for my beautiful OM-1, 5 lens kit and have spent about $30 on eBay fees already.

 

However, I found two nice working vintage cameras recently for under $10 each! A Kodak Vigilant 620 (senior) and an Ansco Shur-flash box camera. (^O^)

 

Leica seems to be holding its value somewhat.

[summitar]

Todd, please send me an email (xkennedy@gte.net) describing the Olympus items you are selling, and I will give it serious consideration. I need another camera like I need another (fill in the blank) but I have never owned/used an Olympus.

[summitar]

It would be interesting to know what volume of film would be necessary to ensure its survival. While five years ago digital was not very close to film in quality, it has certainly has passed the "good enough" state by now for most users, especially when one considers all of the inate advantages of digital. A couple of vignettes. When VCRs became financially feasible for me (ca 1981), I studied all the reports and Beta was generally thought to be the technically superior format. At that time, it had 40 percent market share. So to my eternal regret, I chose Beta. Turns out, the VHS format was "good enough", and was marketted much better. When it became time to choose a PC format, I chose "windows" based on the Beta experience, even though I thought that Mac was more user friendly. I was involved in support in spy satellites many years ago. I was debriefed nearly 30 years ago and I can't believe I know any thing useful to the bad guys, but I will be careful anyway. If you google "corona", you will find the story of a very successful satellite program that used film. Quality was king in those days. From what I read in the papers, and nothing else, I suspect that digital imagery is probably used nowadays, because the quality is deemed "good enough", and the concept would have many advantages, such as not running out of film at a critical time. So here we are, where digital photography is "good enough" and possesses many other important advantages. How many film fans will it take to keep film alive? I don't need further r&d on film. What has been developed so far is plenty good enough for me. However, I don't want to get into mixing chemicals. Just want to continue to have the pleasure of using a real metal and glass work of art.

[john_wire]

Hi Kerry,

 

I still use my Sony Super Beta hi-fi SL-HF900 for time shifting TV programs and recording audio. Why settle for "good enough" when the "very best" is still available?

 

Marketing convinced young/old naive consumers that Beta was "uncool" with no relationship to Beta's technically superior details as it is convincing young/old naive film users of digital's superiority with incomplete and faulty information.

 

Scanning and printing digitally in color is "cool"; however, large wet process B&W prints are hard to match economically with digital stuff today, maybe later, and, a B&W 4x5 negative enlarged 5x is better IMHO than an inkjet print?

 

It will be a long time before film disappears; however, it is getting tough to find good Beta cassettes these days so who knows.

 

GRIN

 

Regards.

[summitar]

Hi John,

 

I agree that Beta was a superior format. I had 3 or 4 Beta machines over the years, but I have not had an operable one for over 10 years. Sony, like Apple would not license other manufacturers to build the drives, from what I understand. Apple seems to be doing fine, but they still have a small market share. At least I never went Amiga. I still thrill at steam locomotives and biplanes, but those things, like me, have seen their day.

[kin_lau]

John,

 

Not many of us have the room for a 4x5 enlarger. I do have a Graflarger, but haven't tried it yet. A flatbed scanner that can handle 4x5 is much smaller. My Meopta handles 6x6, and is about as large as one can go in an apartment.

 

Mixing new and old is a great way using the classics. I dev my own b&w, and then scan & print digitally for the most part, building up a stack of negs to try in the wet darkroom later.

 

Even the DSLR's are getting to be more accomodating. Pentax released firmware for the *istDS so that it would meter properly (auto-stopdown) with manual K-mount lenses. The Nikon D200 meters with older Nikon lenses - previously only considerably more expensive pro-bodies did that. The EOS dslr line has been a favourite since you can get M42, Nikon, C/Y adapters and the camera still meters in stopdown mode... wait till Canon makes full-frame dslr's more affordable.

[john_wire]

Hi Kin, every time I get ready to "pull the trigger" on an "ist" Ds some old piece of something interesting "pops up" on Ebabe or a Flea Market. I can't resist. At this rate I may never get a digital camera.

 

Recently, for example, there was a $2.00 Minox 35 GL (a division of Leitz) on the table. Couldn't resist and with a fresh battery everything works. Someone said the lens is a renamed Elmar. I definitely approve of digital! Regards.