To collect or not to collect...

[photorat]

No offense intended, of course. To each his own and to some everyone else's as well.

[ClaremontPhoto]

My father used to collect cameras.

He didn't keep them forever, he bought and sold, but there were always plenty of Barnack Leicas and Rolleiflexes around the house. Sometimes a Reid or an Alpa also.

He also bought and sold lawnmowers and typewriters.

[photorat]

My father used to collect cameras.

He didn't keep them forever, he bought and sold, but there were always plenty of Barnack Leicas and Rolleiflexes around the house. Sometimes a Reid or an Alpa also.

He also bought and sold lawnmowers and typewriters.

Sounds a lot like my step Dad, but it was stamps and porn that he collected.

You may have posted this before the poll was online. Don't get me wrong, I like to have nice things, too but I just hate watching stuff I could use go for a small fortune on eBay only to then grace the glass cabinets of the well-to-do.

[Double Negative]

Cameras are tools. Tools are meant to be used. ;)

[srtiwari]

Cameras are, like everything else, different things to different people. Some use, some collect, while others only buy and sell.

[oftheherd]

I think perhaps you could use some more choices. Collectors come in many flavors. Some only want pristine examples which will go in showcases. Others want the same pristine examples to be held as investments. Some like me, when I get something unusual, I am looking for a conversation piece as well as a user. I want more to talk about than just how it looks. And there are some who only collect once in a while when the mood strikes them.

Some (and I also suffer from this), just have GAS. :D

[bmattock]

Cameras are tools. Tools are meant to be used. ;)

I noted the emoticon, so don't take this response the wrong way.

What does the term 'are meant' mean? Trees are meant to be cut down and made into furniture, according to some. They are meant to be treasured and preserved for future generations according to others. According to the tree, they only thing it is 'meant' to do is try to survive, reproduce, and die. That is the extent of its 'meaning' as imposed on its own genetic code.

In other words, when we say something is 'meant' for a particular purpose, we are imposing that value upon it. That makes the value variable, not constant. But we say it that way to make it seem like some universal truth, which it is not.

So if one says that cameras 'are meant' to be used rather than collected (or vice-versa), what one is actually saying is that the person speaking intends to impose their will on the person they are speaking about. They want the subject of their statement to accede to the speaker's will.

I would reply that cameras are property. Property-owners can use their property as they see fit. So what another thinks those cameras 'are meant for' is irrelevant.

[Nh3]

Collectors usually don't horde on the equipment that photographers 'need', they usually concentrate on esoteric and vintage gear which has been out of production or had limited release.

For example a Nikon F100 film SLR goes for ~$200 which is the same rate as Yashica T4 P&S or half of a Ricoh GR1... This is thanks to collectors and I say keep collecting but stay away from the stuff that serious photographers need.

[Double Negative]

I noted the emoticon, so don't take this response the wrong way.

What does the term 'are meant' mean? Trees are meant to be cut down and made into furniture, according to some. They are meant to be treasured and preserved for future generations according to others. According to the tree, they only thing it is 'meant' to do is try to survive, reproduce, and die. That is the extent of its 'meaning' as imposed on its own genetic code.

In other words, when we say something is 'meant' for a particular purpose, we are imposing that value upon it. That makes the value variable, not constant. But we say it that way to make it seem like some universal truth, which it is not.

So if one says that cameras 'are meant' to be used rather than collected (or vice-versa), what one is actually saying is that the person speaking intends to impose their will on the person they are speaking about. They want the subject of their statement to accede to the speaker's will.

I would reply that cameras are property. Property-owners can use their property as they see fit. So what another thinks those cameras 'are meant for' is irrelevant.

Not taken the wrong way. :)

I would agree that trees are programmed to survive, reproduce and die. That's what evolution intended for them (or their "maker" if you believe).

But a camera is also programmed by its "maker" or in the case of Leica M's, a certain part of evolution as well, heh. It's built for the purpose of taking pictures. Otherwise it wouldn't have a shutter, wind crank, etc.

I'm not saying it's bad to collect cameras. All I'm saying is a camera is designed to take pictures - so take pictures with it. Hey, I'd love to have a shiny display case with every Leica model ever made with "0" on the odometer. But I get my enjoyment out of using the camera and the results it produces - not wiping them down every night before I go to sleep (though I've been known to do this). To each his own... We all get pleasure from our cameras in different ways.

[bmattock]

It's built for the purpose of taking pictures. Otherwise it wouldn't have a shutter, wind crank, etc.


People are built for the purpose of making babies when they bump uglies. Should every romp end in a child, or is it OK to make the beast with two backs just for the fun of it?

I suspect we humans pervert the original intent of many things, mostly because we feel like it and it doesn't impact the rights of anyone else. Cameras as shelf-queens versus cameras as tools is just one of the many things that is the business of the person who has ownership of the camera in question.

[cjm]

Why not? Cars, stamps, cameras, etc. are all collected but built for different purposes. It's not my cup of tea but to each his own.

[ferider]

I never understood the difference between, say

1) for example, collect all Leicas and lenses made between year A and year B. Go many times to ebay or on-line, or to camera auctions, to search, wait for and buy stuff. Spend lots of time doing that. Try to save as much money as possible when you do, for each item - get a great deal. Put stuff on a shelve, never use it.

2) own a Leica. Accessorize it to the maximum, i.e. get rapidwinder, grip, Luigi case, TA release button in the right color, rapid rewind, etc. Buy some classic lenses. Make sure you get the right hoods. Get fitting filters. Original cases and finders, possibly. Go many times to ebay or on-line, or to camera auctions, to search, wait for and buy stuff. Spend lots of time doing that. Try to save as much money as possible when you do, for each item - get a great deal. Use the stuff.

Seems all very similar to me. If you belong to 2) (like me), face it, you are a collector. If you don't want to believe it, talk to your analyst. :) Otherwise, among others, we wouldn't mind paying an extra few bucks to make sure we get risk free users. We wouldn't mind using Heavystar hoods on all our lenses. A single camera body with 3-4 lenses would be enough. We wouldn't use > 30 year old cameras in the first place. Etc.

Cheers,

Roland.

[cjm]

Seems all very similar to me. If you belong to 2) (like me), face it, you are a collector. Otherwise, among others, we wouldn't mind paying an extra few bucks to make sure we get risk free users. We wouldn't mind using Heavystar hoods on all our lenses. Etc.

Whew! (sigh of relief) I must not be a collector because I just got a heavystar hood for my M2. :p

[photorat]

I think perhaps you could use some more choices.

I'm aware that the poll is about as subtle as a US presidential election. The intention to provoke was deliberate.

After a few trade-ups via eBay, I recently managed to score my 4th M2 in absolutely pristine condition, late model, hardly used, original box and all. The other day it got a nice solid whack against a fence post with a dent to match. I felt so happy. I had effectively saved it from a life of collecting dust.

[ferider]

Whew! (sigh of relief) I must not be a collector because I just got a heavystar hood for my M2. :p

You'll "upgrade" eventually. :)

I recently managed to score my 4th M2 in absolutely pristine condition, late model, hardly used, original box and all.

Do I need to say more ? Why the heck does a "user" need 4 M2s :) :) .... (note that I have 6 Ms, at the moment :o ...)

Roland.

[peter_n]

Cameras are, like everything else, different things to different people. Some use, some collect, while others only buy and sell.Yes indeed. Live and let live.

[Chris101]

People are built for the purpose of making babies when they bump uglies. Should every romp end in a child, or is it OK to make the beast with two backs just for the fun of it?

I suspect we humans pervert the original intent of many things, mostly because we feel like it and it doesn't impact the rights of anyone else. Cameras as shelf-queens versus cameras as tools is just one of the many things that is the business of the person who has ownership of the camera in question.This argument relies on intelligent design which probably works for camera equipment, but fails scientific scrutiny when it comes to living organisms such as trees and humans.

Lets face it, the angst that many budget minded film photographers feel is jealousy when they see a really nice camera being taken off the market to enhance an enclosed collection. But fear not camera users! Eventually those collections will be pieced out, either for income generation, or through estate liquidation. Ultimately, all the cameras will get sold to photographers who will push their buttons.

It's the way of natural selection. ;)

ps, "make the beast with two backs" - now there is a descriptive euphemism you don't hear everyday!

[photorat]

I never understood the difference between, say

1) for example, collect all Leicas and lenses made between year A and year B. Go many times to ebay or on-line, or to camera auctions, to search, wait for and buy stuff. Spend lots of time doing that. Try to save as much money as possible when you do, for each item - get a great deal. Put stuff on a shelve, never use it.

2) own a Leica. Accessorize it to the maximum, i.e. get rapidwinder, grip, Luigi case, TA release button in the right color, rapid rewind, etc. Buy some classic lenses. Make sure you get the right hoods. Get fitting filters. Original cases and finders, possibly. Go many times to ebay or on-line, or to camera auctions, to search, wait for and buy stuff. Spend lots of time doing that. Try to save as much money as possible when you do, for each item - get a great deal. Use the stuff.

Seems all very similar to me. If you belong to 2) (like me), face it, you are a collector. If you don't want to believe it, talk to your analyst. :) Otherwise, among others, we wouldn't mind paying an extra few bucks to make sure we get risk free users. We wouldn't mind using Heavystar hoods on all our lenses. A single camera body with 3-4 lenses would be enough. We wouldn't use > 30 year old cameras in the first place. Etc.

Cheers,

Roland.

I think I can discern a difference and it has to do with the focus of our appreciation. With collectors, the focus of appreciation is on the object as object (as in the aesthetic experience of a work of art). With users, the focus is on the camera as a tool, i.e. on the end product, the quality of the actual photographs it produces.

There is a corresponding difference amongst the various accessories you mention. Some fall under the category of 'restoring' a camera, some relate to making it more 'usable'. A rapidwinder does not make the camera more collectable, though an original accessory viewfinder, original hood with original case, etc. probably would. I also think there are good arguments for using, e.g., a 50 year old Leica M2 over a contemporary camera based on objective criteria alone. The former are arguably of better build quality, offer better functional quality, reliability, etc. for the same money. "Classic" lenses are also generally appreciated for their performance and results as much as for their aesthetics/scarcity/historical relevance, etc.

That said, I agree the distinction is never that clear cut. There is a lot of fetishism in both users and collectors of Leica cameras. Nor are there any (necessary) normative conclusions to be drawn on the basis of this distinction. To each his own and the 'aesthetic' appreciation of an object may be a more authentic one in the end compared with the 'instrumental' appreciation of the user who reduces it to a mere means to an end.

A collector's aesthetic appreciation will always be linked to the idea of craftsmanship and the functional design of the object (i.e. its capacity to make something, even if they do not express that capacity). Conversely, and as you suggest, we all appreciate and recognize the unique aesthetic qualities and 'status' of a Leica camera and our motivations for buying them are not always based on pure functionality.

[photorat]

You'll "upgrade" eventually. :)



Do I need to say more ? Why the heck does a "user" need 4 M2s :) :) .... (note that I have 6 Ms, at the moment :o ...)

Roland.

4th as in the fourth I've ever owned. I got there buying and selling the rest (I only have one of them left).

[RITskellar]

I just don't get this disdain for collectors. To each their own. At the very least, I see collectors as a way of providing a longer term supply of great cameras (ie. "tools") for many years to come, well after Leica has stopped making them. The same reasons why we like Leica stuff will be much the same reasons that help make them desireable and collectible to anyone. Some of this criticism smacks of just plain old snobbery.

[RITskellar]

People are built for the purpose of making babies when they bump uglies. Should every romp end in a child, or is it OK to make the beast with two backs just for the fun of it?

I suspect we humans pervert the original intent of many things, mostly because we feel like it and it doesn't impact the rights of anyone else. Cameras as shelf-queens versus cameras as tools is just one of the many things that is the business of the person who has ownership of the camera in question.

Ah, what a beautifully twisted analogy. Perfect! ;)

[mirrored]

Cameras are tools. Tools are meant to be used. ;)

Yes, and users can be grateful for collectors because they store fine tools against using too quickly. We all have little or bigger collector in our soul. Even a most heaviest user don't use camera as a hammer - and a collector don't take collection under a soil.

[Spider67]

One should not forget the many small scale collectors who saved many cameras who otherwise would have been scrapped. Cameras like the 35 RC or many retinas, and containers of 120 Folders would have vanished in large quantities as they were not regarded as so classic as the Leica, if not for the collector.
If someone buys a camera to look at it it's OK.
Its a nuisance for me when a sudden interst in certain models or brands suddenly skyrockets the prices eg The Canon QL 17, The Zorki 3 etc. On the other hand sometimes its a fad which ends: Zorki 3#s reached a peak of 100 €, where sold on the bay for 80 and the last auction made 40€.
The good thing about collectors is the keep the cameras in good shape and very often after their death their collection are sold off piecemeal and again those are the smalltime collectors whose collection does not ent at the big auction houses.
Oh yes I am a smalltime collector myself although it started like Abrahamsons non collection

[Al Kaplan]

A few years ago I picked up a mint black paint first model 28mm Elmarit from an antique dealer friend, Bill, along with a bunch of other stuff: Hassleblad 150 Sonnar, Leica CL and 40 'cron, M3 body, 90 and 135mm Elmarits, a Minolta Autocord, a bunch of Leica cassettes, other "little stuff". Bill had bought a "sack full of old cameras" at an estate auction. The Autocord looked beat to crap, everything else looked like new. Bill called me and offered to sell me the "bunch of old cameras" for $500. I found out later that he was the only bidder with an opening bid of $25. He had no idea of their value and expected me to offer maybe $300 at most.

Unfortunately there are people in the collector category who fail to impress on their family the value of all those old fashioned film cameras. Within an hour I'd swapped the 'blad lens for a CLA on the M2 body plus $600 in cash from my repair guy. The 28 Elmarit I swapped for a nice clean 21/3.4 S.A. with hood, and a cherry M2 body. Whether you're a collector or a user make sure that your family knows its value and how to unload it for top dollar.

[LChanyungco]

i don't see anything wrong with collecting... if i could afford it i'd be a collector too. it's human nature to hoard things they like. be it potato chips that resemble celebrities or Leica Noctilux' dipped in gold :D

[Spider67]

The only eerie thing I noticed when collecting: Sometimes collections start to collect themselves eg when the collector buys a model he isn't particularly interested in onöy to complete the set.

[Gumby]

I just don't get this disdain for collectors. To each their own. ... Some of this criticism smacks of just plain old snobbery.

... or repressed jealousy. :o

[ricpr]

I'll jump in the pool.....I collect cameras. I use what I have and enjoy quality products. Does it matter to me if I have a camera that others may deam worthy of more use? Not really. When it comes down to it, my entire collection cost less than a new Leica as a result of being in the right place at the right time. I just don't get someone that would spend money on a new Leica for casual shooting every once in a while (not a real problem if you use it a lot). On the flipside, I have no problems with spending $35 on a Canon 7 that I use frequently. Ultimately, one spends their $$ how they want to and should not have to justify that to anyone. I'm just happy that high quality equipment is available at a reasonable price to those of us with not much disposable income to spare. I am also appreciative of those casual users of the expensive equipment because once they are done with the equipment, they recycle the equipment for much less than the original cost. We are seem to benefit.

[mirrored]

Thanks for a collector, I just bought (bid, ebay) couple of rolls used M6 with red Leitz logo (early one?). Like a new as well as Summicron 50 from year 1970. But can it have lubricating going old with time and need service?

(In first side on this thread was this point too, written by several nick, but in other words:) Everyone who have equipments only for potential use (maybe sometimes I can use it, this equipment have a fine idea - I like to have it) is a certain collector. Or simply have so many cameras that have no time to use those. . . ;)

..

[Nikon Bob]

Without collectors and groups such as the NHS you likely would not have the wealth of information easily available on specific cameras or any other item that is collected. They perform an invaluable service to all users and should be respected, not looked down upon by users.

Bob

[cbphoto]

it's not a "to each his or her own" kinda thing - they screw up the prices for all of us, and decrease supply. those of us who actually use cameras for what they are intended, rather than hording them to just sit there and rot on a shelf, have every right to be disdainful.

[Gumby]

Without collectors and groups such as the NHS you likely would not have the wealth of information easily available on specific cameras or any other item that is collected. They perform an invaluable service to all users and should be respected, not looked down upon by users.


Good point... most people on the "asking end" of questions like "what should I buy? How much is it worth? How does it work?" tend to forget this.

[RITskellar]

it's not a "to each his or her own" kinda thing - they screw up the prices for all of us, and decrease supply. those of us who actually use cameras for what they are intended, rather than hording them to just sit there and rot on a shelf, have every right to be disdainful.

I think you're questioning the fundamental laws of supply and demand. This isn't an evil being done TO you... it's life. And you seem to ignore the fact that you're making a personal choice to use cameras that are already expensive, a bit obscure, and in high demand, when you could simply go ahead and use something else instead. If you're upset at people screwing prices up for YOU... then use a Minolta.

As for collectors decreasing supply for everyone else... well, that's simply not true. If not for collectors keeping large quantities of older cameras in pristine condition, there would actually be fewer available to all of us. Collections are being sold off all the time, which actually injects inventories of old cameras into the open market, and often (depending on the model) at prices that are reasonable given the circumstances.

Sure there's going to be a $50,000 Model I or whatever, but there's also going to be the $1400 brand new old stock M6 Wetzlar classic. I say, thank you Mr. Collector for sticking that M6 on a shelf for 20 years and then selling it to me to use.

Cheers, Andy

[bob338]

it's not a "to each his or her own" kinda thing - they screw up the prices for all of us, and decrease supply. those of us who actually use cameras for what they are intended, rather than hording them to just sit there and rot on a shelf, have every right to be disdainful.

is it not a big waste of your energy to be disdainful? who cares if someone has a collection of cameras? as soon as you(not you specifically, but all of the self-righteous 'users') can afford to have whatever camera you want, i can guarantee that you will not give a second thought to what others think about your camera collection.

bob

[mirrored]

it's not a "to each his or her own" kinda thing - they screw up the prices for all of us, and decrease supply. those of us who actually use cameras for what they are intended, rather than hording them to just sit there and rot on a shelf, have every right to be disdainful.

"I am angry to night, because it shorten days."

If imagine pure collector and pure user, thay can see as a enemy to each other. But pure things are not exist in this. What is using? Why certain camera have more value than taking pictures? One analogy: can Rolex be owned purely for time watching? Why collecting cannot be using too?

All who use time, money and interest to purchase something, sail in the same ship, form it, and how can say other more or less value or get pleasure?

How certificate pure user - is the level of using enough when you have 5 body and 10 lenses and you have other job? 3 body and 6 lenses? Taking one roll a week? Maybe would be better value photos: are they good enough so that we can allow you high valued camera? This is a natural and logical question if ready to criticize collecting!

Is it wise to need so high value equipment in photography that must criticize other who need it too?

This is pure philosophy. :angel:

[bmattock]

it's not a "to each his or her own" kinda thing - they screw up the prices for all of us, and decrease supply. those of us who actually use cameras for what they are intended, rather than hording them to just sit there and rot on a shelf, have every right to be disdainful.

Again I ask - who is it doing this intending?

The camera manufacturer may well have intended that a camera be used for taking photos. So what? Their right to dictate anything about how it is used ended when they sold it. And the manufacturers are not the ones complaining - they frankly don't care how you use or don't use their product once you buy it. So who is it that 'intended' for cameras to be used rather than sit on shelves, huh? Explain that to me, please.

[Gumby]

they frankly don't care how you use or don't use their product once you buy it.

Pray tell, how do you know that? Explain that to me, please.

[cbphoto]

jeez folks, lighten up! this is not that deep or complicated. a camera takes pictures. it's a tool for making something. buying it just to have it is materialism for its own sake, which seems quite strange. i think there is a better use for the money, no?

and it appears the poll is on my side so far, so pffft!

;)

[cbphoto]

is it not a big waste of your energy to be disdainful? who cares if someone has a collection of cameras? as soon as you(not you specifically, but all of the self-righteous 'users') can afford to have whatever camera you want, i can guarantee that you will not give a second thought to what others think about your camera collection.

bob

being disdainful requires remarkably little energy. and being self-righteous feels pretty nice. ;)

if i had a huge camera budget, i wouldn't have any pretty cameras that just sit there - they would all be used. i'm thinking a couple of custom a la carte MPs with different magnification finders for different focal lengths. and some funky, self-righteous lizard skins.

[Al Kaplan]

I just love going to a yard/boot/garage/estate sale where somebody is selling grandpa's "junky old film cameras" on the same table as the toaster oven and the electric coffee pot. You look at the $10 price sticker on the Summilux equipped M4 body complete with boxes and instruction books, and say "Will you take five?" Well, that's a bit extreme perhaps, but a nice fantasy, and I have made some great buys.

[bmattock]

Pray tell, how do you know that? Explain that to me, please.

Walk into any camera store. Tell them you have cash and wish to buy the latest M8 (or whatever the most expensive camera they happen sell might be). Tell them that you intend to place it on a shelf and look at it, maybe dust it from time to time.

Let me know if they tell you they refuse to sell it to you on the basis that you won't use it as they intended.

Manufacturers make items to sell. They make them with a particular purpose in mind, but if you want to wear them on your head like a hat or back over them with your SUV, they don't care, as long as you've paid in full.

I have never in my life been asked how I intended to use something before someone else would sell it to me.

[bmattock]

buying it just to have it is materialism for its own sake, which seems quite strange.

To you, perhaps.


i think there is a better use for the money, no?

I don't think you get to decide what is a good or bad use of other people's money.

[RITskellar]

What is it with you people who think you know what is best for other people's money or what they should or should not do with the things they buy? Given that you're such steadfast and pure users of your cameras, I'm surprised you would take the precious time away from picture taking to post such a ridiculous poll. Get over yourselves already or form a club of your own, called "Jealous Curmudgeons for the Ethical Treatment of Leicas". I'm pissed at myself for even getting worked up by this, but my usual easy going, positive spirit is spoiled by this kind of thing. Ugh. I should know better.

[climbing_vine]

I don't think you get to decide what is a good or bad use of other people's money.

Generally, no. But only an unfortunate sort of person would claim that there's no moral line. Would you fly to the Sudan in a private jet carrying your very own Range Rover, drive up to a refugee camp, walk out chewing on a thousand-dollar truffle, and wave ten thousand dollars in front of a refugee who will die tomorrow of starvation before setting it on fire?

Of course you wouldn't. Of course not. So there is a line somewhere. I can't tell you not to do it, but the rest of us humans can decide you're scum and ostracize you.

That said... I don't think you, Bill, would do that (obviously), and I think this collecting thing is probably on the okay side of that line. I mean, we all spend money on things we don't need. But it's important to make the point, I feel.

[Silva Lining]

I am a collector and a hoarder - in that I collect and hoard cameras, or more correctly, lenses. I'm not too fussy about them being in museum condition, In fact, after I have used them for a bit, they wont be! :) so its pointless paying extra for that, for me.

I do need to sell some though as I can't use all of them, and I actually worry about that, You see I hate to waste things, and a camera not being used, to me, is a waste. Problem is the hoarder in me can;t decide which ones to let go....so they remain for now. I know when I finally puts some in the classsified or on the bay I will be happy that someone else is getting some use out of them or enjoying them as part of their collection...

[cbphoto]

What is it with you people who think you know what is best for other people's money or what they should or should not do with the things they buy? Given that you're such steadfast and pure users of your cameras, I'm surprised you would take the precious time away from picture taking to post such a ridiculous poll. Get over yourselves already or form a club of your own, called "Jealous Curmudgeons for the Ethical Treatment of Leicas". I'm pissed at myself for even getting worked up by this, but my usual easy going, positive spirit is spoiled by this kind of thing. Ugh. I should know better.

sorry, but reading this next to the picture of the sad doggy made me crack up a little.

and i don't think there is any jealousy or curmudgeoniness in saying that a camera on a shelf is a waste of a camera.

[bob338]

being disdainful requires remarkably little energy. and being self-righteous feels pretty nice. ;)

if i had a huge camera budget, i wouldn't have any pretty cameras that just sit there - they would all be used. i'm thinking a couple of custom a la carte MPs with different magnification finders for different focal lengths. and some funky, self-righteous lizard skins.

i have quite a few cameras and they all get used, even the expensive ones! but if i decide to leave one of them in the vault at the bank, where one of them actually lives, isn't it my own business?

it seems like this thread was started to get a war going...

bob

[bmattock]

Generally, no. But only an unfortunate sort of person would claim that there's no moral line. Would you fly to the Sudan in a private jet carrying your very own Range Rover, drive up to a refugee camp, walk out chewing on a thousand-dollar truffle, and wave ten thousand dollars in front of a refugee who will die tomorrow of starvation before setting it on fire?

Of course you wouldn't. Of course not. So there is a line somewhere. I can't tell you not to do it, but the rest of us humans can decide you're scum and ostracize you.

That said... I don't think you, Bill, would do that (obviously), and I think this collecting thing is probably on the okay side of that line. I mean, we all spend money on things we don't need. But it's important to make the point, I feel.

You and I are both guilty of being wealthy, well-fed, healthy, educated, free, and having access to technology compared to the majority of people on the planet. No moral sword of judgment that takes my head will miss yours, if that is the point you are making. We (those who can read these words) are all equally obscenely well-off compared to the rest of the world.

So yes, there are lines - and we're all on the wrong side of them, if you really want to go there.

[bmattock]

and i don't think there is any jealousy or curmudgeoniness in saying that a camera on a shelf is a waste of a camera.

No, no jealousy or "curmudgeoniness," just some judgmentalism that you're not entitled to. If it's your opinion, that's one thing. But you continue to insist it is an objective fact. You speak English well enough to know the difference.

[bob338]

No, no jealousy or "curmudgeoniness," just some judgmentalism that you're not entitled to. If it's your opinion, that's one thing. But you continue to insist it is an objective fact. You speak English well enough to know the difference.


agreed.

bob

[bmattock]

it seems like this thread was started to get a war going...


Aren't about 3/4 of the threads here of that nature? Digital versus film, B&W versus color, prime lenses versus zooms, and all of them begin with the premise that if a person prefers A, and another person prefers B, then A is not only wrong, but stupid, evil, or treasonous, according to B; but so is B, according to A.

[NIKON KIU]

Don't get me wrong, I like to have nice things, too but I just hate watching stuff I could use go for a small fortune on eBay only to then grace the glass cabinets of the well-to-do.

Mint Vintage stuff deserve to sit on a shelf. You will discover that in time!

What's wrong with using the regular used stuff? Why would someone use a never-used camera or lens from 30 years ago?

Kiu

[Gumby]

Walk into any camera store. Tell them you have cash and wish to buy the latest M8 (or whatever the most expensive camera they happen sell might be). Tell them that you intend to place it on a shelf and look at it, maybe dust it from time to time.

Let me know if they tell you they refuse to sell it to you on the basis that you won't use it as they intended.

Manufacturers make items to sell. They make them with a particular purpose in mind, but if you want to wear them on your head like a hat or back over them with your SUV, they don't care, as long as you've paid in full.

I have never in my life been asked how I intended to use something before someone else would sell it to me.

Ah, I see. You speculated and issue a challenge to others prove your point. Got it. For a minute there I thought you represented a camera manufacturer/wholesaler/retailer and knew what they thought first-hand. Your belief may not be any more believeable than anyone else's belief about "intention". I was just wondering, BTW, and don't really care if you are right or not.

But speaking as a former manufacturer of a consumer product... I cared. I couldn't control what people did with my product, but I had pride in what I made, the quality to which it was manufactured, the manner in which it fulfilled the market niche and the accomplishement of the "end" by which my product was the "means". Oh, yes, I liked the money and probably wouldn't refuse to sell you one even if you told me you're only interest was to make me rich by buying one and running over with your SUV... but I still would care. That, amigo, is first-hand report! :)

But who cares, really, about speculation of who really knows "intention"...it's really rather immaterial to the discussion, eh?

[Gumby]

No, no jealousy or "curmudgeoniness," just some judgmentalism that you're not entitled to. If it's your opinion, that's one thing. But you continue to insist it is an objective fact. You speak English well enough to know the difference.

:eek:

One "objective fact" following another... the making of a flame war!

[Tom A]

i actually like collectors! They buy mint, boxed and plastic wrapped stuff and usually sell of the stuff they have that is not boxed, mint or plastic wrapped at reasonable prices!
I cant say that understand them - but I like the trickle down effect of mint stuff!

[bmattock]

:eek:

One "objective fact" following another... the making of a flame war!

Not at all.

One person speaks and says "Anyone who collects cameras is doing the wrong thing."

Another says, "In my opinion, not using cameras as they were meant to be used is wrong."

These are very different statements.

And calling attention to them is neither subjective, nor inviting a flame war.

If the analysis I made of the English usage is correct - please feel free to jump in if not - then I have indeed made an factual and objective statement. A statement of fact is not the same as a statement of opinion.

One is permitted to demonstrate in what fashion the argument of one's opponent is full of crap, using logic, intellect, reason, and persuasion. I occasionally throw in some humor.

[Gumby]

I occasionally throw in some humor.

Yes, of course. I assume you laugh at me just as much as I laugh at you. I'm OK; You're OK. :p

[yanidel]

I have about 10 cameras ... just because I am too lazy to sell the ones I don't use anymore.
I don't understand people that collect, except women of course ;)

[bmattock]

Ah, I see. You speculated and issue a challenge to others prove your point.

Let me do your work for you, then, lazybones.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leica_M6


M6J - 1994. A collector's edition of 1,640 cameras to celebrate the 40th anniversary of the Leica M System. Notable for its introduction of the 0.85 magnification finder, the first high-magnification finder since 1966, and the basis for the 0.85 cameras to follow starting in 1998.

I'm sorry, what was that again? A 'collector's edition' Lieca? You mean to tell me that they made it JUST to sell to collectors? That was actually their INTENT?

Well, I hope no one bought one and put it to use as a camera, then. My God, the horror! It would be contravening the INTENT of Leica, and we can't have that, now, can we?

Well, thank goodness that Leica only did it that one time. I mean, that is the only collector's edition they've ever issued, right?

Right?

Oh, you mean they've done it hundreds of times, for events ranging from the birthday of a Sultan's dog to a commemoration of a bridge in a former Soviet state not falling down after six months?

Oh, my. Gosh.


Leica M6 special editions

* Leica M6 Cutaway
* Leica M6 150 Jahre Photographie - 1989 - 75 Jahre Leica Photographie: 1250 cameras
* Leica M6 Colombo '92 (1492 - 1992: 500° Scoperta dell'America - Italia): 200 cameras
* Leica M6 Royal-Foto Austria (1968 - 1993): 101 cameras
* Leica M6J 40 Jahre Leica M (1954 - 1994): 1640 cameras
* Leica M6 Dragon (gold plated): 300 cameras
* Leica M6 Historica (1975 - 1995): 150 cameras
* Leica M6 Royal Wedding: 200 cameras
* Leica M6 Thai Jubilee (50th year of the reign of His Majesty King Bhumiphol Adulyadej): 700 cameras
* Leica M6 Anton Bruckner (1824 - 1896): 200 cameras
* Leica M6 Brunei: 200 platinum plated cameras (125 platinum plated with diamonds) and 350 gold plated cameras
* Leica M6 Partners: 500 cameras
* Leica M6 Leica Demo Ausrüstung Benelux '96: 70 cameras
* Leica M6 Ein Stück Leica: 996 cameras
* Leica M6 Jaguar XK (1948 - 1998): 50 cameras
* Leica M6 Millennium: only 2000 cameras (300 with 0.85× viewfinder and green leatherette)
* Leica M6 Dragon (viewfinder 0.85x, black painted): 500 cameras
* Leica M6 ICS: 200 cameras
* Leica M6 LHSA (Leica Historical Society of America)
* Leica M6 Øresundsbron: 150 cameras
* Leica M6 Henri Cartier-Bresson (with Vuitton case): only 1 camera
* Leica M6 William Klein: only 1 camera
* Leica M6 Swiss Demo (Test the best): 40 cameras
* Leica M6 Zurich Photographic Center: 100 cameras
* Leica M6 Royal Photographic Society: 100 cameras
* Leica M6 Platinum Optics: 150 cameras
* Leica M6 Schmidt Centenary: 151 cameras
* Leica M6 Canada: 270 cameras
* Leica M6 Year of Rooster: 300 cameras
* Leica M6 999: 999 cameras
* Leica M6 Titanium: circa 6000 and 1000 in TTL-version


It would appear - correct me if I am wrong - that Leica actually makes cameras and intends for them to be purchased by some people just for the purpose of collecting them.

So much for the 'intent of the manufacturer', huh?

[Gumby]

It's not "my work" you twit... it's YOUR work. You make statements like you are speaking first hand then challenge others to prove or disprove you. Talk about "lazybones". :)

Manufacturers do not have just ONE intent... and you know it. Of course Leica made collectors items. So did I. Now back on "ignore" for you. I have neither the time nor interest to spar today. Adios

[bmattock]

Yes, of course. I assume you laugh at me just as much as I laugh at you. I'm OK; You're OK. :p

Il va de soi

[photomoof]

Let me do your work for you, then, lazybones.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leica_M6
I'm sorry, what was that again? A 'collector's edition' Lieca? You mean to tell me that they made it JUST to sell to collectors? That was actually their INTENT?
Well, I hope no one bought one and put it to use as a camera, then. My God, the horror! It would be contravening the INTENT of Leica, and we can't have that, now, can we?
Well, thank goodness that Leica only did it that one time. I mean, that is the only collector's edition they've ever issued, right?
Right?
Oh, you mean they've done it hundreds of times, for events ranging from the birthday of a Sultan's dog to a commemoration of a bridge in a former Soviet state not falling down after six months?
Oh, my. Gosh.
It would appear - correct me if I am wrong - that Leica actually makes cameras and intends for them to be purchased by some people just for the purpose of collecting them.
So much for the 'intent of the manufacturer', huh?

Leica keeps trying to issue collector cameras, but they have only succeeded when they did it accidentally - e.g. the original MP. None of the cameras in the list you quote are considered to be especially valuable as collectibles, some are now seen as just fun to own -- because they are so silly. Some bring a small premium over a normal M6, of between 50~100% but none much more. They are all considered "newbie" or sucker's collectibles.

[bmattock]

Leica keeps trying to issue collector cameras, but they have only succeeded when they did it accidentally - e.g. the original MP. None of the cameras in the list you quote are considered to be especially valuable as collectibles, some are now seen as just fun to own -- because they are so silly. Some bring a small premium over a normal M6, of between 50~100% but none much more. They are all considered "newbie" or sucker's collectibles.

Be that as it may, it shoots the argument that camera manufacturers don't 'intend' for their cameras to be collected full of holes. Obviously, they do, or there would be no 'Collector's Editions'. Q.E.D.

[Rayt]

The so called collectors are the ones keeping Leica-Camera AG in business. They buy to collect, to wear as neck jewelry, as status symbol, to fondle, whatever. Because these wonderful collectors are out there ready to buy anything Leica puts out you can be sure there will be stuff for you to buy and use.

I was not able to buy Leica cameras until the 90's so if not for the collectors there would not have been all those mint M2, M3, M4, M5's and all those cool lenses for me to buy and enjoy. Got to love those collectors.

[NIKON KIU]

4th as in the fourth I've ever owned. I got there buying and selling the rest (I only have one of them left).
That makes you a collector!
Collectors are always looking for better examples!!

What was wrong with the first one? Not clean enough??

Kiu

[photomoof]

Be that as it may, it shoots the argument that camera manufacturers don't 'intend' for their cameras to be collected full of holes. Obviously, they do, or there would be no 'Collector's Editions'. Q.E.D.

Actually the main source of revenue for cameras which are not used are the semi-pro and pro models such as the Nikon D3 which are sold to users who simply "need" the best. Nikon and Canon depend on the sales of these cameras to folks who really don't use them much. Without these sales pro models would be far more expensive.

Leica does not call most of these cameras collectors editions, only a few like the M6J truly fall into that category. Most are just custom finishes, and not intended for collectors, but rather as commemoratives. All Leica packages however -- suggest that the cameras are not meant to be used, but rather displayed. Odd isn't it?

Leica is a strange company.

[photorat]

That makes you a collector!
Collectors are always looking for better examples!!

What was wrong with the first one? Not clean enough??

Kiu

No. 1 - Cracked viewfinder
No. 2 - Film counter didn't work
No. 3 - Large piece of vulcanite missing (afraid it would get worse)
No. 4 - Pretty good but still full of bright marks and minor scratches (and now a dented lug)

But I guess the fact that you are 'accusing' me of being a collector means you share the 'disdain' widely expressed in this poll. To be honest, there is something of a collector in me (and I suspect in every Leica user). Functionality and efficiency of design (something Leicas have a lot of) are elements of, or at least foundations for, aesthetic appreciation as well.

Jeremy

[bob338]

Cameras are tools. Tools are meant to be used. ;)


should this calypso be taken out for a plunge?

i think it would be a shame to throw away such a pristine example of a camera just to satisfy your own self-righteousness...


http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=250325948793&ru=http%3A%2F%2Fshop.ebay.com%3A80%2F%3F_from%3DR4 0%26_trksid%3Dm38.l1313%26_nkw%3D250325948793%26_s acat%3DSee-All-Categories%26_fvi%3D1

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=66619

[photorat]

should this calypso be taken out for a plunge?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=250325948793&ru=http%3A%2F%2Fshop.ebay.com%3A80%2F%3F_from%3DR4 0%26_trksid%3Dm38.l1313%26_nkw%3D250325948793%26_s acat%3DSee-All-Categories%26_fvi%3D1


By God, YES!!! Please post the resultant photographs here so we can all admire the issue of this fine camera. Take good care of it and I'm sure it will last a lifetime.

Life is so much more interesting when we live it, renew it and reinvent it, instead of trying to preserve it in a box.

[sanmich]

ps, "make the beast with two backs" - now there is a descriptive euphemism you don't hear everyday!

Just to put this thread on lighter tracks:
"make the beast with two backs" is a very old pictural way to say with extend what nowadays requires only four letters. Comes from the old French (surprise..) "faire la bete a deux dos" (Rabelais), and apparently have been used by Shakespear. Ask google....

Now about the thread: who gives a beast with two backs what people do with their Ur-Compur-one of a kind Leica with red curtain and the little thingy step under the whatever and with the larger letter in the middle of the rare inscription of the Midland what?
As long as I can collect a few clean regular leicas just for the fun of using them...:D

[tvagi]

i like collecting cameras,even the scratched ones,because they have a story to tell.
some years ago,at a local flea market, i bought a Voigtlander Vitoret DR in a really bad shape.it was dirty,with broken viewfinder window and half case missing!but there was something that made me to buy that camera (and it was not only the price!).at the upper right corner,next to the viewfinder window was "engraved" (in fact scratched) the name of the owner! B.Goertz from Karlsruhe.maybe it is not signed by a famous person but it is unique!

[Double Negative]

should this calypso be taken out for a plunge?

i think it would be a shame to throw away such a pristine example of a camera just to satisfy your own self-righteousness...

Wow, man. "Self-righteousness?"

Yes, heaven forbid I expect a camera to take pictures. I know if I spent $12k on one, it had better... ;)

Seriously, I don't have anything against collecting. If that's what you're into, more power to you and enjoy. I'm a bit of a collector myself - but I use all my items. *shrug*

[bob338]

Life is so much more interesting when we live it, renew it and reinvent it, instead of trying to preserve it in a box.

that's a little self righteous...what's wrong with not living life the way YOU want to? i didn't buy this camera, but i'm happy for the person who did. they obviously really wanted it and finally got it.

i find all of this a little disconcerting. all of you who want to buy gear to 'use' are not being bullied by any of the collectors who buy for their own reasons.

i'll say it again, any one of you 'users' would happily buy whatever you wanted without guilt if you had the means. so why sh*t on those who can?

bob

[ricpr]

Man this is definitely getting heavy. If you can answer NO to the following question, then you are not a collector:

You show up to a shop / garage sale / estate sale to find several Leica's for sale at less than $100 a piece. Would you buy them all or just one?

My guess is anyone here would buy all of them and likely keep one or more for personal use. I think that given the right situation, there isn't anyone here that wouldn't keep buying / collecting gear if you could literally pay pennies on the dollar. Many collectors start out this way. I started with a $35 dollar Canon 7.

A great deal is a great deal......camera or otherwise.

[Al Kaplan]

I've gone to garage sales and bought a lot of cameras and lenses that I had no interest in either collecting or using. If the price is right they can be sold or traded at a nice profit. It just means that you need to know the value of a lot more brands than just Leitz/Leica.

[photomoof]

Not at all.

One person speaks and says "Anyone who collects cameras is doing the wrong thing."

Another says, "In my opinion, not using cameras as they were meant to be used is wrong."

These are very different statements.


But you must admit both are the moanings of those who somehow feel left out, since -- if I want to buy cameras and put them in a wood chipper it is my business -- :D

[bmattock]

But you must admit both are the moanings of those who somehow feel left out, since -- if I want to buy cameras and put them in a wood chipper it is my business -- :D

Agreed. And what a lovely noise it would make.

However, I feel the former is a statement of one who wants to tell others how to live, while the other merely wishes they would choose to live that way on their own.

[photomoof]

Agreed. And what a lovely noise it would make.

However, I feel the former is a statement of one who wants to tell others how to live, while the other merely wishes they would choose to live that way on their own.

"In my opinion, not using cameras as they were meant to be used is wrong."

One must say "I use the cameras I own," thus avoiding the use of the word "wrong," if the statement is to be truly neutral. However better to simply show your photos and imply use, since it is a personal decision.

[bmattock]

Point well made. I stand happily corrected!

[Micky D]

Point well made. I stand happily corrected!

Upright and steadfast, not afraid to admit an error, a Gentleman.

Cheers Bill,:)

Mickey.

[nikon_sam]

I own around 20 or more cameras, but not much more than 20, I never in my buying of cameras intended to be a collector and I don't consider myself a collector.
Three of these cameras were indeed bought new by me and one was a gift from my parents...all of my cameras have been used at one point in their lives and would never be confused with many a camera collector's prize possession...
I still own this small collection of cameras mainly due to the love of cameras and also to the dramatic drop in film camera prices...I would rather keep them than sell them for pennies on the dollar...I would also do better to give them away to someone who would use them and possibly grow to love photography as I have...
I have also said many times in here that I have put off buying any more camera bodies for this year and now plan on continueing this thru next year...I can live with and actually feel good about this decision...
Now having said all that I have no problem with someone collecting cameras and actually enjoy looking at camera collections...it's a part of the photographic history that I like looking at and at times actually holding...

[bmattock]

I own around 20 or more cameras, but not much more than 20, I never in my buying of cameras intended to be a collector and I don't consider myself a collector.
Three of these cameras were indeed bought new by me and one was a gift from my parents...all of my cameras have been used at one point in their lives and would never be confused with many a camera collector's prize possession...
I still own this small collection of cameras mainly due to the love of cameras and also to the dramatic drop in film camera prices...I would rather keep them than sell them for pennies on the dollar...I would also do better to give them away to someone who would use them and possibly grow to love photography as I have...
I have also said many times in here that I have put off buying any more camera bodies for this year and now plan on continueing this thru next year...I can live with and actually feel good about this decision...
Now having said all that I have no problem with someone collecting cameras and actually enjoy looking at camera collections...it's a part of the photographic history that I like looking at and at times actually holding...

I am also not a 'collector' in the true sense of the word. I do not look for prime examples of various pieces to 'complete' a given system, but rather seek out inexpensive items of the sort that have been reported as having good photographic qualities, cult items, and the like. I generally can only afford the less-expensive, lower-to-middle-end of the spectrum, so I have no Rollei's, no Hasselblads.

However, I have owned cameras like the Diax IIb (just an example). Why? Because I saw it on CameraQuest or someplace like that, thought it was neat, found one on eBay for cheap, and bought it. Now I know a lot more about the Diax than those who have only read about it - just because I had one, used it, played around with it, and yes, it also sat on a shelf for a couple years before I got around to selling it. I've got some cameras that I haven't used in years and probably won't again anytime soon. I just like them, so I don't want to sell them. Anyone who has a problem with me 'collecting' things like that can go jump in a lake. Do I not use the Diax 'as intended'? Well, cameras are not my religion - there are no sins in using or not using them.

But as far as the serious 'collectors' go, who want one of everything they're interested in collecting, and in pristine condition, to sit on a shelf and merely admire, I say more power to 'em. I can't afford to do that and probably would not if I could, but I believe people should do what they want with their money - if they want to only buy cameras they personally use, do that. And if they want to buy cameras and leave them in the box in a closet, that's cool too. Whatever, if it is your money, do what you want with it. People who have a problem with that just have a problem, IMHO.

[GregL]

Actually I must admit that I just read the first 2 pages of this post as at some point it turned into...something not worth naming.
If I have 20 Leicas and you have one means you are a better photographer then me.
If I have one and you have 20 means that I am a true Leica user and you are just bragging.
Does that settle it?
Now for my personal opinion... collecting cameras is very useful to the users as before I bought my first and only camera I have read numerous posts by people who HAVE many cameras and of different kind and were able to compare them side by side. I find that knowledge invaluable for someone who is just starting with Leicas.
As for the "intended use" of the camera....do you always eat all your fries at McDonalds? Every single one? No?...well just to clarify...that potato intended to be eaten by you..

[Doug]

In many fields of interest there's this division between users and collectors (and degrees between): Cars, guns, toys, stamps, cameras, cigaret lighters... It can be fun either way, and both sides have challenges. Having once actively collected something, I found it was a trap, as there's hardly an end to it, and it keeps getting more expensive as completing those sets gets harder with the rarer items.

With cameras, I'm afraid mine do tend to increase in number, but I resist the idea that I'm collecting. All get used to some extent, and this is different from when I was collecting, as then I'd buy an unused item with the intent to leave it unused. So, with cameras, they just accumulate. Yep! No more collecting! :D

[rxmd]

Using a thing the way it's meant to be used may well mean collecting it, as some things nowadays are produced specifically with the collector in mind.

[LeicaTom]

Collector?

I used to be one (Leica) back in the 1980`s and 90`s and I guess in doing that, I learned alot about the cameras and I respect them even more now, then I used to. :) (it`s amazing that so much great gear has survived! - and I`m thankful for all of us ;))

But now I`m just a Mad PinUp Photographer who likes to take pictures of scantly clad young women while using rare cameras! :eek:

Tom

[Doug]

Tom's comment reminds me that a lot of the fun of collecting for me was researching the stories/history relating to an item or related group. The stories might be about technical design evolution, relate to world events, etc. Can be interesting and educational.

I have a friend who collects old photographs (tintypes etc)... lots of stories there.

[BigSteveG]

I don't care either way. If it drives up the price of something I can sell, why not?

[bobkonos]

The very fact this "poll" shows up shows a disdain for collectors that is more then prevalent on RFF. Look at two of the three choices in the poll. Sad. Why? Envy? Resentful? Too bad. It is a big world, and there's room for all who take part, and many of us are at peace collecting and using.

[RITskellar]

Hi, my name is Andy. I have some cameras that don't really get used.