Leica MP new or old. Used price diffenence?

[Paulus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

One thing I was wondering about and maybe this is open for discussion.

 

Is there a price difference between a " old " MP  ( year 2002/2004 and a new MP  ( 2013 and going)  on the second hand market.

 

The new MP are made for € 4000,- or more and the old ones were only € 2000/2600,- in their days.

 

Is there a difference in buying a used one.

 

I see MP for € 3450,- and for € 2000,- where one cannot see a real difference in the wear. Only the serialnumbers are different?

[250swb]

The old MP's, the very first couple of batches, had an M6 TTL style film speed dial on the back door, but that's about the only outward difference. I understand that Leica had to improve the dust sealing around the viewfinder later, mine had to go back and have dust removed, but since then (and presumably now with the mod) it has been working faultlessly. In many years to come the early ones will be the rare ones, but I'll be dead by then.

 

 

Steve

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[earleygallery]

It's an interesting point, after all you wouldn't expect to pay the same for a 5 year old car and a 1 year old car, but cameras of the same model typically sell for similar prices based on condition rather than age.

 

So yes, someone selling their older MP s/h will take less of a hit than someone selling a newer s/h one. Mint/boxed cameras will obviously sell for more than marked/used unboxed cameras (with rare exceptions), which may be the price differences you're seeing.

[250swb]

I would guess that my MP is at the very least worth as much second hand as I paid for it new in January 2004. That in itself is baffling as prices have held much firmer than M7's etc. when there is no real gain to be had with the MP other than preference, it's not like it is fundamentally a better camera.

 

Steve

[Paulus]

It's an interesting point, after all you wouldn't expect to pay the same for a 5 year old car and a 1 year old car, but cameras of the same model typically sell for similar prices based on condition rather than age.

 

So yes, someone selling their older MP s/h will take less of a hit than someone selling a newer s/h one. Mint/boxed cameras will obviously sell for more than marked/used unboxed cameras (with rare exceptions), which may be the price differences you're seeing.

 A " new " mint MP in the new box shows higher prices.

 

Still. A mint camera about 4 years old, looks , feels and acts the same as a mint MP being 10 years old IMHO. Only the box is different. Still there is a price difference in some cases. Are people paying sometimes €1000,- more for the " new " box? Are people paying for the term " a la carte " even if the " a la carte " is an MP with only another kind of leather and the rest the same?

Edited December 10, 2015 by Paulus

[BjarniM]

If i were to buy a MP today, i would for sure buy a factory new one.

 

Simply because film Leicas don't loose their value in the same way as the digital ones, and i've never owned a factory new film Leica.

[Paulus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If i were to buy a MP today, i would for sure buy a factory new one.

 

Simply because film Leicas don't loose their value in the same way as the digital ones, and i've never owned a factory new film Leica.

 

Ok if you have a special reason for it, new, is new, but why not save € 2000,- the difference between a new for at least € 4200,- The MP will loose it's value the € 4200,- after it's first day. You have to keep it for at least 8 years IMHO to regain its € 4200,- value.

But the camera you have bought for € 2500,- used, shall have this same value.

[wattsy]

Simply because film Leicas don't loose their value in the same way as the digital ones

 

 

They will (and do) lose money if you buy new. A new MP is £3500 and you will be fortunate to recoup £2500 if you sell it, even if you haven't put a roll of film through it. 

Edited December 12, 2015 by wattsy

[wattsy]

Ok if you have a special reason for it, new, is new, but why not save € 2000,- the difference between a new for at least € 4200,- The MP will loose it's value the € 4200,- after it's first day. You have to keep it for at least 8 years IMHO to regain its € 4200,- value.

But the camera you have bought for € 2500,- used, shall have this same value.

 

I agree it makes financial sense to buy used but (as I've mentioned in another thread) it is often nice to buy some things brand new and, in doing so, you support Leica and make it worthwhile for them to continue making these things. 

Edited December 12, 2015 by wattsy

[Paulus]

so the only real reason to have a price difference in used MP's ( in mint condition ) could be, that the " new " MP still has its warranty of 5 years. After 5 years it's just as " old " as a 10 year old MP.

[Paulus]

I agree it makes financial sense to buy used but (as I've mentioned in another thread) it is often nice to buy some things brand new and, in doing so, you support Leica and make it worthwhile for them to continue making these things. 

Of course, I bought an MP also new twice. Great feeling, but I sold both and now I have a MP used in mint condition. Also a great feeling, but, as Jaap so eloquently puts it: " the fun starts when you use it . " ( or words like that. ) . So I can say. IMO the difference is gone in a few weeks.

[piblondin]

If i were to buy a MP today, i would for sure buy a factory new one.

 

Simply because film Leicas don't loose their value in the same way as the digital ones, and i've never owned a factory new film Leica.

I bought a new MP this year and the meter was broken. Buying used from a trusted source gets you a camera that's already been tested. 

[Paulus]

I bought a new MP this year and the meter was broken. Buying used from a trusted source gets you a camera that's already been tested. 

That was my thought, when my M6 broke down three times in 2 years. The next camera was a " traveller" who had been travelling a lot. It also broke down ( shutter stuck ) but was repaired under warranty. So it did not matter that it was used, because the warrenty came from the dealer. Of my MP's the only one that broke down, was a new bought one. ( loose screw , so that the recocking did not work ).

[Abram]

I was in the market for an MP and got a fairly early one that was also fairly used (not beaten-up but it shows a decent amount of braising on the edges and wear near the strap lugs). None of this phased me or deterred me from the purchase, because it cost me nearly $1000 less than I was seeing other MP bodies go for and I'm not a collector, I will be using this camera extensively alongside my M240 and honestly it's going to get used and scratched up anyways (one needs only look at my M240 to see such evidence). 

 

I didn't give any thought to an older one costing more than a newer one other than potentially having a warranty and a box and all that. 

 

I just wanted a really nice used camera to work with and I found one for a good deal. (I will have to get that viewfinder cleaned out though haha!)

[pixie]

My M3 was new when received in 1967.

It required parts to be fitted for RNFDR to function..

My M6TTL  new in 2000.

My M3 my most used camera esp. these days no longer a pro.

M3 is almost 50 yrs .old, the M6 a kid at 15 yrs.

I suggest buying used, with warranty.

The difference in price can get you a used lens..

Don't worry about outside wear.

These cameras were made for the long haul.

Enjoy!

[Guest]

If I wanted an MP with the 0.85x viewfinder would it be easy to find a good, used one or would it make more sense to buy a new one which, I take it, would have to be à la carte?

 

BTW, why are people willing to pay so much more for a used Leica with the original box? Is it because buyers think that someone who is fussy enough to the box is more careful with his camera as well? I could care less about the box.

[Archiver]

If I wanted an MP with the 0.85x viewfinder would it be easy to find a good, used one or would it make more sense to buy a new one which, I take it, would have to be à la carte?

 

BTW, why are people willing to pay so much more for a used Leica with the original box? Is it because buyers think that someone who is fussy enough to the box is more careful with his camera as well? I could care less about the box.

Some want to be able to sell the camera again at a later date, and they know they will get a better price if it comes with box and papers, much like an expensive watch.  An item with box and papers is closer to 'new' than without.  Vintage cameras are especially like this, as collectors prize things that are as close to original condition as possible.  There may also be interesting historical provenance, such as a camera being owned by, and registered to, someone of importance.  There's no practical benefit to having the box outside of resale, but psychologically, you feel more like you're buying something new or 'complete'.

Edited March 5, 2016 by Archiver

[Matlock]

 

 

BTW, why are people willing to pay so much more for a used Leica with the original box? Is it because buyers think that someone who is fussy enough to the box is more careful with his camera as well? I could care less about the box.

 

You may have a point but, whenever I buy an item with a box, the box goes into the loft and stays in pristine condition.

[Gavbo]

A first batch (2002/2003) MP serial 28XXXX with M6 style door would be a great choice from a investment perspective say 50+ years from now.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M