davidhunternyc Posted May 17, 2011 Share #1 Posted May 17, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Do any digital cameras increase in value over time? The first camera that comes to mind is the Leica M9 Titanium. Conversely, no matter how special the camera is, it seems that the nature of digital technology will render all digital cameras obsolete. Are there exceptions? Are there any digital cameras out there that have maintained their value and even increased in value over time? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 17, 2011 Posted May 17, 2011 Hi davidhunternyc, Take a look here Do Any Digital Cameras Increase in Value?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaques Posted May 17, 2011 Share #2 Posted May 17, 2011 personally I doubt it- at least for the foreseeable future. Unusual, prototype, limited run cameras may over time- but I doubt it in most cases. I think the M9 Ti will depreciate in value rapidly- and I don't think it will recover over time either. but who knows? Time will tell. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
likalar Posted May 17, 2011 Share #3 Posted May 17, 2011 (edited) If mine are any indication: NO! Some of the lenses are holding value well, but it seems that almost anything digital that I've ever owned is worth about 25% or less of purchase price after just a few short years. This includes Canon gear, Megavision, etc...Sure, my trusty M9 is holding some value, for now, but time will tell how quickly it devalues as newer versions appear. The more I use it,though, the personal value of the camera has increased quite a bit. Great camera! Larry Edited May 17, 2011 by likalar Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
krabat Posted May 17, 2011 Share #4 Posted May 17, 2011 I do not believe that there will be any camera INCREASING in its value. At least, there could be some models where the decrease is not as dramatic. As an example, the price for a used Digilux 2 is relatively stable after the initial drop, if you get a D2 at all. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
!Nomad64 Posted May 17, 2011 Share #5 Posted May 17, 2011 No. Digital cameras are doomed the same way PCs are. They decrease in value as newer ones supersede them. The decreasing rate depends from the model replacement rate. The quicker they go off, the more they depreciate. If memory serves well Apple computers had a higher price retention than PCs due to the fact that new models were introduced with lesser frequency. The same happens with Leica. An M8 commands still decent a value, but in no way she will retain or increase it in time the way an M3 or M2 did. A Nikon D1 sold for roughly € 6,000. Today you can have one for less than € 300 being generous... Cheers, Bruno 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted May 17, 2011 Share #6 Posted May 17, 2011 Cameras wear out. You eventually need to replace some parts. It's worth doing it to a Leica lllf or M3, for example, because it will be like a new camera again and fully functional. In 10 years time when parts on an M8 need replacing, if the parts are even available, who will want to spend the money on the camera when, presumably, by then you could probably buy a much better newer digicam instead? So no, I really don't think that any digital camera will increase in value over time, in the way that the more collectable film cameras have done. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shard Posted May 17, 2011 Share #7 Posted May 17, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) In the short term, meaning a few years, probably not, digital cameras no matter how limited or special will not appreciate by a significant amount. But further down the road in about 10 to 20 years, it will appreciate not because it still works or it still takes amazing pictures but because it has become a collectible. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted May 17, 2011 Share #8 Posted May 17, 2011 I doubt it, but who knows. There's always a market for Film and TV props. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 17, 2011 Share #9 Posted May 17, 2011 (edited) It is a matter of time - I think this may change as digital cameras are less and less seen as a new or replacement technology for film cameras. Will these newfangled bronze axes increase in value like my flint ones did? It don't think so - flint has a certain something that bronze does not have and thus it keeps its value, and bronze may, in the future, well be replaced by new technology like steel, making them useless. Edited May 17, 2011 by jaapv Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frc Posted May 17, 2011 Share #10 Posted May 17, 2011 Another call for a replaceable digital module in the otherwise long lasting Leica M. A replacement part could/should be a new digital heart. On topic: No it would not increase the value but it definitely slows down the process of decreasing. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted May 17, 2011 Share #11 Posted May 17, 2011 (edited) It is a matter of time - I think this may change as digital cameras are less and less seen as a new or replacement technology for film cameras. Will these newfangled bronze axes increase in value like my flint ones did? It don't think so - flint has a certain something that bronze does not have and thus it keeps its value, and bronze may, in the future, well be replaced by new technology like steel, making them useless. A specious analogy. 1. digital cameras haven't been seen as "a new or replacement technology for film cameras" for a very long time now - unless you're talking about the tiny and unrepresentative sample of Leica M users who stuck with film when there was no digital alternative. 2. Some of the reasons why film cameras have maintained or even increased in value: - build quality; - sheer reliability; - technology that doesn't 'date'; - the ability to 'replace the sensor' after 36+ shots; - maintainability (re: the DMR and parts availability); - a digital sensor will, regardless of other factors, degrade over time. I could also add that there is some 'romance' associated with the manual hand-craft of a beautifully-made film camera which, imo, is generally absent from the assembly of third-party circuit boards and processors inside a digital camera. Don't get me wrong - love my Mac laptop, iPhone, M8 and so on, but it's not the same as picking-up a perfectly functioning M2 that's considerably older than I am, and listening to the faultless snick of the shutter. People should enjoy their cameras now. The idea that digital cameras may increase in value in the future is just a phantasm. Edited May 17, 2011 by plasticman Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted May 17, 2011 Share #12 Posted May 17, 2011 It is a matter of time - I think this may change as digital cameras are less and less seen as a new or replacement technology for film cameras. Will these newfangled bronze axes increase in value like my flint ones did? It don't think so - flint has a certain something that bronze does not have and thus it keeps its value, and bronze may, in the future, well be replaced by new technology like steel, making them useless. I like that Jaap. It'll be interesting to see how the generation of photographers who have never experienced a time when film was the primary means of photography, and who don't even use the word "digital" because it is so much the norm, view old cameras. By which I mean old cameras like the M9, M8.2 and the like, when things like the M13.2 and Nikon Buttercup are the cameras of choice. We don't really know how to do it yet. We're too mired in sentimentality even if we don't know it, and sentimentality is, of course, an important element in determining prices. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted May 17, 2011 Share #13 Posted May 17, 2011 It'll be interesting to see how the generation of photographers who have never experienced a time when film was the primary means of photography, and who don't even use the word "digital" because it is so much the norm, view old cameras. By which I mean old cameras like the M9, M8.2 and the like, when things like the M13.2 and Nikon Buttercup are the cameras of choice. We don't really know how to do it yet. We're too mired in sentimentality even if we don't know it, and sentimentality is, of course, an important element in determining prices. Talk to photographers who are under 20. They mostly think that film cameras are 'kewl' and are keen to experiment with them. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Want-a-leica Posted May 17, 2011 Share #14 Posted May 17, 2011 A Nikon D1 sold for roughly € 6,000. Today you can have one for less than € 300 being generous... Cheers, Bruno I'm waiting for the D3S to get to that price:D Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidhunternyc Posted May 17, 2011 Author Share #15 Posted May 17, 2011 Film photography is, of course, an interesting topic in this regard. Let's just say, for the sake of argument, that film photography reached the masses by 1850 and was used regularly by photographers up to the year 2000. So that is 150 years of film photography. In the brief history of time, that is not long at all. Look how long painting has been around and it is still going strong. Thing is too, digital photography is here to stay. I am certain it will last longer than 150 years. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
!Nomad64 Posted May 17, 2011 Share #16 Posted May 17, 2011 I'm waiting for the D3S to get to that price:D Ten years from now on, maybe less and it'll be yours. But will you want it by then? Even if it's that dirt cheap would you drop 300 Euro on a D1 today? Me? No thanks! God only knows what technologies will be available to digital photographers in 10 years. When I think that silver photography has been around as we know it for about 90 years then I think that maybe we're not on the right path, but that's only me... Cheers Bruno Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted May 17, 2011 Share #17 Posted May 17, 2011 I believe there will be collectable digital cameras... if you only want it to put on your shelf, it doesn't matter if it is outdated tech wise. Collectors are not rational. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Want-a-leica Posted May 17, 2011 Share #18 Posted May 17, 2011 Ten years from now on, maybe less and it'll be yours. But will you want it by then? Even if it's that dirt cheap would you drop 300 Euro on a D1 today? Me? No thanks!God only knows what technologies will be available to digital photographers in 10 years. When I think that silver photography has been around as we know it for about 90 years then I think that maybe we're not on the right path, but that's only me... Cheers Bruno True, yeah. The specs on that thing (the D3, S, or X) are pretty amazing now, but you'd imagine that ten years down the road they'll look weedy. The question is, is there a point of diminishing returns? Will there be a point where you just can't get any more megapixels in without some kind of negative effect? Or will they just keep raising the MP and ISO while keeping the noise down? I have no idea, but it makes you wonder. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted May 17, 2011 Share #19 Posted May 17, 2011 Talk to photographers who are under 20. They mostly think that film cameras are 'kewl' and are keen to experiment with them. Sometimes, yes, especially when its specifically brought to their attention. But "mostly"? That's not my experience, particularly amongst those very imaginative and creative young people who genuinely do treat their cameras as tools, with the image being the primary object of interest. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted May 17, 2011 Share #20 Posted May 17, 2011 particularly amongst those very imaginative and creative young people who genuinely do treat their cameras as tools, with the image being the primary object of interest. Amazing how every thread has to devolve into a film vs digital fight, complete with catty and derogatory comments. In fact, there are plenty of kids out there who are interested in exploring what's possible with film that can't just be added to a sensor-capture by applying a SilverEfexPro filter. Anyway, this was a thread about whether any digital cameras have or potentially can increase in value - anyone have any concrete examples? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.