OMG! The prices!

[RayD28]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

13 hours ago, DoubleE said:

I just paid $1800 all in for a single stroke, 1960 vintage, M3.  It's in very nice condition cosmetically with excellent rangefinder optics, but it turned out it could use a CLA which will add another $300 or so to the cost.  It's with Sherry Krauter at the moment, hopefully ready sometime this week.  Maybe I overpaid, but after some weeks of looking it's about the best I could find.

You are the going same route as I did about seven years ago.  Bought M3 and had to send it to Sherry for a new shutter curtain.  Barring any major accidents, your camera will be good to go 10 to 20 years, maybe longer.    

[colint544]

3 hours ago, Matlock said:

Yes but a Chrome M4 is shown at £1600 so not a fair comparison.

What's unfair about pointing out that a shop is selling a 40-year-old black chrome M4, and a brand new black chrome M-A for exactly the same price, on a thread about the rocketing price of old Leica M cameras, and the thread is titled "OMG! The prices!"? 

[Capuccino-Muffin]

18 hours ago, Huss said:

We love zinc bubbles.

The M6 is clearly a downgrade versus all its predecessors. The only thing it has going for it is the meter that are slowly failing. The Brass M4-2 and M4-P are better value.

I don’t dislike the M6 as much as I Value and appreciate the M2-M3-M4 and M5 to what they truly are: magnificient cameras. Top Quality unmatched by the M6. That is all.

[Matlock]

1 hour ago, colint544 said:

What's unfair about pointing out that a shop is selling a 40-year-old black chrome M4, and a brand new black chrome M-A for exactly the same price, on a thread about the rocketing price of old Leica M cameras, and the thread is titled "OMG! The prices!"? 

It is a little unfair as the black chrome M4s always attract a price much higher than the 'normal' silver chrome. The  better analogy would have been to compare the Silver Chrome M4 at £1600 with the Silver Chrome M-A at £4100.

[Tomsmac]

1 hour ago, Capuccino-Muffin said:

The M6 is clearly a downgrade versus all its predecessors. The only thing it has going for it is the meter that are slowly failing. The Brass M4-2 and M4-P are better value.

I don’t dislike the M6 as much as I Value and appreciate the M2-M3-M4 and M5 to what they truly are: magnificient cameras. Top Quality unmatched by the M6. That is all.

Thank you for your contribution. I’m strongly looking at a M4-2 now. And yes indeed, apparently much better value even including a $325 CLA.

[Matlock]

1 hour ago, Capuccino-Muffin said:

The M6 is clearly a downgrade versus all its predecessors. The only thing it has going for it is the meter that are slowly failing. The Brass M4-2 and M4-P are better value.

I don’t dislike the M6 as much as I Value and appreciate the M2-M3-M4 and M5 to what they truly are: magnificient cameras. Top Quality unmatched by the M6. That is all.

Thankfully most people disagree with you. The M6 is a downgrade in your eyes but not to most people. I have M3, M2, M1 (not really relevant here), M4, M4-2, M4-P. M5. M6TTL and M7. My favourite is the M7 closely followed by the M6TTL although I do think the M5 is superb. All except the M3 and M1 get regular use. I often pair up my M6TTL with my M10-D and they make a great team if I require film and digital.

[adan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, colint544 said:

What's unfair about pointing out that a shop is selling a 40-year-old black chrome M4, and a brand new black chrome M-A for exactly the same price, on a thread about the rocketing price of old Leica M cameras, and the thread is titled "OMG! The prices!"? 

That particular camera is an outlier - black, black chrome, and therefore relatively rare among M4s - and in exceptionally good condition (from the photos). Which, as we know, bumps the price up a lot from the median, in collecti-world. Far right side of the bell-curve.

M4 production dropped significantly after the 1971 introduction of the M5. About 500 were made in 1972,  none were made in 1973, and there are only 1820 or so 1975/Wetzlar M4s in existence. (And none in 1976-77 - the "end of the M system" until ELCAN began making the M4-2 in 1978)

BTW - in 2022, a camera made in 1975 is 47 years old.

Edited May 16, 2022 by adan

[colint544]

14 minutes ago, Matlock said:

It is a little unfair as the black chrome M4s always attract a price much higher than the 'normal' silver chrome. The  better analogy would have been to compare the Silver Chrome M4 at £1600 with the Silver Chrome M-A at £4100.

I noticed that Red Dot Cameras are selling a new black chrome M-A alongside a 40-year-old M4, and both cost £4100. Two near identical cameras in specification and finish. That reflects the steep rise in price for vintage Leica M cameras. Which this thread is about. I find that remarkable. I thought it made the point nicely, and I put it on the thread.

But hey, perhaps you're right, and your analogy about the chrome M4 being much cheaper than the new M-A makes the point more succinctly.

[colint544]

2 minutes ago, adan said:

That particular camera is an outlier - black, black chrome, and therefore relatively rare among M4s - and in exceptionally good condition (from the photos). Which, as we know, bumps the price up a lot from the median, in collecti-world. Far right side of the bell-curve.

M4 production dropped significantly after the 1971 introduction of the M5. About 500 were made in 1972,  none were made in 1973, and there are only 1820 or so 1975/Wetzlar M4s in existence. (And none in 1976-77 - the "end of the M system" until ELCAN began making the M4-2 in 1978)

BTW - in 2022, a camera made in 1975 is 47 years old.

My arithmetic is terrible! And you're right. I actually have a black chrome M4. It's a 1974 model, and I bought it in 2016 from Red Dot Cameras. It was mint, and it cost £1550. Definitely more than a chrome M4, or an M6. But the price now reflects an incredibly steep rise.

[madNbad]

2 hours ago, Capuccino-Muffin said:

The M6 is clearly a downgrade versus all its predecessors. The only thing it has going for it is the meter that are slowly failing. The Brass M4-2 and M4-P are better value.

I don’t dislike the M6 as much as I Value and appreciate the M2-M3-M4 and M5 to what they truly are: magnificient cameras. Top Quality unmatched by the M6. That is all.

Zinc became the material of choice for the M4-2. A small number of early ones have brass top plates, some of those left over from M4 production. By the time the M4-P arrived, all of the top plates were zinc until the Millennium series of 2000.

[Matlock]

8 minutes ago, madNbad said:

Zinc became the material of choice for the M4-2. A small number of early ones have brass top plates, some of those left over from M4 production. By the time the M4-P arrived, all of the top plates were zinc until the Millennium series of 2000.

Very true and Leica made a big thing about it when the zinc top plate was introduced. It seems that there had been a number of brass M4 top plates that deformed so zinc was introduced to overcome the problem.

[Tomsmac]

I love this community!

[Herr Barnack]

Quote

OMG! The prices!

It's not just used kit. I say that every time I look at the M11 and some of the new M lenses, too. 😵

[tom0511]

I think the cool thing about M6 is that, IMO it was designed as a modern camera to be used.

The MP caught up the same features, put it in a shiny nice built camera, without any innovations.

I agree the MP feels a little nicer and shiny, but in the end the M6 just can do the same for less money.

By the way I own both, if I had to sell one it would be the MP (But just because I have owned and used the M6 for long long time)

[madNbad]

In late 2018 I bought a “LN” chrome M4 from a online seller. It was like new after four hundred dollars worth of work. Unbeknownst to me, the same week I bought my M4, an elderly photographer from central Oregon brought a box of gear into one of the local shops. Along with the pristine M3, virtually unused M2, O series replica and a pile of Barnacks was a black chrome M4. It was still in the box and he had never used it. The shop sold it for $750 to someone who couldn’t get their wallet out fast enough.

Edited May 16, 2022 by madNbad

[a.noctilux]

1 hour ago, madNbad said:

Zinc became the material of choice for the M4-2. A small number of early ones have brass top plates, some of those left over from M4 production. By the time the M4-P arrived, all of the top plates were zinc until the Millennium series of 2000.

With respect of your writing, I invite you to verify on M4-2 and M4-P*.

I was toll that my multiple M4-2/M4-P have brass top plate.

I tend to believe as some of them have some "bangs" and/or bumps and many have scratches.

 

*maybe because black chrome of M4-2/M4-P top doesn't brass ?

Edited May 16, 2022 by a.noctilux

[madNbad]

https://www.nemeng.com/leica/042b.shtml

[a.noctilux]

5 minutes ago, madNbad said:

https://www.nemeng.com/leica/042b.shtml

Thanks, I see that is NOT all M4-2/M4-P, but

The M6 (and later M4-P), those with flush windows (Bill Rosauer concluded :  All the M4-P's with flush windows have zinc top plates...)

 

[Danner]

FWIW, and IMHO, the M6 is the best M-film body, except for, perhaps, the MP where price may be a determining factor.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Tomsmac]

16 minutes ago, Danner said:

FWIW, and IMHO, the M6 is the best M-film body, except for, perhaps, the MP where price may be a determining factor.

Why, in your opinion?