Leica price bubble finally bursting?

[Vivek]

. Most Leica shooters... errr collectors... nowadays tend to be wealthy, and like everyone else, overvalue their own possessions.

:thumbs:

 

[Gary Clennan]

Also consider price elasticity. Most Leica shooters... errr collectors... nowadays tend to be wealthy, and like everyone else, overvalue their own possessions. The difference that sets them apart from other brand loyalists is that they can afford to hold on to an item that decreased in value, determined that it is worth over what the demand calls for.

A FLE is worth USD 4,750 now, but I bet you a lot of people are thinking that it is worth USD 5,500 or more still.

Oh lord - here we go again.... Next post up will be talking about Leica snobbery and how they continue to produce an inferior product. Having wealthy consumers is not the primary reason that Leica products continue to sell so well.

 

[Brian S]

I don't care who is buying them, as long as stay in business and continue to make the products that I like. Like the M9 monochrome.

It's all about me, Baby.

 

[Vivek]

Having wealthy consumers is not the primary reason that Leica products continue to sell so well.

Who else can afford them?

 

[Shashin]

I think a single data point from an eBay sale really sums up the market. It means that one individual in the market bought one lens at a particular price. We can take that single fact and extrapolate it to mean that there are people who really don't know anything about statistics nor how to analyze information.

 

[monza]

I'm curious how public policy relates to this thread.

 

[wattsy]

I think a single data point from an eBay sale really sums up the market.

I assume you mean that you "don't think.."? Nevertheless, I think this ebay sale is wholly in line with how demand seems to have gone out of the market. The heat went out some time ago and there no longer appears to be any appetite for paying over the odds for the flagship M lenses such as the 35 Summilux and 50 Noctilux. My personal view is that we are unlikely to see again the buying frenzy that started almost exactly a year ago. I guess various pressures (supply and the increasing hyping up of various lenses by a few online personalities) had been building for a while but the mania seemed to kick off last June when a 35 Summilux was listed (and apparently sold) for something like $8,500 in the classifieds in this forum. I can't see those sort of over RRP prices happening again apart from a few early listings for the APO 50 and (possibly) the M Monochrom.

 

[MSUSpartan]

Agreed. The eBay listing was at least based on multiple bids. The Buy It Now listings with the lens for $5,500 are not selling.

This is probably the first test of the REAL luxury market with electronics that becomes obsolete (with the bodies at least), I'm interested to see how the bodies hold up 5 years down the line. I don't see people shooting a M9 30 years down the line like they do with a M6.

The lenses should hold up decently though since it's just glass. It doesn't hurt that Leica used lenses are usually pristine since they rarely are taken outdoors. Kidding... mostly.

 

[fotografz]

Some folks will pay a premium to be first. After a while the rareness and newness is gone, so prices settle down to MSRP, and used a bit less than that depending on how the supply may be on that specific lens.

Nothing new about that.

If Leica puts out a 28/1.4 ASPH, and trickles out three of them a month, there may be those who'll pay a premium for that also ... especially if they are first time M buyers because of the M10.

Leica is treating lenses like DeBeers treats Diamonds ...

-Marc

 

[Godfrey]

A FLE just sold for USD 4,750 on eBay: Auction

I think this is what life is like before the M9 right? Finally prices are back down to earthly levels (high rise penthouse, not walkups). I welcome this with open arms. I don't want to pay over Leica's already high MSRP for used lenses.

What does FLE stand for?

(Frankly, I don't care at all what Leica prices their stuff at, or how it's selling, or whether someone considers a Leica owner to be a snob, or any of that horsepucky. If I want it, and I can afford it, I buy it and use it. It's that simple.)

 

[Double Negative]

Floating Lens Element(s).

 

[Gary Clennan]

Who else can afford them?

People who save their money and/or make sacrifices in other area's to buy the goods. Not sure if you were joking or not but it is not only the rich who use Leica.... Although it still tends to be a strong (and untrue) stereotype.

 

[4season]

I think some of this stuff, lenses in particular, was purchased as a sort of investment. Which isn't totally far-fetched given the USA real estate market, and lousy interest rates paid on regular savings and even Treasuries. And though a good part of 2011 it seemed it seemed to be working too.

 

[Godfrey]

I think some of this stuff, lenses in particular, was purchased as a sort of investment. Which isn't totally far-fetched given the USA real estate market, and lousy interest rates paid on regular savings and even Treasuries. And though a good part of 2011 it seemed it seemed to be working too.

I don't know about anybody else, but I don't buy camera equipment to be an "investment." I buy it to use in making photographs. If I'm a professional, I'm not 'investing' in camera equipment either, I'm purchasing capital goods (tools) for use in my business (and I depreciate them as such).

Does anyone on this photography forum 'invest' in camera equipment? Seems a very risky venture.

 

[Double Negative]

Investing assumes you'll sell said goods. This is the problem I face. I only seem to accrue gear...

I buy it to use and enjoy, and sure - make money with whenever possible. Invest in camera gear? Lenses might be worthwhile (at least Leica lenses) but anything digital? That would be... Dumb.

 

[Godfrey]

Investing assumes you'll sell said goods. This is the problem I face. I only seem to accrue gear...

I buy it to use and enjoy, and sure - make money with whenever possible. Invest in camera gear? Lenses might be worthwhile (at least Leica lenses) but anything digital? That would be... Dumb.

And as we can easily see, the returns on a long term investment in film camera bodies is pretty darn poor. ;-)

 

[jonoslack]

I think some of this stuff, lenses in particular, was purchased as a sort of investment. Which isn't totally far-fetched given the USA real estate market, and lousy interest rates paid on regular savings and even Treasuries. And though a good part of 2011 it seemed it seemed to be working too.

Quite right - I have quite a lot of leica lenses, I bought them to take pictures with (okay Godfrey) . . . but I couldn't possibly have excused the expense without some idea that they would hold their value pretty well. In the current financial climate they're probably as safe as any other investment, and safer than some.

After all, the cost of owning a lens is the cost of the depreciation when you sell it, and sensibly bought Leica lenses don't depreciate.

Camera bodies - Oh No! . . . well, ordinary digital camera bodies at least!

 

[4season]

And as we can easily see, the returns on a long term investment in film camera bodies is pretty darn poor. ;-)

Yes, just awful:
Leica mp-36 News, Videos, Reviews and Gossip - Gizmodo

1923 Leica 0-series becomes world's most expensive camera, fetches $1.89 million at auction -- Engadget

 

[MSUSpartan]

And yes, we should start collecting toast and cheese.

Grilled Cheese

In all seriousness, I doubt my MP in 10 years will be worth much more than what it is worth today.... and my M9, I'm glad I sold it late last year before it dropped anymore. When they hit sub 4K I might buy another one, and I probably don't have to wait too long.

 

[Vivek]

People who save their money and/or make sacrifices in other area's to buy the goods. Not sure if you were joking or not but it is not only the rich who use Leica.... Although it still tends to be a strong (and untrue) stereotype.

I can not be more serious. There was no need to be joking as it is a fact. If you deny it, perhaps you are living in Utopia.

Photography itself isn't for the poor. Leica certainly isn't for the lower income groups, even in the most affluent societies.