Shocking resale experience on P1 gear. Very disappointed!

[shootingalot]

I am working with MF gear in the past 3-4 years and constantly upgraded. What i experienced is a
painful reality when it comes to pre owned gear. P1 lenses in general i don't like unless its stopped
down. Schneider on the other hand are wonderful. However, get back to the bodies and backs.
P40+ is an excellent back, even being about 7 years old technology , still beats 5dsr or nikon cameras
any day. A good quality P40+ what i am trying to sell for a while now, i don't even get a single email
on a $5k asking price with Pelican case, papers, cables and all original parts. Not sure why is this huge
value loss. DF+ bodies are selling around $1200-$1500 on a good day used, Schneider lens i am getting
offers on my 80mm for $900.... Phase One should price a little more realistically. While you are a canon
user buying a 50mm f1.2 or 35mm f1.4  , they will sell for about $1200 in a blink of an eye...
I love MF and won't even try to compare the quality to a 35mm system. However, When i see that a back
once costs $20k+ and had to deal with the DF and DF+ issues forever with stuck mirrors, error codes ,
finally P1 comes out with a body that looks like a camera body we been waiting for, it does not support
the P backs... For the money paid and talking about sensors used in an IQ140 which will work on the XF,
i expect more from P1.. Not sure what is your experience selling MF gear but we are losing a lot of money
when selling. Upgrade options are not better with dealers as well. I guess its just something we have to swallow.

[Petrus]

P40+ is an excellent back, even being about 7 years old technology , still beats 5dsr or nikon cameras
any day.

I love MF and won't even try to compare the quality to a 35mm system.

???

Maybe, if you did compare to similar resolution cameras from Sony and Nikon, you would understand why you are not able to sell it for the price you ask.

[BernardLanguillier]

As all cameras, their purchase should IMHO be planned on top of a business plan targeting ROI from camera usage and a very low cash back from equipment sales.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Christoph B.]

Well I think there are a few things at work here:

1. Normal loss of value over time. I bought a 5D Mk II in 2010 and paid about 2000€ for it. 2015 it sold for less than 700€, meaning it was reduced to a third of its value over 5 years. So your back might be considered to have an estimated value of 5.000$.
2. Low value for a trade-in. If you buy a back and you intend to get a deal from P1 in a few years this has to be considered. If P1 offered more for used backs the situation would change, but currently they themselves are devaluing the backs on the 2nd hand market.
3. Additional cost of equipment. A digital back needs a body and a lens and a stable tripod, capable computer,... all in all it's more expensive than a small format camera, even when it's 2nd hand. As you said the 80mm 2.8 will still fetch a hefty 2nd hand price of 900-1000$ which should actually be compared to a 50mm 1.4 - and those are very cheap. The 50mm 1.2 are very rare and that's what defines the price on the used market. But there are a lot of 80mm 2.8 around, just do a quick eBay-search. If you have to buy all that expensive additional equipment that will drive the price on the 2nd hand market down. Nobody wants to spend a lot when they're already on a budget.
4. Technological advances. Yes, the P40+ still delivers great images but it has a CCD chip and many people are dismayed by that. While CCDs are (to me) great and just as good as CMOS sensors at low ISO settings, they aren't as good at higher ISO. That limits their use somewhat. So a new high resolution CMOS sensor inside a complete camera will be much more appealing than an old high resolution CCD sensor on a back without a camera.
5. Limited upgradability. As you said, the P+ can't be used on XF bodies. That means you won't be able to use the latest camera and that will drive the price down even further. If you want to get a new body you're reduced to the AFD, AFDII, DF and DF+ - all of which have a lousy AF system and some knows problems (the DF+ is pretty stable, though).

Also let's not forget that the DF and DF+ do have their inherit limitations, they are not as "nice" as a new compact 35mm SLR.

In short: there isn't that much demand for old backs - and if there is, it's mostly for backs like the P45+ or ones with higher resolution (60mp+)

Also you should consider the fact that while the P40+ is a great back, it's heavily cropped - about 1.3x. That's not always a good thing or something that people desire if they get into MF photography.

[jamgolf]

I am sympathetic to your frustration but all digital equipment depreciate due to rapid advancements in the state of the art. Computers, TVs, BlueRay players, cameras or digital backs.

Such rapid product cycles are both good and bad. Good because consumers have the ability to experience the technological advancements very quickly. Bad because the prior purchases have a sharp downward slope as far as their resale value. Older film cameras e.g. TLRs or 617 panoramics etc. fare far better in terms ot resale values, since they do not become any more obsolete than they already were a couple of years ago.

The second point regarding the comparison to 35mm is that its a far smaller pool of buyers interested in MF equipment in comparison to 35mm. So in some ways its demand and supply.

The third point is that without question digital backs are absurdly priced to begin with which makes the actual $$ hit very painful.

 

[torger]

Technology moves forward. Older digital backs produce excellent image quality just as you say, but most people want the newer stuff regardless of the quality of the older systems. Latest and greatest. Now with full-frame 100 MP with 15 stops of DR and CMOS live view available, who wants a 40 megapixel crop sensor with a crappy LCD? Not that many, and that shows in the price.

If you're one that can appreciate the quality of legacy stuff (like I do myself), there's an excellent opportunity to simply be the one that gains from the majority's preference of newer gear. Stay a bit behind the latest and buy pre-owned stuff. It's a buyers market. Price/performance of MFD has never been better -- if you buy pre-owned / second hand.

[Christoph B.]

If you're one that can appreciate the quality of legacy stuff (like I do myself), there's an excellent opportunity to simply be the one that gains from the majority's preference of newer gear. Stay a bit behind the latest and buy pre-owned stuff. It's a buyers market. Price/performance of MFD has never been better -- if you buy pre-owned / second hand.

I agree!

Nobody can tell the difference between an IQ360 or a P65+ or an IQ140 or a P40+ - and both the P65+ and P40+ are getting very very affordable.

No point in buying MF gear for the resale value, it's not real estate nor jewelry. For that you have the Leica M system, Rolex and the like.

That's it. The only cameras you 'can' buy as an investment are collectors items such as certain Leicas or semi-historical cameras like a Deardorff (they'll keep their value even after years). But digital cameras are rarely worth collecting and lose their worth quickly. They are simply put tools. Very sophisticated tools but not an investment per se, as you use them and with use they lose value.

[Joe Towner]

The resale market sucks because the pool is very very shallow, and very wide.  Photographers aren't reaching higher and going with MF gear as a lot of their 'issues' have been solved with things like the B1/B2's.

I wouldn't ask Phase to take a loss on gear, but I would ask them to help drive interest with more events, especially showcasing CPO/refurb gear.  Not everyone can afford a IQ3 100MP kit, but get someone into a P/P+ back on their RZ and life should be amazing.  Come to think about it, with the pack film situation, I wonder if there will be a drive to utilize these older backs for test shots.

[Theodoros]

I am working with MF gear in the past 3-4 years and constantly upgraded. What i experienced is a painful reality when it comes to pre owned gear. P1 lenses in general i don't like unless its stopped
down. Schneider on the other hand are wonderful. However, get back to the bodies and backs. P40+ is an excellent back, even being about 7 years old technology , still beats 5dsr or nikon cameras
any day. A good quality P40+ what i am trying to sell for a while now, i don't even get a single email on a $5k asking price with Pelican case, papers, cables and all original parts. Not sure why is this huge
value loss. DF+ bodies are selling around $1200-$1500 on a good day used, Schneider lens i am getting offers on my 80mm for $900....
Phase One should price a little more realistically. While you are a canon user buying a 50mm f1.2 or 35mm f1.4  , they will sell for about $1200 in a blink of an eye... I love MF and won't even try to compare the quality to a 35mm system. However, When i see that a back once costs $20k+ and had to deal with the DF and DF+ issues forever with stuck mirrors, error codes, finally P1 comes out with a body that looks like a camera body we been waiting for, it does not support the P backs... For the money paid and talking about sensors used in an IQ140 which will work on the XF, i expect more from P1.. Not sure what is your experience selling MF gear but we are losing a lot of money when selling. Upgrade options are not better with dealers as well. I guess its just something we have to swallow.

I'm not surprised with the resale value of your P-40+ back... With new Hasselblad CFV-50c Cmos back selling at the price it is, or with Pentax 645Z costing even lees, not many will invest on a CCD back that (despite its quality) won't work with the modern XF platform, is not supported by P1 for future use, is not very good at high ISO and... one can't fit on different platform.

I'm sure that if your back was for a different platform , or if it used interchangeable plates that would adapt it in different platforms, it would have sold from day 1... IMO, other than P1's insane pricing policy for new backs, there are two more faults in their marketing policies...

1. They decided to exclude ALL backs that where for the older M/P1 645 interface but the IQ ones... (no reason to do so what so ever),
2. They charge unreasonable to alter a back's fitting from one platform to another... just my two cents...

[Paul2660]

The issue of IQ only backs on th XF is very understandable.  If you follow the feature enhancements that Phase has delivered for the XF.   Feature sets 1 and 2.   It's very apparent that these feature would not work on the older P backs.  So to me it was a good call by Phase One. Rather than get into a bunch of emails etc as to why this feature or that won't work on the P backs Phase made a clear line in the sand.

To use any of the newer feature sets for the XF the IQ back is needed for the more modern interface.

The interface swap, considering that hounding get your same back returned I have never seen that as a need. Phase just ships you a new back in the mount you are after. I would much rather keep the back I have and not inherit a used back with a possible set of new problems.

However if the photographer purchased the value add warranty at the time of the purchase of the P + back you get one mount swap at no charge during the warranty.

I also agree that the price point of the 50c and 645Z are making resale of the older CCD backs much more difficult. Especially those without the IQ interface.

Paul C

[Theodoros]

The issue of IQ only backs on th XF is very understandable.  If you follow the feature enhancements that Phase has delivered for the XF.   Feature sets 1 and 2.   It's very apparent that these feature would not work on the older P backs.  So to me it was a good call by Phase One. Rather than get into a bunch of emails etc as to why this feature or that won't work on the P backs Phase made a clear line in the sand.

To use any of the newer feature sets for the XF the IQ back is needed for the more modern interface.

The interface swap, considering that hounding get your same back returned I have never seen that as a need. Phase just ships you a new back in the mount you are after. I would much rather keep the back I have and not inherit a used back with a possible set of new problems.

However if the photographer purchased the value add warranty at the time of the purchase of the P + back you get one mount swap at no charge during the warranty.

I also agree that the price point of the 50c and 645Z are making resale of the older CCD backs much more difficult. Especially those without the IQ interface.

Paul C

Are you saying that it was difficult for P1 to include the older interface in parallel with the new one in the XF, giving the choice to the user for which to select? ...excluding the older backs (out of all MFDB makers) was done in purpose from P1... The thing is that the decision is more hurting to the company than to their benefit... and the other thing is that by the time they'll realise the mistake and turn back to include their ex-customers, there will be even more (marketing) damage as they will expose their previous blackmail to their own customers... Exactly as it happens with the O/P poster in this discussion.

[Doug Peterson]

Photographers aren't reaching higher and going with MF gear as a lot of their 'issues' have been solved with things like the B1/B2's.

As I frequently point out Phase One's sales/financials are public record. They show increasing sales every year since 2008.

[Theodoros]

As I frequently point out Phase One's sales/financials are public record. They show increasing sales every year since 2008.

That's irrelevant to the subject.... Also... "Increasing sales" doesn't mean "more new units"...

[Doug Peterson]

That's irrelevant to the subject.... Also... "Increasing sales" doesn't mean "more new units"...

Sales are nearly double what they were in 2009, and the price points are about the same as they were in 2009, so with respect... yes it does.

As to relevancy... someone suggested resales value of the OP were effected by decreased demand for Phase One backs. Given ever increasing sales that seems unlikely. I think, rather, that the jump between P+ and IQ backs was so significant that the resale value of P+ backs have taken a more than usual hit. The "generational" difference between a [P65+ and IQ160] is about the same as an [IQ160 and an IQ260], but the practical difference is quite large. The P+ backs still produce fantastic image quality, but the interface is quite dated at this point.

I also think that in general most buyers ready to shell out for medium format would prefer to buy a new or factory refurbished from a knowledgeable dealer who can provide a warranty and help them with the research and support them after purchase. But of course, in that regard, I am incredibly biased aren't I?

[Theodoros]

....I am incredibly biased aren't I?

Sure thing...

[Paul2660]

Are you saying that it was difficult for P1 to include the older interface in parallel with the new one in the XF, giving the choice to the user for which to select? ...excluding the older backs (out of all MFDB makers) was done in purpose from P1... The thing is that the decision is more hurting to the company than to their benefit... and the other thing is that by the time they'll realise the mistake and turn back to include their ex-customers, there will be even more (marketing) damage as they will expose their previous blackmail to their own customers... Exactly as it happens with the O/P poster in this discussion.

What I am saying is Phase One made a business call, just like Ford and Toyota do when making a new car.  I don't think you can find the features of a 2009 or 2010 model in a 2016, and for that matter, never will.   Phase One is a business just all the other camera companies. 

I don't see it as blackmail.  The DF+ has vastly improved AF over the DF and with the latest firmware Phase released, plus the Li-on battery backs lock up problems decreased dramatically.  For a P+ back user, the DF+ is an excellent solution and the P+ back works with all the tech cameras, so IMO there is quite a bit of opportunity still available for that user, not to mention LS glass and all the latest versions of that also Blue Label versions. 

If a customer needs the XF, the interface supported is the IQ and forward.  The IQ interface alone has been around now for 5 years or more.  To expect an even older interface/controller, electronics with this type of product, sorry not going to happen.  Actually I was impressed that Phase found a way to pass on most of the IQ features and so far all the Feature additions of the XF to the IQ 1 backs. 

I have been a customer of Phase since early 2008, and I have had my share of problems with them, however the XF support line is not one of them.  I was made very aware of the possible issues of staying outside of the IQ interface back in 2011, long before the announcement of the XF last year. 

I fully expect Phase to announce features in the future that I will be locked out of unless I stay 2 or 3 generations current. 

Paul C

[Theodoros]

What I am saying is Phase One made a business call, just like Ford and Toyota do when making a new car.  I don't think you can find the features of a 2009 or 2010 model in a 2016, and for that matter, never will.   Phase One is a business just all the other camera companies. 

I don't see it as blackmail.  The DF+ has vastly improved AF over the DF and with the latest firmware Phase released, plus the Li-on battery backs lock up problems decreased dramatically.  For a P+ back user, the DF+ is an excellent solution and the P+ back works with all the tech cameras, so IMO there is quite a bit of opportunity still available for that user, not to mention LS glass and all the latest versions of that also Blue Label versions. 

If a customer needs the XF, the interface supported is the IQ and forward.  The IQ interface alone has been around now for 5 years or more.  To expect an even older interface/controller, electronics with this type of product, sorry not going to happen.  Actually I was impressed that Phase found a way to pass on most of the IQ features and so far all the Feature additions of the XF to the IQ 1 backs. 

I have been a customer of Phase since early 2008, and I have had my share of problems with them, however the XF support line is not one of them.  I was made very aware of the possible issues of staying outside of the IQ interface back in 2011, long before the announcement of the XF last year. 

I fully expect Phase to announce features in the future that I will be locked out of unless I stay 2 or 3 generations current. 

Paul C

It still doesn't answer to: "Why didn't they include a parallel interface that would allow older users to keep their backs"...  Is the few Kbs of memory space the problem?

[eronald]

I also think that in general most buyers ready to shell out for medium format would prefer to buy a new or factory refurbished from a knowledgeable dealer who can provide a warranty and help them with the research and support them after purchase. But of course, in that regard, I am incredibly biased aren't I?

As you are asking, I agree that you are a very knowledgable dealer, as well as incredibly biased.

Any other questions?



Edmund

[Joe Towner]

As I frequently point out Phase One's sales/financials are public record. They show increasing sales every year since 2008.

Yep, and it's great to see their year over year growth.  The comment was directed at the number of photographers who stop at 35mm gear, without either an understanding or interest in pushing into MF gear.  They accept the trade-offs, and for their business, it's ok.

[Bo Dez]

Personally I would never buy a 7 year old back. Casting aside the fact the technology is old, I would not want to invest several thousand on an old piece of equipment when I could buy a brand new dSLR for a similar or likely less cost with 90% (or more in some instances) of the performance, a full warranty and support going into the next 5-7 years, more exciting because it's new and also because it's brand new with no surprises or mystery from mishandling, drops, etc. I can simply exchange for a new one if things are wrong. The Phase One DF and DF+ while capable is again a limiting platform as it's a dead end. I personally don't like and never have liked that platform. The depreciation is terrible now, it will be even worse in another 5 years.

There is so much going on in the industry, in almost all brands and formats, and my old gear is "good enough" to wait and see how things develop. This is another contributing factor I believe and another reason why I have no need to buy something now, particularly when it is old gear. With all this talk about small formats heading into 100mp+ - 200MP then I think it would be best to wait and see how technology fairs in the next year or so rather than invest further into a 7 year old 40MP CCD system with an old discontinued platform.

Then there is the large transition to motion that is occurring. Spending thousands on a system without at least 4K capture isn't a savvy option right now, unless it's offering something over and above, like 80-100MP on a large sensor.

There is certain gear you can buy which either holds it's value well or actually increases in value. Otherwise, unfortunately we need to accept that any gear that has technology as it's feature (ie. 99% of all gear today) is going to be next to worthless in some amount of time. after shooting for 20 years I have several dead systems that I could sell for pennies if I could only find a buyer, all gear that was expensive at the time of purchase. If you can make it work on a financial level, you are far better to cycle your upgrades sooner as to regain the maximum possible. Otherwise, it's status quo , I'm sorry to say, but I do empathise with you given we are all in the same boat.