Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 13   Go Down

Author Topic: Let's talk about money: Upgrade prices, value depreciation, promotions for P1  (Read 109341 times)

Neil Williams

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 541
    • Neil's Photography

Are you guys seeing the same adsorbent depreciation prices of Leica camera gear recently?

I decided to trade in my Leica M gear for a new Leica S and pretty much took a 60% hit on my Leica gear that is less than 2 years old...............I haven't made the deal yet but when I look back to last month when I sold my wife's Sony a7r to help finance her new Sony a7ii that puppy also took a 60% depreciation hit and that was over a 6 month period................maybe it's just me, maybe I am just sh}te at negotiating when it comes to selling camera gear :) :) Ahh well so be it, but wondered if anyone else has experienced the same sh{t?

 

The only thing I can think of apart from my previous statement is that now that Leica is flooding the market with new brands i.e. "Q's" "T's" "SE's" and the like maybe that has something to do with it................hay what the hell do I know............................... I am just an old Roughneck
Logged

ddolde

  • Guest

Interesting how none of the ever present sales crew have chimed in on this subject.  Guess they are afraid of getting their reputations sullied
Logged

Ken R

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 849

Are you guys seeing the same adsorbent depreciation prices of Leica camera gear recently?

I decided to trade in my Leica M gear for a new Leica S and pretty much took a 60% hit on my Leica gear that is less than 2 years old...............I haven't made the deal yet but when I look back to last month when I sold my wife's Sony a7r to help finance her new Sony a7ii that puppy also took a 60% depreciation hit and that was over a 6 month period................maybe it's just me, maybe I am just sh}te at negotiating when it comes to selling camera gear :) :) Ahh well so be it, but wondered if anyone else has experienced the same sh{t?

 

The only thing I can think of apart from my previous statement is that now that Leica is flooding the market with new brands i.e. "Q's" "T's" "SE's" and the like maybe that has something to do with it................hay what the hell do I know............................... I am just an old Roughneck


Camera gear are horrible financial instruments unless you make money using them for what they were designed to do, make images, or rent them to other people who do.

Even so Leica lenses, if purchased used, can be sold basically for what you paid. They hold their value well. If purchased new you do take a hit but not 60%. With Digital bodies it varies but they sell well also (on the private market).
Logged

JV

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1008

Are you guys seeing the same adsorbent depreciation prices of Leica camera gear recently?

I decided to trade in my Leica M gear for a new Leica S and pretty much took a 60% hit on my Leica gear that is less than 2 years old...............I haven't made the deal yet but when I look back to last month when I sold my wife's Sony a7r to help finance her new Sony a7ii that puppy also took a 60% depreciation hit and that was over a 6 month period................maybe it's just me, maybe I am just sh}te at negotiating when it comes to selling camera gear :) :) Ahh well so be it, but wondered if anyone else has experienced the same sh{t?

 

The only thing I can think of apart from my previous statement is that now that Leica is flooding the market with new brands i.e. "Q's" "T's" "SE's" and the like maybe that has something to do with it................hay what the hell do I know............................... I am just an old Roughneck

A dealer is never going to pay what you get on the private market...   I would guess you perhaps got 60-70% of the trending price on eBay.
Logged

Neil Williams

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 541
    • Neil's Photography

I am very happy with the deal that I got.
I am now using a new Leica S system that cost me nothing in terms of laying out more cash. I am now using a way superior camera than the Leica M gear that I was finding impossible to use due to my inability to nail focus with the rangefinder system..........all in all a win win situation
Logged

FelixWu

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 79

Such a good informative thread had turned into a crap debate between the CCD VS CMOS debate. I mean com'n Full Frame CMOS is still non-existent, I can't take a picture with it I am sorry. Yeah CMOS has better high iso performance but when you desire the best quality most would stick with base ISO regardless of CCD or CMOS. 
Logged

voidshatter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
    • www.500px.com/voidshatter

Such a good informative thread had turned into a crap debate between the CCD VS CMOS debate. I mean com'n Full Frame CMOS is still non-existent, I can't take a picture with it I am sorry. Yeah CMOS has better high iso performance but when you desire the best quality most would stick with base ISO regardless of CCD or CMOS.  

We are talking about low ISO performance - what are you thinking? 645 format is indeed crop for medium format film. You want full frame? At least shoot 12x20. There are also digital sensors in large format sizes.

I also provided numbers for cross grade for the original topic. Where are your numbers?
Logged

tjv

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 135

What is he thinking? Perhaps what many other posters here, including myself have said in other words already. That your constant, tedious and often insulting one-line conversation ran tired a long time ago? That perhaps it's time for you to move on?

We are talking about low ISO performance - what are you thinking? 645 format is indeed crop for medium format film. You want full frame? At least shoot 12x20. There are also digital sensors in large format sizes.

I also provided numbers for cross grade for the original topic. Where are your numbers?
Logged

voidshatter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
    • www.500px.com/voidshatter

What is he thinking? Perhaps what many other posters here, including myself have said in other words already. That your constant, tedious and often insulting one-line conversation ran tired a long time ago? That perhaps it's time for you to move on?


Feel free to defend your CCD. I'm done with it and I no longer need to carry the burden of making images worse than D800E.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2015, 06:44:15 am by Yunli Song »
Logged

DucatiTerminator

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 46

We are talking about low ISO performance - what are you thinking? 645 format is indeed crop for medium format film. You want full frame? At least shoot 12x20. There are also digital sensors in large format sizes.

I also provided numbers for cross grade for the original topic. Where are your numbers?

Did you get picked on a lot as a kid? Give it a rest. kthxbye.

Feel free to defend your CCD. I'm done with it and I no longer need to carry the burden of making images worse than D800E.

Promise?
Logged
La gallina vecchia fa buon brodo

voidshatter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
    • www.500px.com/voidshatter

Did you get picked on a lot as a kid? Give it a rest. kthxbye.

Promise?

I mean I'm done with defending the image quality of CCD, because I have got rid of it. I've tried various ways like bracketing and blending but failed. Good luck with you.

Registering alternative forum accounts can't change facts of image quality unfortunately. Sorry :)
« Last Edit: July 19, 2015, 01:20:51 pm by Yunli Song »
Logged

Ken R

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 849

Feel free to defend your CCD. I'm done with it and I no longer need to carry the burden of making images worse than D800E.

I guess for the type of images you make that is the case. But I tested the D800E right alongside a 645D and then took similar shots (from identical location and scene etc) with my IQ160 and Rodenstock 40 HR-W and the IQ160 blew the D800E away. The files were MUCH better. Granted it was not a long exposure situation, not high iso and the contrast in the scene was well within the range of both cameras. A big difference was the lens. Neither the 15mm Zeiss, the 14-24mm Nikon or the 24mm PC-E could get close to the quality one gets with the Rodenstock glass. I guess with the IQ150/250/350 one gets the best of both worlds (minus the amount of movements possible)

But no one can convince you of anything. You are right in what you say but you are also wrong. You are one stubborn individual.

I guess no good photography was ever made before the Sony Exmor came along. It was impossible right? It was too hard? To you everything but the EXMOR is junk and not worth paying a penny for.

« Last Edit: July 19, 2015, 02:09:55 pm by Ken R »
Logged

voidshatter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
    • www.500px.com/voidshatter

I guess for the type of images you make that is the case. But I tested the D800E right alongside a 645D and then took similar shots (from identical location and scene etc) with my IQ160 and Rodenstock 40 HR-W and the IQ160 blew the D800E away. The files were MUCH better. Granted it was not a long exposure situation, not high iso and the contrast in the scene was well within the range of both cameras. A big difference was the lens. Neither the 15mm Zeiss, the 14-24mm Nikon or the 24mm PC-E could get close to the quality one gets with the Rodenstock glass. I guess with the IQ150/250/350 one gets the best of both worlds (minus the amount of movements possible)

But no one can convince you of anything. You are right in what you say but you are also wrong. You are one stubborn individual.

I guess no good photography was ever made before the Sony Exmor came along. It was impossible right? It was too hard? To you everything but the EXMOR is junk and not worth paying a penny for.



What you say here is right. Of course I know that the Rodenstock lenses can blow away the Nikon/Zeiss lenses. Of course I know that for a single exposure where dynamic range is within control (e.g. portrait in studio) the CCD digital backs can blow away the D800E. Yes if you shoot outdoors with the requirement of single exposure and relatively low contrast then 60MP/80MP Dalsa with Rodenstock/some Schneider can destroy the D800E. What I was suggesting is that such case is perhaps a small fraction of all "worthy" photography (at least to my limited knowledge) for the following reason: as photography techniques advances, people tend to like pictures of high contrast scenes that are more challenging, and it's more and more difficult to achieve eye-candy effects of visual impact with the constraints above (i.e. single exposure, low contrast scene, outdoor). Of course there are many nice and classic pictures made within such constraints, but if you shoot within the limit of the IQ280 then it's probably impossible to shoot anything better than Joe Cornish can. However if you shoot with some different gear then you have the chance to shoot something different from his work. If you can bracket with a CCD, then I can also stitch with a CMOS (either flat or spherical). My original statement of "CCD has no advantage outdoors" is based on such conditions. I know it's a blowing statement but I still stand with it.

Examples of gear making a difference:

a) Suppose you do aerial of a sunset - there is no chance to bracket.

b) Can Joe Cornish shoot Thierry Cohen's Darkened Cities with merely an IQ280?

Again, the right tool for the job - 60MP/80MP Dalsa still have advantages in certain areas, but the justifications can be removed over time as technology advances, and depreciation is strongly associated with justification removals. P65+ used to be at $40K inductive price, but is now sold for only $8K - $10K privately among my friends. Does pixel and frame slow down the depreciation well enough?
« Last Edit: July 19, 2015, 02:56:08 pm by Yunli Song »
Logged

DucatiTerminator

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 46

I mean I'm done with defending the image quality of CCD, because I have got rid of it. I've tried various ways like bracketing and blending but failed. Good luck with you.
Thank you. I have yet to decide which way to go, but based on my current gear, either way will give me a great opportunity to grow. Maybe I'll go with both? Who knows, but I did come to this thread to see how P1 users feel about the stated thread topic, not CCD vs. CMOS.


Registering alternative forum accounts can't change facts of image quality unfortunately. Sorry :)
Are you suggesting I'm someone else with whom you have a current My-CMOS-DRdick-is-bigger-than-your-moreMP-CCDdick contest? If so, I'm very flattered, thanks. The knowledge, experience, and quality of images of the members here are things I aspire to acquire as I start this new journey. The fact I'm someone else means that I'm likely further along than I realized, LOL. FWIW, I've been DucatiTerminator for about 14 years, based on a bike I bought in 2001:



As you can see, I have a lot of room to grow with my photography, though admittedly this was a single test shot that I grabbed and used since the rest were all NSFW model shots. In case you still think I'm someone else, my Facebook is public, but you likely won't find any inspiring shot there, especially in the CCD vs. CMOS arena. I hear you are or sometimes are in the LA area. Feel free to look me up.

As long as we are making assumptions, let me give it a shot -- young, first generation opinionated Korean male who feels he has to prove himself right no matter what (I've noticed this quality in many first generation Korean men -- many among my friends and extended family -- is this a cultural thing?). Am I close? LOL

Alvin
Logged
La gallina vecchia fa buon brodo

synn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1235
    • My fine art portfolio

If the mods were so kind to push the shiny buttons on their control panel, they'd see that Mr. Song's IP matches up to a certain other gentleman who only posts in his defense in threads where Mr. Song is taking heat.
Ironic, I know.
Logged
my portfolio: www.sandeepmurali.com

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11296
    • Echophoto

Hi,

I recall that LensRentals was testing the Canon 24-70/2.8 LII lens. It is much better than the corresponding Nikon offering, but when the mediocre Nikon was paired up with Nikon D800 sensor it run rings around the Canon. Sensor resolution matters a lot and so does sensor size.

No doubt, an 80 MP sensor paired with a mediocre lens will outperform very good lenses handicapped by a medium resolution sensor. Now, the Rodenstock and Schneider HR lenses are really good lenses. Can you use tilt, they may even perform close to optimum using medium apertures.

On the other hand, our friend Chris Barret seems to be happy with his 20+ years old Hasselbald V/Zeiss lenses. I essentially have the very same lenses and I feel that they are OK, but not without issues.

My take from this is really:

  • There is no substitute for megapixels
  • There may be no substitute to square inches (of sensor estate)
  • Conditions matter a lot. Can we use Scheimpflug and shoot at medium apertures?|/li]
    • Whatever equipment we use, we may run into limitations.

    Decent equipment, like foretold Hasselblad V series lenses, can do a very good job if properly used.

    A knowledgable photographer will be able to make best use of the tools available and that expertise is probably more important than label on the lens or DxO-rating.

    Best regards
    Erik

    I guess for the type of images you make that is the case. But I tested the D800E right alongside a 645D and then took similar shots (from identical location and scene etc) with my IQ160 and Rodenstock 40 HR-W and the IQ160 blew the D800E away. The files were MUCH better. Granted it was not a long exposure situation, not high iso and the contrast in the scene was well within the range of both cameras. A big difference was the lens. Neither the 15mm Zeiss, the 14-24mm Nikon or the 24mm PC-E could get close to the quality one gets with the Rodenstock glass. I guess with the IQ150/250/350 one gets the best of both worlds (minus the amount of movements possible)

    But no one can convince you of anything. You are right in what you say but you are also wrong. You are one stubborn individual.

    I guess no good photography was ever made before the Sony Exmor came along. It was impossible right? It was too hard? To you everything but the EXMOR is junk and not worth paying a penny for.


« Last Edit: July 19, 2015, 04:06:10 pm by ErikKaffehr »
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

voidshatter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
    • www.500px.com/voidshatter

Thank you. I have yet to decide which way to go, but based on my current gear, either way will give me a great opportunity to grow. Maybe I'll go with both? Who knows, but I did come to this thread to see how P1 users feel about the stated thread topic, not CCD vs. CMOS.

If you still cannot see why depreciation is related to technology then there is no need to look into my posts. Just add me to your ignore list and be done with it :)

Are you suggesting I'm someone else with whom you have a current My-CMOS-DRdick-is-bigger-than-your-moreMP-CCDdick contest? If so, I'm very flattered, thanks. The knowledge, experience, and quality of images of the members here are things I aspire to acquire as I start this new journey. The fact I'm someone else means that I'm likely further along than I realized, LOL. FWIW, I've been DucatiTerminator for about 14 years, based on a bike I bought in 2001:

As you can see, I have a lot of room to grow with my photography, though admittedly this was a single test shot that I grabbed and used since the rest were all NSFW model shots. In case you still think I'm someone else, my Facebook is public, but you likely won't find any inspiring shot there, especially in the CCD vs. CMOS arena. I hear you are or sometimes are in the LA area. Feel free to look me up.

I can be anyone. Just find a random photographer on the internet.

As long as we are making assumptions, let me give it a shot -- young, first generation opinionated Korean male who feels he has to prove himself right no matter what (I've noticed this quality in many first generation Korean men -- many among my friends and extended family -- is this a cultural thing?). Am I close? LOL

Alvin

I don't have to prove anything to you :)
Logged

voidshatter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
    • www.500px.com/voidshatter

If the mods were so kind to push the shiny buttons on their control panel, they'd see that Mr. Song's IP matches up to a certain other gentleman who only posts in his defense in threads where Mr. Song is taking heat.
Ironic, I know.

If you are satisfied with your gear but don't feel it necessary to prove it to anyone then just keep enjoying it. There is no need for personal attacks like this. I've been a moderator for a photography forum for a while and I never bother to chase any IP address - the most professional trolls always use VPN to register forum accounts and spam around.
Logged

synn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1235
    • My fine art portfolio

If you are satisfied with your gear but don't feel it necessary to prove it to anyone then just keep enjoying it.

I'll start when you start taking your own advise, Song.
Logged
my portfolio: www.sandeepmurali.com

voidshatter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
    • www.500px.com/voidshatter

I'll start when you start taking your own advise, Song.

I believe you decided to add me to your ignore list - what makes it attractive for you to look into my posts again?  8)

I've been keen to show proof of image quality to people around the world, but probably not to you.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 13   Go Up