Shocking resale experience on P1 gear. Very disappointed!

[Christoph B.]

You do realise that every DSLR is a dead end itself, right? You can't upgrade the Sensor or the shutter or anything else. Sure, the firmware can get better but that's it.

My reasons for getting a 7 year old back was as follows:

1. Bigger surface with rather big pixels and a high resolution.
2. bigger viewfinder
3. possibility to go for a 80 and even 100MP back sometime in the future (the IQ backs are backwards compatible). So in 5-10 years I could upgrade to the 100MP if I have the money and still shoot with the DF+ or just replace the DF+ with a used XF and keep all my lenses and other stuff like cables etc The system isn't just the back and the camera.
4. I don't need technological fancy-schmanzy to get the photos I need.
5. If the camera breaks down I can replace the camera with another used AFD, AFDII, DF or DF+ and keep shooting. The back is very, very unlikely to fail. No moving party means no mechanical wearout, only an electrical failure is possible. And after 7 years of 0 issues that would be quite improbable.
6. I don't think that having new technology improves your photos. I look at photographers who were doing amazing stuff 10 years ago. 20 years ago. 30 years ago. 70 years ago. I just want to work with a big format and have the precision and comfort of digital. Everything else is only necessary when it's necessary - not when a new product or feature emerges.

4K capture. That's what I call a buzz word. Sure - my clients are a bit amazed by the 60 MP resolution but they are more amazed by the image quality in general and the tethering - a lot of magazines are not used to having a photographer work with a MFD camera or using a tethered solution on location. That's a big plus. But nobody complained about resolution when people used 20mp full frame DSLRs - and many still do.
Sure, when you're creating photos for ads that's something else but even you would either rent a system or have enough money to get the lasted stuff anyway.

I think when it comes to robust, reliable technology - such as MF backs - there's hardly a reason to cycle or sell the gear before its time - unless it has serious issues/drawbacks. I can understand someone wanting to sell a back if it limits his/her ability for long time exposure or high ISO usage. But if that's not the case and you're not limited by the resolution either - why sell it?

For me it makes a lot of sense to invest in used equipment, even if it's "discontinued", you can upgrade all the way up to the latest product line on the 2nd hand market for a real bargain and if you sell your 2nd hand stuff again you won't lose nearly as much as those did, that bought them new from the factory.

And the DF/DF+ is a pretty good system and very stable and reliable when you have the latest firmware and the battery pack. Of course it has limitations but let's be reasonable here: it's a camera. It takes pictures. It doesn't have to brush your teeth or tuck you in at night.

[Theodoros]

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 with at least 4K capture isn't a savvy option right now, unless it's offering something over and above, like 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 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.

I agree with you on most, but to your view on older MFDBs... The P-40+ is a very capable back indeed (as is the P-25+ (and all other backs of the "fat pixel" family out of other makers) & the (same but larger sensor size) P-65+ or the Sinar E-motion 75LV, or the Hasselblad CF series of backs), the problem with the particular back is (as you mention) with the "dead end" platform... If the back was for a different platform, or if it used adapter plates for different platforms (like the Sinarbacks or the Hassy CF series backs do), or if could work with the XF platform, it would have sold already... perhaps a bit lower than the asking price, but not by much...

Prices have definitely being affected by Hasselblad's pricing policy and by Pentax 645z which both share a new technology Cmos sensor at previously unimaginable cost, but many older CCD backs still have a few things to teach to modern backs... if the price and platform is right of course...

You are 20 years in photography and have invested a lot of money in equipment that is now obsolete... Well, I'm more than 35 years in photography and have never chosen equipment that became obsolete... I use Nikons, Contax 645 & Fuji GX-680 for many years now with Sinar 54H & CF-39MS backs... If I ever decide to replace a part of my equipment, I know my loss (if a any) will be of minimum with respect to my investment... Some of the equipment I use, (the Fuji GX-680 5 lens system for instance) I bought S/H for peanuts, my first C645 kit, I bought new 11 years ago at less than half price taking advantage of the discontinuation of the system... My backs I bought S/H in perfect condition for very sensible prices too. I now will replace the GX-680 system with a Rollei X-act-2, which I highly modify as to use my new Sony A-7II or my MFDBs (in multishot mode too) with it  by simply detaching the Sony and attaching the backs or vice versa... The lenses will be out of my existing system from 24mm up to 210mm and will work with full dedication of aperture control (electronically) with either leaf shutter (if a lens with leaf shutter is used - like the GX-680 lenses or Rollei 6000 system lenses) or focal plane shutter. Both front and rear standards will be corrected for true yaw free operation despite the lens used too. My Contax lenses work on my Nikons with full dedication and AF... I now use the minimum of equipment and can do with optimal quality all possible photographic tasks at the maximum possible quality level.... From shooting in the dark to the highest detail and colour accuracy repro work... 

If I have one advice I can give to anybody, is to pre-calculate their investments well and look into the future... One can only hope not to "bleed" if he foresee into the gear he invests that it can live and perform up to the future standards.

Imagine if instead of the Contax system I would have invested in the Mamiya AFD platform? ...now I would be trapped under P1's policies, couldn't use my multishot backs on an XF body and couldn't share my glass on my Nikons either and would have to invest on a different series of ultra expensive lenses and electronic shutters for use on a view camera... not a penny less than a fortune...

[Bo Dez]

I agree with you on most, but to your view on older MFDBs... The P-40+ is a very capable back indeed (as is the P-25+ (and all other backs of the "fat pixel" family out of other makers) & the (same but larger sensor size) P-65+ or the Sinar E-motion 75LV, or the Hasselblad CF series of backs), the problem with the particular back is (as you mention) with the "dead end" platform... If the back was for a different platform, or if it used adapter plates for different platforms (like the Sinarbacks or the Hassy CF series backs do), or if could work with the XF platform, it would have sold already... perhaps a bit lower than the asking price, but not by much...

Prices have definitely being affected by Hasselblad's pricing policy and by Pentax 645z which both share a new technology Cmos sensor at previously unimaginable cost, but many older CCD backs still have a few things to teach to modern backs... if the price and platform is right of course...

You are 20 years in photography and have invested a lot of money in equipment that is now obsolete... Well, I'm more than 35 years in photography and have never chosen equipment that became obsolete... I use Nikons, Contax 645 & Fuji GX-680 for many years now with Sinar 54H & CF-39MS backs... If I ever decide to replace a part of my equipment, I know my loss (if a any) will be of minimum with respect to my investment... Some of the equipment I use, (the Fuji GX-680 5 lens system for instance) I bought S/H for peanuts, my first C645 kit, I bought new 11 years ago at less than half price taking advantage of the discontinuation of the system... My backs I bought S/H in perfect condition for very sensible prices too. I now will replace the GX-680 system with a Rollei X-act-2, which I highly modify as to use my new Sony A-7II or my MFDBs (in multishot mode too) with it  by simply detaching the Sony and attaching the backs or vice versa... The lenses will be out of my existing system from 24mm up to 210mm and will work with full dedication of aperture control (electronically) with either leaf shutter (if a lens with leaf shutter is used - like the GX-680 lenses or Rollei 6000 system lenses) or focal plane shutter. Both front and rear standards will be corrected for true yaw free operation despite the lens used too. My Contax lenses work on my Nikons with full dedication and AF... I now use the minimum of equipment and can do with optimal quality all possible photographic tasks at the maximum possible quality level.... From shooting in the dark to the highest detail and colour accuracy repro work... 

If I have one advice I can give to anybody, is to pre-calculate their investments well and look into the future... One can only hope not to "bleed" if he foresee into the gear he invests that it can live and perform up to the future standards.

Imagine if instead of the Contax system I would have invested in the Mamiya AFD platform? ...now I would be trapped under P1's policies, couldn't use my multishot backs on an XF body and couldn't share my glass on my Nikons either and would have to invest on a different series of ultra expensive lenses and electronic shutters for use on a view camera... not a penny less than a fortune...

My obsolete gear I can still use with backs but have no interest in. RZ, Hassy V, Mamiya 645. all of these have lost interest (from buyers) and resale value. I had a Fuji GX but I consider that obsolete too (for my use, YMMV) - I'm glad I sold it when I did, a capable camera but too big to be useful in my use and experience. I have always been a Canon user, have a lot of older L lenses (not bought any in 6 years) which have recently slumped in value too - they have become somewhat obsolete, or at least, less favourable that the modern lenses. Witnessing all of this is one of the reasons i am invested, and continue to invest so heavily in Leica M, it's IQ is excellent but is it's resale can be incredible with the right buys - My 75mm Summilux, for example, has more than doubled in value since I bought it and it seems it's going to go a lot higher. Same for the f1 Noctilux and 35 Summilux aspherical. Too bad the M system bodies have somewhat levelled in performance - but the value has not, and it easily gets the job done, hiring 60-80MP when needed. I think the safest and smartest buy these days in terms of old tech and MFD CCD is the Leica S2-P because investing in that means you can set yourself up in a system that is moving forward into the future with first rate lenses and have excellent IQ at low ISO. I would ***personally*** (again, YMMV) choose this over an equivilant Phase One or Leaf back P40, P45 etc.

[Christoph B.]

Well that's you loss and a gain for everyone looking for great gear on the 2nd hand market I'd say. 

The Hasselblad V System is still great - put a PhaseOne back on it and you're ready to go! The GX-680 is also amazing, not only for film but with the right adapter for digital stuff too and they're all work horses. Actually all the gear you listed is excellent (okay, you're not able to use the 645 with modern backs (at least I don't think so) but  you can still use the lenses etc).

I think it's a mistake to always buy and sell stuff as if your life depended on it (unless you're a dealer of course ) - as a photographer you're not dependent on having the lastest gear or the shiniest case. It might impress your customers but that will fade as soon as they see you fumbling around, trying to get something to work because you're not familiar with your tool.

Leicas are a different subject. They're valued for their name and the image behind it, especially the M-series. Without that image they wouldn't sell well - look at the Leica R-series. My grandpa bought one years ago and never really touched it. He bought it for thousands of €/$ with a 50mm 2.0 - now the camera is worth less than 300-400€, even though it's pretty much unused.

If PhaseOne had been around for as along as Leica has and had a red dot somewhere - who knows? But it's a mistake to believe that resale value should be the main reason for acquiring your gear if you truely intent to work with it.

[Bo Dez]

Well that's you loss and a gain for everyone looking for great gear on the 2nd hand market I'd say. 

The Hasselblad V System is still great - put a PhaseOne back on it and you're ready to go! The GX-680 is also amazing, not only for film but with the right adapter for digital stuff too and they're all work horses. Actually all the gear you listed is excellent (okay, you're not able to use the 645 with modern backs (at least I don't think so) but  you can still use the lenses etc).

I think it's a mistake to always buy and sell stuff as if your life depended on it (unless you're a dealer of course ) - as a photographer you're not dependent on having the lastest gear or the shiniest case. It might impress your customers but that will fade as soon as they see you fumbling around, trying to get something to work because you're not familiar with your tool.

Leicas are a different subject. They're valued for their name and the image behind it, especially the M-series. Without that image they wouldn't sell well - look at the Leica R-series. My grandpa bought one years ago and never really touched it. He bought it for thousands of €/$ with a 50mm 2.0 - now the camera is worth less than 300-400€, even though it's pretty much unused.

If PhaseOne had been around for as along as Leica has and had a red dot somewhere - who knows? But it's a mistake to believe that resale value should be the main reason for acquiring your gear if you truely intent to work with it.

I'm not saying that people can't use the gear. If you can and you don't mind the above reasons then sure, go for it. It's not a loss for me because it has been paid for several times over with the work I've done with it, by the time I come to upgrade it or move on from it for any reason. I don't buy things unless it has a specific purpose, and I write that into my business model and plan. I don't upgrade until it has performed it's task and made the money it needs to have to be financially viable - it's not rocket science is it?

I've been using Phase One on various platforms for about 15 years. Mamiya RZ+645/Phase One DF, DF+, Hasselblad H+V. Hasselblad V is OK up to P45 in my experience and use, the H is better for P65, IQx80 and beyond, but it's lenses don't have the magic (IMO) of the Zeiss V's. It's a compromise I've lived with when I need the higher resolution. Mamiya RZ is making a comeback as a film camera at the moment, but still the resale value makes it a pointless sale. It's not my preferred choice for Digital back use with the crop factor and wake up cable mess. The Phase One, IMO is a great platform with monstrous IQ but the lenses are wanting, ****IMO*** - they do nothing for me, but are definitely better since the Schneider venture.

Who said I buy and sell stuff as though my life depended on it? Who said I fumble with gear in front of clients? :-/ Resale is a bonus, and if you can have a system which offers it, why wouldn't that bonus be considered favourable? Buying Leica M for me was more about what it offered as a tool - but the resale was a significant enticement.

Yes, Leica M is a another beast entirely. But that is the topic of the thread. If you want resale you have to buy where resale is favourable and live with what compromises it may present. To some that seems a pointless endeavour, for some it is not. There are few systems that give that level of resale interest -  Leica M, for me, is close to perfect. I love the IQ, the lenses truly are magical and the camera is a joy to use. The resale is a completely bonus, though, ironically, because the system is so good I have little interest in selling it and I don't think I ever will. The Achilles heel at this point is the resolution limited at 24MP, and no real sign this will change in Leica land.

[Theodoros]

...... I think the safest and smartest buy these days in terms of old tech and MFD CCD is the Leica S2-P because investing in that means you can set yourself up in a system that is moving forward into the future with first rate lenses and have excellent IQ at low ISO. I would ***personally*** (again, YMMV) choose this over an equivilant Phase One or Leaf back P40, P45 etc.

Yes, the Leica S (any Leica S) seems a very good future-proof investment... Especially if one has invested on Contax 645 or a Hasselblad H system in the past and thus already has very capable lenses for the system... I can't stop thinking that an addition of a Leica S-007 into my system, it would:

1. Replace completely my Nikon system, which by selling it, would finance the Leica body itself,
2. Add a modern Cmos single shot MFDB in my system, completely compatible with the existing series of lenses from 24mm up to 300mm (210 + mutar 1.4x) that would then be shared between the two systems (24mm lens is my latest addition in Contax mount, by converting the ultra sharp & distortionless Nikkor 24mm f3.5 PCE -with full dediction- for Contax 645 mount).
3. Would save even more space and minimise considerably the equipment I have to curry... (only the Contax system and three of the GX-680 lenses + the view camera and the Leica S body... nothing else for any photographic task imaginable.
4. Improve image quality considerably over the Nikon bodies, but over the single shot quality of the MFDBs too...
5. Would secure the system's quality to last even more through the future...

Clearly deciding on the Contax 645 for my MF platform, was the smartest thing I ever done... I would strongly recommend any newcomer to MF to consider investing on a S/H Contax 645...

[Bo Dez]

Yes, the Leica S (any Leica S) seems a very good future-proof investment... Especially if one has invested on Contax 645 or a Hasselblad H system in the past and thus already has very capable lenses for the system... I can't stop thinking that an addition of a Leica S-007 into my system, it would:

1. Replace completely my Nikon system, which by selling it, would finance the Leica body itself,
2. Add a modern Cmos single shot MFDB in my system, completely compatible with the existing series of lenses from 24mm up to 300mm (210 + mutar 1.4x) that would then be shared between the two systems (24mm lens is my latest addition in Contax mount, by converting the ultra sharp & distortionless Nikkor 24mm f3.5 PCE -with full dediction- for Contax 645 mount).
3. Would save even more space and minimise considerably the equipment I have to curry... (only the Contax system and three of the GX-680 lenses + the view camera and the Leica S body... nothing else for any photographic task imaginable.
4. Improve image quality considerably over the Nikon bodies, but over the single shot quality of the MFDBs too...
5. Would secure the system's quality to last even more through the future...

Clearly deciding on the Contax 645 for my MF platform, was the smartest thing I ever done... I would strongly recommend any newcomer to MF to consider investing on a S/H Contax 645...

I whole heartedly agree. The Contax lenses are relevant today (though are somewhat legacy looking in their rendering - something I personally like but others don't) and the S system is superb. The more and more I look at the S, the more it seems likely it's in my future and the most recent pricing makes it a better proposition with both initial acquisition and depreciation.

[Gigi]

Good mechanical equipment used to be understandable: buy the best you can afford, take good care of it, and there was a reasonable floor to selling it.

Electronics are a different matter: for PCs, consider a straight-line depreciation to 0 value in 3-5 years. While harsh, it puts things in a different and clear light. Then anything better than that can be considered gravy.

OK... maybe its more than that... but its not the same as the older analog world. 

[Christoph B.]

I'm not saying that people can't use the gear. If you can and you don't mind the above reasons then sure, go for it. It's not a loss for me because it has been paid for several times over with the work I've done with it, by the time I come to upgrade it or move on from it for any reason. I don't buy things unless it has a specific purpose, and I write that into my business model and plan. I don't upgrade until it has performed it's task and made the money it needs to have to be financially viable - it's not rocket science is it?

I've been using Phase One on various platforms for about 15 years. Mamiya RZ+645/Phase One DF, DF+, Hasselblad H+V. Hasselblad V is OK up to P45 in my experience and use, the H is better for P65, IQx80 and beyond, but it's lenses don't have the magic (IMO) of the Zeiss V's. It's a compromise I've lived with when I need the higher resolution. Mamiya RZ is making a comeback as a film camera at the moment, but still the resale value makes it a pointless sale. It's not my preferred choice for Digital back use with the crop factor and wake up cable mess. The Phase One, IMO is a great platform with monstrous IQ but the lenses are wanting, ****IMO*** - they do nothing for me, but are definitely better since the Schneider venture.

Of course it's not rocket science - but it doesn't sound very reasonable either. I don't understand what you mean by "performed its task" - do you mean you buy a completely new system for a new job? Or that the image quality isn't enough for you personally or for your clients?
What's the reason for switching from Mamiya 645, 67  and Hasselblad to PhaseOne and Leica?

I hope you don't think I'm trying to annoy you, I'm just curious!

Who said I buy and sell stuff as though my life depended on it? Who said I fumble with gear in front of clients? :-/ Resale is a bonus, and if you can have a system which offers it, why wouldn't that bonus be considered favourable? Buying Leica M for me was more about what it offered as a tool - but the resale was a significant enticement.

Oh no I didn't mean you personally, I meant I know a lot of people who cycle their gear continuously and it never seems like they know their gear at all while doing so. I understand now that you really work long with your stuff and then sell it, I'm not sure why but I'm keen to know the reason behind it!

Yes, Leica M is a another beast entirely. But that is the topic of the thread. If you want resale you have to buy where resale is favourable and live with what compromises it may present. To some that seems a pointless endeavour, for some it is not. There are few systems that give that level of resale interest -  Leica M, for me, is close to perfect. I love the IQ, the lenses truly are magical and the camera is a joy to use. The resale is a completely bonus, though, ironically, because the system is so good I have little interest in selling it and I don't think I ever will. The Achilles heel at this point is the resolution limited at 24MP, and no real sign this will change in Leica land.

Hmm that's trues but then again resale value drops as you keep using it, so I wouldn't suggest it's a good idea for a professional photographer to buy his main gear thinking of how much value he'll be able to get back when he's selling it.

I like to pick a system and stay with it as long as possible - only when I have multiple systems at once and I realise that I don't use one I'll sell it. Resale value is nice but I actually learned to prefer used stuff and secondly it limits my choices.

[jacsin]

Yes, the Leica S (any Leica S) seems a very good future-proof investment... Especially if one has invested on Contax 645 or a Hasselblad H system in the past and thus already has very capable lenses for the system... I can't stop thinking that an addition of a Leica S-007 into my system, it would:

1. Replace completely my Nikon system, which by selling it, would finance the Leica body itself,
2. Add a modern Cmos single shot MFDB in my system, completely compatible with the existing series of lenses from 24mm up to 300mm (210 + mutar 1.4x) that would then be shared between the two systems (24mm lens is my latest addition in Contax mount, by converting the ultra sharp & distortionless Nikkor 24mm f3.5 PCE -with full dediction- for Contax 645 mount).
3. Would save even more space and minimise considerably the equipment I have to curry... (only the Contax system and three of the GX-680 lenses + the view camera and the Leica S body... nothing else for any photographic task imaginable.
4. Improve image quality considerably over the Nikon bodies, but over the single shot quality of the MFDBs too...
5. Would secure the system's quality to last even more through the future...

Clearly deciding on the Contax 645 for my MF platform, was the smartest thing I ever done... I would strongly recommend any newcomer to MF to consider investing on a S/H Contax 645...

Having just sold off my Leica S system I can assure you there is a significant loss in value as with any other MF system. Leica M lenses are the only pieces that retain their value to some extent (excluding rarities), even the M bodies drop dramatically once a new version is announced.
I agree with your points, but resale value is pretty poor. 

Btw your idea of using Contax lenses with the S 007 is what was recommended by a Leica rep until they sort out their AF failures.

[Bo Dez]

Of course it's not rocket science - but it doesn't sound very reasonable either. I don't understand what you mean by "performed its task" - do you mean you buy a completely new system for a new job? Or that the image quality isn't enough for you personally or for your clients?
What's the reason for switching from Mamiya 645, 67  and Hasselblad to PhaseOne and Leica?

I hope you don't think I'm trying to annoy you, I'm just curious!
Oh no I didn't mean you personally, I meant I know a lot of people who cycle their gear continuously and it never seems like they know their gear at all while doing so. I understand now that you really work long with your stuff and then sell it, I'm not sure why but I'm keen to know the reason behind it!
Hmm that's trues but then again resale value drops as you keep using it, so I wouldn't suggest it's a good idea for a professional photographer to buy his main gear thinking of how much value he'll be able to get back when he's selling it.

I like to pick a system and stay with it as long as possible - only when I have multiple systems at once and I realise that I don't use one I'll sell it. Resale value is nice but I actually learned to prefer used stuff and secondly it limits my choices.

Performed it's task = get the job done to expectation and specification, writing it's value based on $x amount per job, which is worked out separate to other expenses, rates and fees etc. So for example. 4 jobs per month at $500 per job = $2000 per month, or $24000 per year. So essentially you treat it as though each job is a rental. Once you have made your money back then that is what I mean by "performed it's task". I've never bought a system for one job - I would just hire in that instance.

I listed some of the reasons why the switch around my previous post but just quickly:

GX680 - Incredibly capable but cumbersome. Limiting for what I did, especially since my style went from tripod to handheld.
RZ was incredible and first choice for film, a good balance of size and tremendous IQ. annoying with digital because of the crop and extra wake up cables etc.
645/DF/DF+ - OK but I don't like the lenses, I found af problematic, it's an uninspiring system to me.
V - my favourite MF but limited to P45+ in my experience. When I needed the P65+ it was suddenly a lot more involving with focus and reliability and the lenses were showing their limits.
H - Most efficient and easiest to use. Super bright viewfinder makes for far better focusing with high res backs, better af, superior design, superior build tolerances, but ergonomically challenged at times, suffers with poor connection issues with Phase Backs, don't like the lenses as much as the Zeiss V's.

I guess here is how it is for me:
My first consideration with gear is necessity. eg. If I need the extra resolution then that will win over rendering or ease of use/handling.
Coming a close second is rendering. The way the pictures look.
Third, probably practicality/workflow/ease of use
Fourth most likely how much I like using the camera. ie I love using the M and the V hassy. The H Hassy is OK, the Phase One DF, not very much. I've not tried the XF yet, but it looks good.
Fifth, maybe, or maybe even less significant is resale or long term value. Even if I can get some of the money back, then it's a bonus. But is fun to buy a lens and have it double in value and continue to rise (e.g. Leica 75mm Summilux).

For the past 4 years I have been using 2 systems only. Leica M for almost all of my editorial (thought this is changing) or anything that the small file size will allow and Hassy H/Phase One for Commercial that needs higher res or something I need cropping flexibility with. These two systems have served me exceptionally well and I have no need to do anything drastic, though the Leica S does have quite a lot of allure.

[Bo Dez]

Having just sold off my Leica S system I can assure you there is a significant loss in value as with any other MF system. Leica M lenses are the only pieces that retain their value to some extent (excluding rarities), even the M bodies drop dramatically once a new version is announced.
I agree with your points, but resale value is pretty poor. 

Btw your idea of using Contax lenses with the S 007 is what was recommended by a Leica rep until they sort out their AF failures.

You date your bodies but marry your lenses. You really can't expect to get much back from well used bodies, no matter the brand.

[Bo Dez]

Just wanted to add - I think it's safe to say that disappointment on resale is more apparent, and quite likely to become even more apparent with digital photography gear. I think it's more important to look at what the camera has done for you in it's life time. How much enjoyment it has given you, how much work it has given you, how it has contributed to your style, artistic progression and how many pictures you have made with it that make you happy. Those things are eternal and more important. Even if my Leica M kit had sweet f.a. resale value then I would be ultimately happy because those pictures I have made with it I love the most and it's value has been fully utilised.

[Christoph B.]

Performed it's task = get the job done to expectation and specification, writing it's value based on $x amount per job, which is worked out separate to other expenses, rates and fees etc. So for example. 4 jobs per month at $500 per job = $2000 per month, or $24000 per year. So essentially you treat it as though each job is a rental. Once you have made your money back then that is what I mean by "performed it's task". I've never bought a system for one job - I would just hire in that instance.

I listed some of the reasons why the switch around my previous post but just quickly:

GX680 - Incredibly capable but cumbersome. Limiting for what I did, especially since my style went from tripod to handheld.
RZ was incredible and first choice for film, a good balance of size and tremendous IQ. annoying with digital because of the crop and extra wake up cables etc.
645/DF/DF+ - OK but I don't like the lenses, I found af problematic, it's an uninspiring system to me.
V - my favourite MF but limited to P45+ in my experience. When I needed the P65+ it was suddenly a lot more involving with focus and reliability and the lenses were showing their limits.
H - Most efficient and easiest to use. Super bright viewfinder makes for far better focusing with high res backs, better af, superior design, superior build tolerances, but ergonomically challenged at times, suffers with poor connection issues with Phase Backs, don't like the lenses as much as the Zeiss V's.

I guess here is how it is for me:
My first consideration with gear is necessity. eg. If I need the extra resolution then that will win over rendering or ease of use/handling.
Coming a close second is rendering. The way the pictures look.
Third, probably practicality/workflow/ease of use
Fourth most likely how much I like using the camera. ie I love using the M and the V hassy. The H Hassy is OK, the Phase One DF, not very much. I've not tried the XF yet, but it looks good.
Fifth, maybe, or maybe even less significant is resale or long term value. Even if I can get some of the money back, then it's a bonus. But is fun to buy a lens and have it double in value and continue to rise (e.g. Leica 75mm Summilux).

For the past 4 years I have been using 2 systems only. Leica M for almost all of my editorial (thought this is changing) or anything that the small file size will allow and Hassy H/Phase One for Commercial that needs higher res or something I need cropping flexibility with. These two systems have served me exceptionally well and I have no need to do anything drastic, though the Leica S does have quite a lot of allure.

Thank you, now I understand your reasons for switching gear!

For me image quality (including resolution & rendering) is the main aspect, handling is second - if both is good I like the camera even if it has quirks or is too heavy for handheld use and I wouldn't switch for any other reason. I started with 35mm about 10-11 years ago and quickly switched to medium format and large format, where I could enjoy the bigger frame and higher levels of detail - but film is very cumbersome to work with and that's why I kept on working with digital 35mm, bought a 5D mkII and used it for 7 years - but I never liked its image quality and the way it rendered the images and tethering was very slow and unstable. That being said my clients never were bothered by this, the resolution was good enough for magazine prints.
Now that I have sold the 5D and instead bought a 2nd hand P65+ with DF+ I'm very happy, it delivers amazing image quality and the lenses are great - and if one day i the future I decide that I need more megapixels I can always upgrade to 80 or 100 mpx and keep the rest of the system - and that'll save me a lot of money which I can invest in other stuff
In short - I'm happy as can be and looking forward to working with the back as soon as it gets back from being serviced!

[Theodoros]

.......I agree with your points, but resale value is pretty poor....... 

I know, but I don't think it will apply for the S-007 the same as with the S-2 or the 006... There are several reasons why all MF CCD equipment (up to now) has great devaluation figures in the S/H market... Main reason IMO, is the recent introduction of Cmos sensors which are dominating the market, another reason is the major alteration of the pricing policies of both Hasselblad and Leica for new equipment, which made the modern equipment considerably more affordable than it used to be in the past, another reason is the high quality LV functioning which is very important to many photographers, but above all, one has to admit that older to S-007 Leicas couldn't replace DSLRs for Low light ability and speed, which enforced many photographers to build a DSLR system in parallel to their previous Leica S... Thus, I think that the S-007, having overcome all the above mentioned issues, will keep considerably higher prices than previous Leica S versions.... At least you was able to find a customer for your Leica S (even at a low price)... there other MF owners of different platforms (Hasselblad H3/H3II/H4D & Mamiya/P1 AFD to DF) that are struggling to find a customer at all for their equipment... 

Never the less, I'm not thinking to add an S-007 having its resale value at the back of mind, as I think that even if Leica upgrades to an S-008 in the future (inevitably), there can't be much improvement in IQ as to justify the expense.... I predicted the same to friends when Nikon released the D800E... Look at its resale value if compared to the one of the D810... it's not much different, is it? I do predict that the same will happen with modern Cmos MF gear (P1 excluded because of their insane pricing policy), as most of the issues that caused the devaluation (same as the up to the S-006 issues as they are described above) have been taken care off by the makers...  Still, if the O/P had his back for Contax 645 platform, he would have sold it by now and I'm sure the existence of the Contax 645 platform is responsible for previous body Leica S owners to ...find customers for their S/H bodies, either directly (by selling the body to a C645 owner) or indirectly (by the C645 owners consuming Leica S bodies and thus keeping offerings in balance with demand)...

All the above said, I have to say that I find my self very fortunate not only to have invested in the Contax 645 system, but to also own two multishot CCD backs and both with interchangeable plates for different platforms... It may be true that CCD backs prices are dropping faster than ever, but to the contradict, Multishot backs demand (and thus prices) are rising considerably as they become rarer by the time and what they can do is priceless to many other photographers...

[JV]

Btw your idea of using Contax lenses with the S 007 is what was recommended by a Leica rep until they sort out their AF failures.

I just sent one my lenses in for repair due to AF failure... 3 weeks ago and no estimate yet after sending two reminders requesting one... not so pleased with Leica at the moment...

If the Leica CEO wants to transform his company into a/o also a services company (see link below) he has got a long way to go...
http://blog.leica-camera.com/2016/03/28/constant-change/

[sbernthal]

The rules for Canon/Nikon used market and P1/Hass used market are not the same.

In Canon, normally if you buy an item, you can sell it 5-10 years later for 80-90% of the original value. Bodies depreciate faster.
Why is that? Because product generations are relatively long. Once Canon release a lens, normally the next one doesn't come before 10 years. This protects resale value.

With P1, at least in the last 10 years, P1 was extremely aggressive in R&D and in closing the gap it had vs. Hass and then opening a new one. This means, that you buy an item which is top of the line at the time, and pay many thousands of dollars. Then just a couple of years later there's a new model which is better and everybody wants it. Meaning the buyers that can pay will be willing to pay for the top of the line only. This market has a limited volume. The more used equipment is passed around, the more bargain hunters are finding themselves with very nice systems, that don't really require upgrading anymore. Used backs values were much better 5 years ago before the trickle down segment of the market got saturated.

This is the price you pay for being the customer of a company that keeps releasing new products. They are not responsible for the second hand market. You are not buying items that are supposed to excel in value retention. They are making the best cameras and lenses they can make, and the previous attempts drop sharply in value. I do think that XF will keep very well in value, as there will probably not be a replacement any time soon. The same applies to Schneider lenses. But they have to release something - they have that R&D department which is very good and it wouldn't make a lot of sense for them to fire all the engineers and just run with what they have for the next ten years - which will be ideal for resale value.

[eronald]

Hi,

 Nice thoughts.

 A different line of reasoning is that Sony has become very agressive and started releasing hi-rez sensors which are much more flexible than the old CCD sensors that were around until 2 years ago, causing a bunch of people to move to Nikon, D800, then  Sony A7RII, and some to move to the new Sony-powered MF cameras. And Phase themselves chose not to make their XF body compatible with the P+ backs, so everything P+ is now basically orphaned. Also, Phase dealers and Hassy  are selling warranteed  refurbs into the used market. As a result the used market is now saturated.

Edmund

The rules for Canon/Nikon used market and P1/Hass used market are not the same.

In Canon, normally if you buy an item, you can sell it 5-10 years later for 80-90% of the original value. Bodies depreciate faster.
Why is that? Because product generations are relatively long. Once Canon release a lens, normally the next one doesn't come before 10 years. This protects resale value.

With P1, at least in the last 10 years, P1 was extremely aggressive in R&D and in closing the gap it had vs. Hass and then opening a new one. This means, that you buy an item which is top of the line at the time, and pay many thousands of dollars. Then just a couple of years later there's a new model which is better and everybody wants it. Meaning the buyers that can pay will be willing to pay for the top of the line only. This market has a limited volume. The more used equipment is passed around, the more bargain hunters are finding themselves with very nice systems, that don't really require upgrading anymore. Used backs values were much better 5 years ago before the trickle down segment of the market got saturated.

This is the price you pay for being the customer of a company that keeps releasing new products. They are not responsible for the second hand market. You are not buying items that are supposed to excel in value retention. They are making the best cameras and lenses they can make, and the previous attempts drop sharply in value. I do think that XF will keep very well in value, as there will probably not be a replacement any time soon. The same applies to Schneider lenses. But they have to release something - they have that R&D department which is very good and it wouldn't make a lot of sense for them to fire all the engineers and just run with what they have for the next ten years - which will be ideal for resale value.

[Christoph B.]

They are not responsible for the second hand market. You are not buying items that are supposed to excel in value retention.

Well...yes and no. I think the way they estimate the value of used backs for their trade-in program is very much a point of reference for many users.
And I think the PhaseOne lenses keep their value about as well as Canon lenses do - keep in mind that you're not 'forced' to use Phase lenses, you can also use Mamiya lenses and they'll work just as good - so people on the 2nd hand market (who want to save money after all) can get the same or similar performance for very little money these days.

If you want to get a 120mm macro you can chose between the old manual 120mm Mamiya 'A', the Mamiya 120mm Macro for AF (without AF) , the "D" Version, the PhaseOne without AF, the PhaseOne 'D', the PhaseOne with AF and the LS version...
With Canon in the other hand you can't use legacy lenses and that's kind of a big deal (or rather it was a big deal back when they ditched the FD-mount). I'd say the reason why PhaseOne lenses have a comparatively "low" resale value (compared to their initial investment) it that they were 'nice' enough to keep the Mamiya 645 mount. At least until now, who knows what future developments will bring...

[sbernthal]

Hi,

 Nice thoughts.

 A different line of reasoning is that Sony has become very agressive and started releasing hi-rez sensors which are much more flexible than the old CCD sensors that were around until 2 years ago, causing a bunch of people to move to Nikon, D800, then  Sony A7RII, and some to move to the new Sony-powered MF cameras. And Phase themselves chose not to make their XF body compatible with the P+ backs, so everything P+ is now basically orphaned. Also, Phase dealers and Hassy  are selling warranteed  refurbs into the used market. As a result the used market is now saturated.

Edmund

I didn't talk about external influences which do exist. Don't exist as much for Canon as normally once you get into that you stay there, unless you change the type of your photography.