Merit in keeping camera bodies?
 

When upgrading to the latest and greatest camera body, is there any merit in keeping an obsolete body?

I sold my previous body after I upgraded but how many members keep and collect?

I assume you're not talking about a back-up body? which, is the logical position for an usurped body. More about hoarding and not wanting to let a good servant go for silly money?

I don't tend to sell my old cameras, the proceeds are so minimal that I'd rather keep them or give them to a family member or close friend. I did get exceptional prices for some Contax cameras that I was given prior to the Kyocera pull-out, I couldn't resist 'offing' these.

More about hoarding, is there any merit?

Do you think an early digital SLR camera would be worth something in twenty or thirty years?

20 to 30 years time? I think not. 50 or 60 years time then maybe. These items are being produced in massive quantities, far more so that the production volumes seen with the equivalent models of 50 years ago. Because of this, the rarity of dSLRs will not be very great until a much longer period has elapsed. Add in to this, the 'antiques roadshow' effect, where people realise the potential value of 'old junk', and it will take a long time before the availability of old dSLRs becomes sufficiently rare to warrant any monetary value. There will be particular models, landmarks in the development of dSLRs that will attain classic status. These will become valuable items when the nostalgia factor becomes greater than the supply available.

I've kept the last film SLR I used in anger (Pentax z-50P) because, as Andy has said, it's not worth any money at all, nor is it ever likely to be. It's worth more to me than anybody else, not for any sentimental reason, but purely as a tool should I need to use it.

I have my 68 year old Rolleiflex, bought for £60 at a camera fair about 10 or 11 years ago. This was bought as a nice piece of engineering, not as an investment. Likewise, my K1000 was bought 2nd hand for £42 (the only item I've even won on an ebay auction), because it's a beautiful piece of engineering. Due to their simplicty by today's standards, both of these items still work, and work well. I don't think my z-50P will work so well in 50 years time. I don't think by *ist DS will work at all in 50 years time, and even if it does, there probably won't be a compatible infrastructure (computer, software, memory card, etc) around to support it. I've got more chance than most of being able to get batteries for it though.

Duncan.

I think some of the original FD Sony Mavicas may get some money in years to come. Though even now, what you going to do with a photo on a floppy disc?
I can't think of any compact digital cameras that are classics and well remembered, maybe the Nikon Coolpix 950 is an exception.

It will probably come down to the old phrase "supply and demand" (at the time). As Duncan states, certain film cameras are "nice pieces of engineering" that are usually appreciated by us of "a certain age" :)
I still have a couple of Zenith SLR cameras with a number of lenses, also a sub-miniature Minolta 16-P, although one would hardly refer to these as a nice piece of engineering - the Zeniths were all I could afford at the time.

Roger

Andy, maybe "in the eye of the beholder" applies in this situation?

Roger

Not really, it is regarded by many in the trade as a landmark camera, a compact digital with manual control was very novel in the late 1990's.

Sorry Andy, I should have made it clear that I was referring to the first part in the quote :- I can't think of any compact digital cameras that are classics and well remembered, not the superb Nikon camera.

Roger

Ah, no problem.

Note i didn't say 'fondly remembered', I sincerely hope no one fondly remembers the floppy Sonys ;)

I've kept most of my old stuff but I have, over the years sold/traded-in/given away:

Praktica L
Praktica LLC
35mm/50mm/135mm/400mm lenses for above
Olympus RC
Olympus OM2n
Zuiko 75-150mm F4 and 300mm F4.5 lenses
Kodak (126) Instamatic 200

...oh, and a Leica M4 50th Anniversary model with 35mm Summicron (probably worth more than everything photographical that I own now!)

Aaah nostalgia, comes to us all in time.

In respect of cameras I am sure that younger members coming into photography in the digital age, will in later years reflect on years gone by. The means of recording an image in 30 years time will no doubt be significantly different from that we use today. In threads on this forum we have comments on the introduction of TTL metering for example. Would not even think about it today. So that technology advance only really has relevance to those who used cameras before its introduction. Similarly I think that other than for collectors there is a life span to old film cameras. 50 years from now and very few people generally will have any experience of film.

I think the current Pro DSLR's will then be viewed in awe. Veritable heavyweight monsters. Viewers of archive film may well have seen pictures of press photograhers wielding these monsters http://www.cosmonet.org/camera/spgr_e.htm

So in answer to Stephens question I would say yes to keeping nice examples of digital cameras that have some landmark ( personal or development ) status. Pro cameras are usually good savers as in the world in which they are mostly used most lead a hard life so in time nice examples become sought after.

Don