What determines used camera values - in particular a Nikon Df vs a Nikon D610 (Page 2): Sentimental value. Nothing to do with REAL capability at all. In other words there is a sucker...

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

DaveyDitzer wrote:

I can't quite figure out the used Nikon camera market. I see the Nikon Df (originally a $2800 body new) and these are currently selling used at about $1200 - $1300. Then I see a good used Nikon D610 selling for about $450. The D610 has a 24mp FF sensor and the Df has a 16mp FF sensor. Can anyone explain the price difference?

Sentimental value. Nothing to do with REAL capability at all.
In other words there is a sucker born every minute who will buy only on peer pressure to thing=k there is value but look closely and it is like the "Kings new Clothes", nothing really there.

Carnpo Loc: North Carolina

It is nostalgia for a certain customer base. I purchased a Nikkormat in early 70s. Wanted an F but budget caused me to settle for the Nikkormat. As soon as I saw the Df I knew it was for me. I still get asked if it is an old film camera. I only use it with a 50mm and 85mm lenses. Mostly I use it for portrait work. Oh, and the Nikkormat is still in use.

ELNikkor

The solid, retro design with simpler, fewer features and its unique place in a sea of look-alike latest-feature DSLRs and now mirrorless cameras make the Df a more attractive choice for those who lean toward the "purist" bent in photography. Kind of like how the 3 year old Leica M10 will set you back 8 grand (without a lens!) and won't even focus itself. (Or their M/A from 5 years ago that still, (get this!) shoots FILM, has no electrics at all, and goes for over 5K, also without a lens.)

cameraf4 Loc: Delaware

DaveyDitzer wrote:

I can't quite figure out the used Nikon camera market. I see the Nikon Df (originally a $2800 body new) and these are currently selling used at about $1200 - $1300. Then I see a good used Nikon D610 selling for about $450. The D610 has a 24mp FF sensor and the Df has a 16mp FF sensor. Can anyone explain the price difference?

Davey, the market is also driven by people's perception. As Jerry pointed out, the D600 had huge problems. Nikon "cleared them up" in the D610 but many folks THINK that is not the case. Some Hogs have said here that the D610 is junk because of those problems, thinking the cameras are actually the same. Because of that, many folks will shy away from the D610 so demand is down, prices are down.
You have had 2 Dfs, so you know how great the camera is. Many folks, upon seeing me out with mine, ask why I haven't "gone digital" (one reason I love the camera so much). People who know it SHOULD know something about it, like what GPS Phil pointed out. Quality construction + higher worth.

CWGordon

While never a “brand-new” model, the 610 corrected the issues that haunted the 600. I don’t believe the 610 was ever
marketed as a totally new model. Generally, the .10 that was added or the .50 that is sometimes added to the original model number is indicative of more of an update or freshening than of an entirely new model. For example D700/D750 or D800/D810/D850. This is echoed by the D600/D610.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

The price of used equipment is largely a function of ‘supply’ and ‘demand’. Sometimes a used camera will command a hefty price but we should never think in terms of “investment” - the price used virtually never has any connection to its original price.

Bill 45

Age old question. Value is when someone put money in your hand for the camera.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

Gene51 wrote:

The market. Nothing more, nothing less.

Yup. Comes under the heading of "What's anything worth"? What some one will pay for it. Is Brady worth 25million per year? Apparently yes. Because some one will pay that much.

NoSocks Loc: quonochontaug, rhode island

I disagree that the 610 is “entry level”. It’s an excellent camera technologically superior to the DF. The DF is cool looking, but I’d go for the 610 features and save myself 800 smackeroos.

BebuLamar

NoSocks wrote:

I disagree that the 610 is “entry level”. It’s an excellent camera technologically superior to the DF. The DF is cool looking, but I’d go for the 610 features and save myself 800 smackeroos.

Most people do like you.

NoSocks Loc: quonochontaug, rhode island

RWR wrote:

There’s little comparison between the two. The D610 is an entry level camera, the Df is built for professional use like the F series film cameras.

Who are you to declare the 610 an “entry level” camera. Please support your assertion.

StanMac Loc: Tennessee

Demand.

Stan

cameraf4 Loc: Delaware

CWGordon wrote:

... Generally, the .10 that was added or the .50 that is sometimes added to the original model number is indicative of more of an update or freshening than of an entirely new model. For example D700/D750 or D800/D810/D850. This is echoed by the D600/D610.

My D850 a "freshening" over my D800, now that's a good one. How "fresh" can you get?

wingclui44 Loc: CT USA

Wallen wrote:

https://cameradecision.com/compare/Nikon-Df-vs-Nik... (show quote)

No, I got my Df as it came out the market in 2013, it's not because for the it's fashion look nor Nikon pride, it was because of it's manual control functionality, it's my tool not my jewelry, they matched my shooting style. I could easily picking the D800 at that moment with more pixel, but instead getting the Df!

wingclui44 Loc: CT USA

Carnpo wrote:

It is nostalgia for a certain customer base. I purchased a Nikkormat in early 70s. Wanted an F but budget caused me to settle for the Nikkormat. As soon as I saw the Df I knew it was for me. I still get asked if it is an old film camera. I only use it with a 50mm and 85mm lenses. Mostly I use it for portrait work. Oh, and the Nikkormat is still in use.

I still have my Nikon F and the Nikkormat since 1971, now I have the Df.