diogenis Posted June 21, 2011 Share #421 Posted June 21, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) The sad thing is that Leica lenses are more and more out of reach of those who could probably put them to work best (esp the special fast ones) vs rich amateurs whose pictures I see would often be better off with a p&s (see scale focusing a 50mm .95 thread). And even the basic lenses are getting more out of reach (if you can find them), even on the used market. But Leica is a business, and if their business is now selling to the well-heeled so be it. The lenses are expensive to make, and they are not a photographers benevolence society. I do find it frustrating to not be able to afford the lenses that would make my photography richer (such as the 24 Lux) but I sit back and go okay my 24 Elmarit is just fine (bought mint w/ finder for $1225 in 2000). I disagree here. Everyone, poor or rich is today able to purchase a great camera and go for some great shooting. Artistic capabilities can not be bought, and the cameras are just tools to photography. What money can buy is maybe better functionality or a little better quality or a better workflow, but not necessarily better photos Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 Hi diogenis, Take a look here Open Letter to Leica — 10 Ways To Improve the M9 Rangefinder. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jto555 Posted June 21, 2011 Share #422 Posted June 21, 2011 The main change I would like to see to the M9 is for a larger viewfinder or at least one that is easy for us glasses wearers to use. I sure it would not be easy but... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted June 21, 2011 Share #423 Posted June 21, 2011 {snipped}But Leica is a business, and if their business is now selling to the well-heeled so be it. The lenses are expensive to make, and they are not a photographers benevolence society. I do find it frustrating to not be able to afford the lenses that would make my photography richer (such as the 24 Lux) but I sit back and go okay my 24 Elmarit is just fine (bought mint w/ finder for $1225 in 2000). I think some kudos should go to Leica for the Summarit series. I know they don't fire the photographic imagination the way a 1.4 (or faster) series lens does, but they're "real" Leicas and the results I've seen from them are excellent, actually. I fully agree with you though, that it's a shame that the most optically interesting lenses are almost out of reach. But it's not just Leica. Canon & Nikon put their expertise into high end tele lenses (good for their markets). Their top-end glass isn't exactly cheap, either People still buy them, though. I could probably buy a complete set of Summarits for about the price of a single Canon 200 f2 tele; the 300mm 2,8 IS is still more than the 21 or 24 lux--and 2 stops slower Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted June 21, 2011 Share #424 Posted June 21, 2011 I could probably buy a complete set of Summarits for about the price of a single Canon 200 f2 tele; the 300mm 2,8 IS is still more than the 21 or 24 lux--and 2 stops slower It is about 15x longer though Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vip Posted June 21, 2011 Share #425 Posted June 21, 2011 I agree in most of the first 7 point. Even If M9 is still the best camera on the market there is always way to improve. These are good one. For the price I suggest to read the last Leica Fotographie interneational article.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted June 21, 2011 Share #426 Posted June 21, 2011 It is about 15x longer though Hmmm. Maybe if you lay the Summarits end-to-end? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted June 21, 2011 Share #427 Posted June 21, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) I think some kudos should go to Leica for the Summarit series. I know they don't fire the photographic imagination the way a 1.4 (or faster) series lens does, but they're "real" Leicas and the results I've seen from them are excellent, actually. I fully agree with you though, that it's a shame that the most optically interesting lenses are almost out of reach. But it's not just Leica. Canon & Nikon put their expertise into high end tele lenses (good for their markets). Their top-end glass isn't exactly cheap, either People still buy them, though. I could probably buy a complete set of Summarits for about the price of a single Canon 200 f2 tele; the 300mm 2,8 IS is still more than the 21 or 24 lux--and 2 stops slower No, of course. But the long lenses are pretty special app (sports, wildlife), and easily rentable in most major markets and many are owned by the agency or media the photogs are working for. These tend to be $ making machines vs the struggling documentary or fine art photographer (and yes even Magnum photogs struggle) wanting a better tool for long term projects. But I can buy a Nikon or Canon 35 or 50 f/1.4 today for about a third (or less) the price of a Leica 35 f/1.4 which seems to be only available from scalpers at the moment asking (and getting) a huge premium. If I was a young photographer looking to get into Leica it would be Zeiss or CV lenses all the way. As it is I'm glad I bought the Leica lenses I did back in the film days. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted June 21, 2011 Share #428 Posted June 21, 2011 {snipped}If I was a young photographer looking to get into Leica it would be Zeiss or CV lenses all the way. As it is I'm glad I bought the Leica lenses I did back in the film days. Yes, I wonder if Leica will ever have to make faster entry-level lenses? There's going to come a time when they stop selling bodies without a supply of lenses to match... I wonder what a Summilux built to a Summarit standard, on older designs, would sell for? Or if that's even a possible / viable model? But we're in weird time anyway: it seems a bit crazy to me that a new AF Nikkor 35 1.4 @ $1700 US is considered a bargain lens by comparison IIRC I paid exactly $400 dollars over that for my chrome 35 Lux ASPH... back when there was a used market! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted June 21, 2011 Share #429 Posted June 21, 2011 Leica started targeting the higher end market some time ago. First with special versions once they realized people were actually collecting cameras. And eventually prices went way up on everything they made. Even lens caps and numerous other items that can't cost much to make. I presume they re-assessed their place in the market and thought this was their best way to go and thus avoid having to compete on price with many of their products. Meanwhile, although not inexpensive, Nikon and Canon have held the line on some of their gear and even found ways to make good entry model cameras and lenses at much lower prices than in the 60s and 70s (compensating for inflation.) Thus they have expanded their systems over several decades while still offering top of the line models. I don't begrudge Leica charging what they do and considering the manufacturing methods, they may have no choice. However they also really mark up items that they make for very little or buy from third parties. Perhaps this is where their profit center is. But if I take the very complex and sophisticated specialized 17 tse and 24 tse lenses from Canon, I can't see how they can make these in a high volume mass production way or save significant design or construction costs over even a much simpler yet still much more expensive fairly common standard Leica lens such as a 50 Summilux. (17 tse - $2400, 24 tse $2100, 50 Summilux - $3700) So why does the Leica lens cost so much more to make or is it simply more profitable? I have an old 1971 Helix camera store catalog from 1971 and posted the Nikon and Leica prices below. It is interesting to me so see what Leica offered back then for the M and SL. And Nikon had a pretty deep system by then. You can see that at one time the lens prices were not that far apart between the two. http://www.goldsteinphoto.com/Posts/leicahelix.jpg http://www.goldsteinphoto.com/Posts/nikonhelix.jpg I also have a 1970 catalog from Hong Kong. A Nikon FTN w/ 50 1.4 was $258 and an M4 w/ 1.4 was $340. (MR meter was $35) 35 f2 Nikkor was $85 and a 35 Summicron was $115. In terms of the bigger picture of the M changing. It seems to me that a few years ago, Leica was close to going out of business. They seemed to embrace technology and change in order to try to make a profit. At first it was the DMR back and selling re-branded Pannys. Then the M8, S2, X1, M9. Why would they not continue in this direction although they are at a severe disadvantage being such a small company now and having started so late.? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted June 21, 2011 Share #430 Posted June 21, 2011 Well, maybe Leica uses better or best raw mterials, or very special techniques for manufacturing or special coatings and so on. In the end when one looks at specs and realizes that Leica specs is really above the rest, then they charge that premium. But it doesnt mean that if someone wants a cheaper alternative he cant get for example a sumarit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted June 21, 2011 Share #431 Posted June 21, 2011 IIRC I paid exactly $400 dollars over that for my chrome 35 Lux ASPH... back when there was a used market! I got you beat - I paid $1350 for my mint black 35 Lux asph - from a dealer no less! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted June 21, 2011 Share #432 Posted June 21, 2011 Well, maybe Leica uses better or best raw mterials, or very special techniques for manufacturing or special coatings and so on. In the end when one looks at specs and realizes that Leica specs is really above the rest, then they charge that premium. When did they start doing that or did Nikon start using cheaper materials or cheaper construction methods? Haven't the lenses improved in both brands since 1971? We can speculate on the techniques, materials, etc. but you have not convinced me that making a 50mm f2 Summicron is as difficult to design, has better quality glass, or is more precise than a 24mm Canon tse that sells for a similar price and is probably a fairly low volume lens. Also keep in mind that these tse lenses are in very complicated and precise mechanisms that have geared shift and tilt and two independent rotating sections. (With locking knobs and centering lock slides too.) Since Leica doesn't make lenses equivalent to these tse lenses you could only hope that a hypothetical Leica 17 tilt/shift or 24 tilt/shift would be above these. (Both of which are truly outstanding lenses that probably cost a lot to design.) What do you think Leica would charge for such lenses? If Leica has stuck with its traditional materials (such as brass focusing mounts) and methods, then they also haven't had to invest as much money in R&D to develop new materials, equipment, and methods. Leaving out AF motors, electronic contacts, and no need for auto diaphragm mechanisms must save some money too and make lenses easier to design and produce. I do believe there may be several reasons why Leica lenses cost so much more but I think that putting this all down to them being much better is a stretch. Leica may simply not have the volume nor the resources to make lenses more efficiently and maintain the quality where others do. And since Leica can sell out their production at these high prices, any added efficiency or cost savings would best be used to increase profits. I think only some the 75 Summarit is listed as being available at B&H and all other Leica M lenses are unavailable. So maybe the lenses are priced too low. I don't see any incentive for them to lower prices nor do I blame them for keeping them high. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 21, 2011 Share #433 Posted June 21, 2011 I think it is really time you did a factory tour, Alan. There is absolutely no way manufacturing methods can be compared in this manner. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted June 21, 2011 Share #434 Posted June 21, 2011 I think it is really time you did a factory tour, Alan. There is absolutely no way manufacturing methods can be compared in this manner. You might be right but it is irrelevant to me. If Leica only wants to sell a low volume at high prices, and use their current methods, that is fine with me if they can keep it up and remain profitable in the future. In any case I bet the making and assembly of a 17mm tse is pretty special too. You can't exactly throw one of these together with off the shelf parts, unskilled labor and no testing. I was watching a BBC show about Robert Penn assembling his own state of the art bicycle by going to various shops around the world. So he saw his Brooks saddle being hand made and his wheels being laced and trued. But neither Campagnolo (mechanicals and brakes,) Cinelli (handlebars,) nor Chris King (headset) would let him see how things were made in order to keep their competitors from knowing their methods. So I don't know why Leica gives public tours unless they hide some special sections. I would think that lens construction would be as competitive as techniques for making bicycle components. Since there seems to be so much more demand for the lenses than they can supply, I wonder how much money they are leaving on the table? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted June 21, 2011 Share #435 Posted June 21, 2011 Since there seems to be so much more demand for the lenses than they can supply, I wonder how much money they are leaving on the table? Hopefully enough that their R&D budget swells, and we get better products in the future, at better prices and greater availability - granted, much of that only comes with volume, which I suspect is unlikely to happen. Cheers John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted June 21, 2011 Share #436 Posted June 21, 2011 I was one to complain about Leica prices and admit they are very high. I've given up on the complaining. Over time I have come to realize that Leica is small in comparison to Canon and Nikon, and will sill remain small. What I can purchase is limited but I've made my peace with that. What I have fulfills my creative needs. I'm curious to see what the M10 will look like and wonder if I will be able to purchase one, but for now I will continue to hold steady with my very much loved M8. So what was the purpose of this thread? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilliamsphotography Posted June 21, 2011 Share #437 Posted June 21, 2011 ............... So what was the purpose of this thread? To fitter away the time while images are processing ... not one person is going to change their position or opinion even if this thread went to 1,000 pages, and Leica is already pretty much well down the road designing the next M digital, so we'll all just have to wait and see what they did. : -) -Marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted June 22, 2011 Share #438 Posted June 22, 2011 When did they start doing that or did Nikon start using cheaper materials or cheaper construction methods? Haven't the lenses improved in both brands since 1971? We can speculate on the techniques, materials, etc. but you have not convinced me that making a 50mm f2 Summicron is as difficult to design, has better quality glass, or is more precise than a 24mm Canon tse that sells for a similar price and is probably a fairly low volume lens. Also keep in mind that these tse lenses are in very complicated and precise mechanisms that have geared shift and tilt and two independent rotating sections. (With locking knobs and centering lock slides too.) Since Leica doesn't make lenses equivalent to these tse lenses you could only hope that a hypothetical Leica 17 tilt/shift or 24 tilt/shift would be above these. (Both of which are truly outstanding lenses that probably cost a lot to design.) What do you think Leica would charge for such lenses? It's a hypothetical question. They could charge the same, less or more. Besides they already have lenses (summarits) that are cheap. Also, don't forget the recently announced PanaLeica Summilux DG25 for 4/3 ... I believe only 900$. Traditionally, Germans are far better in engineering anything mechanical than Japan is. So, their product would be better as well. I do believe there may be several reasons why Leica lenses cost so much more but I think that putting this all down to them being much better is a stretch. Leica may simply not have the volume nor the resources to make lenses more efficiently and maintain the quality where others do. And since Leica can sell out their production at these high prices, any added efficiency or cost savings would best be used to increase profits. .... We don't really know that they produce them in small quantities, because most of them are always on demand and backorder. However, if someone really wants to buy cheaper lenses, there are still options from Zeisss, Voigtander etc.. The difference in cash and quality however is evident Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmas Posted June 22, 2011 Share #439 Posted June 22, 2011 However, if someone really wants to buy cheaper lenses, there are still options from Zeisss, Voigtander etc.. The difference in cash and quality however is evident Some of the Zeiss lenses are manufactured in Germany some by Cosina in Japan. Zeiss mark up the Cosina manufacturing cost a lot, similar sort of packaging. Not noticed any difference between the ZM and CV lenses, the CV seem better in build standard, the CV seem to stand up to hard wear and tear better. Leica do real nice packaging, have German manufacturing costs but also mark up a lot. I do have some modern Leica lenses they are ok. Noel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMR Posted June 22, 2011 Share #440 Posted June 22, 2011 i would agree with the 10 point in only 3 points: Better ISO performance Sapphire screen with high resolution More MP. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.