AlanG Posted May 16, 2012 Share #341 Posted May 16, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) This is a fair point, but as you will know producing such things as lens caps is all about volumes. If you go to a plastic moulding company and ask for a run of lens caps for the entire Nikon lens production you will get a completely different price than Leica would get for caps for its entire M lens production. That argument falls down when there are cheap knockoffs of branded lens caps on Ebay. And Hasselblad lens caps are not expensive and they probably don't sell many more lenses than Leica sells. http://www.ebay.com/itm/LEICA-lens-FRONT-PROTECTIVE-CAP-chrome-36mm-internal-diameter-NEW-/140610041644?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item20bd02f72c I don't think comparing the price of lens caps is pointless. I think it is very telling what one manufacturer charges for a simple item compared with another when the price difference is so great. I remember that a little very simple replacement plastic bubble level for my Linhof view camera cost about $35 many years ago. (The liquid disappeared in a couple of them somehow.) For the same $35 price I also bought a 2 foot long mahogany and brass carpenters level that had several curved vials in it. Linhof also sold me a replacement camera mounting screw for my tripod head for $55. (20 years ago.) Maybe this explains why Linhof doesn't sell many tripods today. Rollei charged $660 for the standard $60 Polaroid 405 back but added a plastic mounting plate and a simple release mechanism to fit their camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 16, 2012 Posted May 16, 2012 Hi AlanG, Take a look here New Summicron. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
IkarusJohn Posted May 16, 2012 Share #342 Posted May 16, 2012 That argument falls down when there are new $10 Leica lens caps on Ebay. Sourced from the same factory? The nitpicking is endless if you wish to prove that Leica simply has a higher markup. It may be true, but you'd have to establish the same quality of product (same factory, effectively), shipped to Germany and handled through the same distribution channels. The only reason you can't buy a genuine iPhone from the factory door in China at huge discount is because Apple won't allow it - you must buy the product through the distribution channels for your country. Not sure this is leading anywhere. Work to do John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted May 16, 2012 Share #343 Posted May 16, 2012 Sourced from the same factory? No, not sourced form the same factory and probably not the same quality. But I think it shows that there does not have to be a high volume to sell the part for much less. In this case a low volume metal cap, embossed logo, with felt inside for much less than a genuine Leica plastic cap. I think they are made in Ukraine so that is not far from Germany. So are the $15 Hasselblad caps inferior? I think we all know that Leica has higher costs but I think the main reason they can charge $35-$50 for a lens cap is that it goes on a lens that costs several thousand dollars and there is prestige in the name. Why does the lens cap need any name on it since the MM has no name on the body? I don't knock them for this. It is inevitable if customers are happy to pay this much. Maybe they can charge even more for blank lens caps to go with the MM. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 16, 2012 Share #344 Posted May 16, 2012 All this about the new Summicron... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted May 16, 2012 Share #345 Posted May 16, 2012 No, not sourced form the same factory and probably not the same quality. But I think it shows that there does not have to be a high volume to sell the part for much less. In this case a low volume metal cap, embossed logo, with felt inside for much less than a genuine Leica plastic cap. I think they are made in Ukraine so that is not far from Germany. So are the $15 Hasselblad caps inferior? I think we all know that Leica has higher costs but I think the main reason they can charge $35-$50 for a lens cap is that it goes on a lens that costs several thousand dollars and there is prestige in the name. Why does the lens cap need any name on it since the MM has no name on the body? I don't knock them for this. It is inevitable if customers are happy to pay this much. Maybe they can charge even more for blank lens caps to go with the MM. Yes, you're probably right on this. But I don't really think that Leica's pricing policy on lens caps is indicative of the pricing of the new APO-Summicron 50 ASPH, other than to point out the obvious point that Leica charge a lot even if there is no red dot! It isn't supply and demand pricing ... Cheers John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted May 16, 2012 Share #346 Posted May 16, 2012 Yes, you're probably right on this. But I don't really think that Leica's pricing policy on lens caps is indicative of the pricing of the new APO-Summicron 50 ASPH, other than to point out the obvious point that Leica charge a lot even if there is no red dot! It isn't supply and demand pricing ... Cheers John Considering Leica almost went out of business a few years ago, I don't begrudge them any pricing and product strategy that works for them now and in the future. And I am not qualified or informed enough to second guess their decisions. I'm just pointing out a few observations and if I could sell lens caps for $50 I would too. It's not a charity. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted May 16, 2012 Share #347 Posted May 16, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) All this about the new Summicron... No. It's about the pricing of the Apo-Summicron. And that is a relevant discussion. The old man from the Kodachrome Age Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted May 16, 2012 Share #348 Posted May 16, 2012 John, I thank you for two good reasons: First, there's finally someone here who can write longer posts than I, and second, it was a very good one. You have obviously gone beyond the propaganda slogans into real economy. I find that I agree completely with you. The old man from the Age of Capital Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaques Posted May 16, 2012 Share #349 Posted May 16, 2012 As someone who has had plastic items manufactured and costed the tooling expenses- I can tell you that Leica would only pay a few cents only for their lens caps... And they would have covered their tooling expenses many years ago. Sure they use less caps than Nikon- but I have had more complex plastic components made- out of more expensive materials- in small runs of only 2000 pieces a go- and the unit cost is still less than 2 dollars a piece... Basically the caps are almost pure profit at a high margin and $35 for a cap is frankly absurd.... Leica can charge it for one reason: BRAND NAME RECOGNITION. I had a a realisation about this new Summicron- it makes amazing economic sense for leica. I realized many (wealthy) people will buy into the M9 - being completely new to Leica- and they will of course want a good standard lens. They will see this new one- read the hype- note the price and determine that it is the must have lens for them - for these customers nothing but the best will do and money probably isn't much of a concern at all. Leica will be able to make a very good FAT profit on both body and lens- and many of these 'top end' customers will probably skip the Summilux and grab a .95 as their low light toy down the track. It's a clever strategy to get the most out of new customers- straight off the bat. Not to say that the lens probably isn't exceptionally good- I just think the price has a lot to do with the brand name, and the luxury of it all. I personally doubt very much that the price is primarily determined by the cost of production... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted May 16, 2012 Share #350 Posted May 16, 2012 jaques: "... for these customers nothing but the best will do ..." The Leica Man Sounds very similar to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 16, 2012 Share #351 Posted May 16, 2012 No. It's about the pricing of the Apo-Summicron... Which is the topic of this other thread: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/customer-forum/238647-what-do-you-think-price-new.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted May 16, 2012 Share #352 Posted May 16, 2012 John, I thank you for two good reasons: First, there's finally someone here who can write longer posts than I, and second, it was a very good one. You have obviously gone beyond the propaganda slogans into real economy. I find that I agree completely with you. The old man from the Age of Capital Sorry to plagiarise, but I didn't have the time to write a shorter post. Cheers John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted May 16, 2012 Share #353 Posted May 16, 2012 John, I certainly accept your conclusions about how Leica will behave, but I don't agree that they're somehow outside the simple S&D forces, or that there are special conditions that exempt them. I think you're mis-applying some of the conditions. Briefly: Regarding being fully informed; I don't think this is much to do with MTF charts and so forth, nearly as much as it is to do with price information. You will buy lens X from Bert's if they sell it at $10 less than Fred's, if the product and the service (part of the product) is identical and you're rational in this specific pricing decision, which I believe most people are. But they don't have to be rational in their desire for a $7,000 lens, they just have to want it and be prepared to buy it. Also, you do know to a sufficient degree what the difference is between a Summicron and a competitor's equivalent (but non-identical) 50mm f2 lens, so you can make your pretty-much perfectly informed decision there quite easily. And you will get pretty close to perfect price information. And in a market comprising let's say at the very least a few hundred participants, the sum of their behaviour will define what is rational in this context. So I think those conditions are met to a sufficient degree, most of the time. So in the unlikely event that there's a consensus saying its not worth $7000, and no one buys it, Leica have the choices that classic S&D suggests, including dropping the price (hugely unlikely) or quietly dropping it from production. Or leaving it there as a showpiece. The fact (if it is a fact, which it may be) that they use the cost of production plus margin as means of calculating the offer price doesn't in any way side-step the fact that the combination of supply and demand will determine the eventual outcome. Though I accept perhaps not the initial RRP, but that again is part of the process. Its no coincidence that most Leica lenses are in short supply and increasingly expensive. Yes John, I do believe we're saying pretty much the same thing as it relates to the final outcome. And I agree it will sell. I just think you're arguing that some of the outcomes demonstrate that S&D is an inadequate description of how or why they happen, whereas I think it describes it pretty well. Almost incidentally, I do believe there are all sorts of producers and suppliers, both large and small, who sincerely believe they are exceptions to the "rule" because of special conditions. Its rather like throwing a rock above your head and shouting out "I'm defeating the laws of gravity.' It won't stop the rock coming back down on your head! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted May 16, 2012 Share #354 Posted May 16, 2012 I think the new summicron looks fantastic. I am however a little concerned that Leica are starting to price themselves out of a big segment of their market. I am a huge fan of Leica products and I guess I belong to the upper middle class earner group that can buy a Leica without defaulting on their mortgage. I really do feel that the price of this lens is a little steep. Now this alone doesn't worry me too much because as people have said, you can always buy the old summicron. Had Leica discontinued the traditional cron, I would have called "foul." Now, here is my concern: how much will they charge for an M10? I personally think they should stay below $8,500 and even then, they may loose a lot of their customers. The reason being that the M9 is really a great camera and I think it will be more difficult to entice people to upgrade from a camera that is already full-frame. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 16, 2012 Share #355 Posted May 16, 2012 Not clear how is the hood of the new Summicron. I mean the hood, not the hood's price. Any idea? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rramesh Posted May 16, 2012 Share #356 Posted May 16, 2012 Not clear how is the hood of the new Summicron. I mean the hood, not the hood's price. Any idea? It's built in, isn't it and if so, it must be adequately designed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeicaBraz Posted May 16, 2012 Share #357 Posted May 16, 2012 Apologize for my materialistic contribution, moreover since we know price is not the essence of these items (!?#@), but just saw today Leic'as price-list for Switzerland. All prices in CHF including VAT. CHF/USD at 0.9443 Noctilux 11.250 Apo Summicron 50mm 7.850 Summilux 50mm 3.890 Summicron 50mm 2.340 Summarit 50mm 1.580 Cameras: Leica Monochrom 8.990 M9-P 7.490 M9 6.990 MP 4.950 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizard Posted May 16, 2012 Share #358 Posted May 16, 2012 Not clear how is the hood of the new Summicron. I mean the hood, not the hood's price. Any idea? Well, the specs say that the hood is extendable by rotary action. So it does not seem to be the usual sliding hood, but requires a rotary movement to extend. In my view, this implies that the hood will be locked, or at least essentially prevented from moving back in, in the extended position. Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyedward Posted May 16, 2012 Share #359 Posted May 16, 2012 Now, here is my concern: how much will they charge for an M10? I personally think they should stay below $8,500 and even then, they may loose a lot of their customers. The reason being that the M9 is really a great camera and I think it will be more difficult to entice people to upgrade from a camera that is already full-frame. Unfortunately, I think the M10 will cost £7K+ ($9-10K?), simply because the M9M costs £6200. The M10 has to be seen by the public to be better than the M9, hence the increase. Here's where leicas mirrorless M mount camera comes in - its lower-than-m10 cost will make it a more viable option for people on a lower budget/new to leica. If leica don't produce a mirrorless M mount camera I forsee them returning to financial difficulty because few FF dslr users will pay £7K+ for an M10 when the D800 costs £3k. Am I correct in assuming that most new leica customers own, or have owned, a dslr? I can imagine that for someone considering moving to leica, summarit lenses don't cost a fortune, but hold on a minute, an M10 costs how much?! WTF?! Because of the high price leica will ask for the M10, they ideally need to release their mirrorless at photokina '12. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double Negative Posted May 16, 2012 Share #360 Posted May 16, 2012 I have no doubt the M10 will be one pricey mother... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.