Nordvik Posted December 1, 2017 Share #1 Posted December 1, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) Here in Norway a M10 have the same price as a Nikon D5. My theory is that the M have always cost the same as the top Nikon, F or D. Have I been dreaming this? Can someone find a price list for both from US and DE? From 1960 until today? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 1, 2017 Posted December 1, 2017 Hi Nordvik, Take a look here Historic price list for Leica M and Nikon F/D. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
luigi bertolotti Posted December 2, 2017 Share #2 Posted December 2, 2017 (edited) I am not knowledged about Nikon... surely searching with care one can find a detailed list of prices in the years : I found quickly just these two references : 1964 - USA : Nikon F standard prism (no Photomic) with 50/2 324 $ , with 50/1,4 388 $ Leica M3 with 50/2 447 $, with 50/1,4 513 $ (The Leitz prices include US Taxes.... not 100% sure about Nikon) 1975 - Italy Nikon F2 Photomic 560K Lire with 50/2 Leica M5 780K Lire with 50/2 (in 1975 M5 apparently was the only Leica M listed - there was also the CL - 350 K Lire with 40/2) Leicaflex SL 650K Lire with 50/2 (Zeiss Contarex Super 370K Lire with 50/2... but in 1975 Zeiss Ikon was already officially closed, and the Contarexes were "old new stock" - with regular warranty, anyway) Edited December 2, 2017 by luigi bertolotti Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nordvik Posted December 2, 2017 Author Share #3 Posted December 2, 2017 Thank you. Could it be that the M lenses were more expensive than the Nikkor? (interesting that the Leicaflex SL was cheaper than the M5) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
a.noctilux Posted December 2, 2017 Share #4 Posted December 2, 2017 1985 France Prices are TVA (tax) included Nikon F3 HP ...7 590 FF Nikkor AI 1.4/50 ...2 175 FF Leica M4-P ...10 470 FF Summilux-M 1.4/50 ...7 820 FF Leica M6 ....12 950 FF Summicron-M 2/50 ...3 540 FF Leica R4 ....9 680 FF Summilux-R 1.4/50 ...9 165 FF Leica R4s ..7 985 FF Summicron-R 2/50 ...2 355 FF Kodak Tri X 135-36 ...29,90 FF Kodachrome Pro 64/25 135-36 ...87,90 FF 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gyoung Posted December 2, 2017 Share #5 Posted December 2, 2017 I haven't any documentation that far back, but I remember when I first went to work in a camera shop in 1961, an M3 body cost about the same as a Nikon F with 50mm f/2, about £145. A Pentax S1 was £70, an S3 £99. Both with standard lens. A second hand Leica III of any model could be had for between £30 and £40, usually with a 3.5 Elmar, or a Summar/Summarit Gerry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeitz Posted December 2, 2017 Share #6 Posted December 2, 2017 On May 1, 1976 the suggested retail price for a chrome Nikon F2 Photomic body only was $629.00 and with 50mm f2 lens was $753.50. A chrome F2S Photomic body only was $745.00 and with the same lens was $869.50. Add $20 to these prices for a black finish. This is from an EPOI (US Nikon importer) price list. For those who want to figure in US sales taxes, there is no US sales tax. The US mostly taxes just income. Each state may have a sales tax that can vary widely state-to-state and even within a state if a local municipality also has an additional tax. An interesting example is Alaska which has no state sales tax, but some Alaska municipalities do have a tax. In 1964 a state tax might have been about 4%. Today it is likely at least double that, about 8%. The state sales tax is not charged on a purchase for out-of-state sales unless the seller has a physical presence in the buyer's state. When you buy out of state, the buyer's state expects the buyer to pay the sales tax when the state income tax is filed. I don't remember any item advertised in the US with sales tax included. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shac Posted December 3, 2017 Share #7 Posted December 3, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) No Nikon prices but these from 1965 in US$$ M3 body only $288 M3 black body $318 M2 w/ self timer $243 M2 no s-timer $209 M2S black body $273 50mm Summicron rigid $147 50mm Summicron DR $186 50mm Summilux $196 There's lots more from the catalogue I have but these should give an idea. Now for crazyness - how about these M prices in CD$ from 1995 M6 black body $4,740 50mm f2 black chr $$1,710 50mm f1.4 Bl Chr $5,100 But these were the days when the 800mm f6.3 R lens had a retail price of $36,600 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelwj Posted December 4, 2017 Share #8 Posted December 4, 2017 2017: Nikon F6 US$2499 Leica M-A US$4450 Nikon D5 US$6497 (100th Anniversary US$7999) Leica M10 US$6895 Canon 1DX US$5999 So it appears that top of the range digital is all the same cost, but top of the range film is a very wide gap between Nikon and Leica. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
david strachan Posted December 4, 2017 Share #9 Posted December 4, 2017 Great thread. It just goes to show pricing is about what the market will bear, and the perceived buyers. Nothing to do with development costs really. ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted December 4, 2017 Share #10 Posted December 4, 2017 (edited) 1965 military Base Exchange in England: Leica M2 with 50mm Summicron - $275 USD. Edited December 4, 2017 by pico Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_livsey Posted December 8, 2017 Share #11 Posted December 8, 2017 November 1989 BJP Hasselblad new 500CM complete £1,189 (after £200 rebate from H'blad) S/H Leica M6 £1,067 50mm Summicron £276 (Noctilux £820) (R6 chrome new £1,125) S/H Nikon F4S £594 50mm f1.4 AiS £130 (58mm f1.2 new (£756) (S/H F3HP £486) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedaes Posted December 8, 2017 Share #12 Posted December 8, 2017 From the 1967/8 Wallace Heaton of London 'Blue book'' Nikon F with 1.4 lens £192-13-1 Zeiss Contarex with 1.4 Planar £314-14-6 Leicaflex 2.0 Summicron £301-6-5 Leica M3 with 1.4 Sum £257-10-0 2.0 Summicron £223-9-10 M2 ditto £239 - 7-7 2.0 .. £205-17-5 M4 body £150 -14-8 Summmilux 50 /1.4 £113-19-9 Nikkor-Auto 50 /1.4 £83-3-0 The 'Blue Book' has most cameras and lens prices 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcraf Posted December 24, 2017 Share #13 Posted December 24, 2017 ...... Summmilux 50 /1.4 £113-19-9 Nikkor-Auto 50 /1.4 £83-3-0.... It’s interesting that these two 50 f1.4 lenses were relatively close in price back then. Now the equivalent Leica offering is just over 7 times the cost of the equivalent Nikon! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
willeica Posted December 24, 2017 Share #14 Posted December 24, 2017 (edited) It’s interesting that these two 50 f1.4 lenses were relatively close in price back then. Now the equivalent Leica offering is just over 7 times the cost of the equivalent Nikon! And staying with the originals, as collectors' items the Leica lenses are worth 10 to 12 times the value of the Nikon lenses today. In truth, such comparisons are rather meaningless. The Leica items are far less common than their Nikon equivalents and Leica items have a much better established collector market. As for comparing current Leica lenses with their current Nikon equivalents, that is a real apples and oranges comparison, which has little or no validity for a whole range of reasons. William Edited December 24, 2017 by willeica Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now