Jump to content

Recommended Posts

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

x

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 by luigi bertolotti
Link to post
Share on other sites

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

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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

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

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

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.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

......

 

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

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 by willeica
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...