Jump to content

Cost of 75 and 90 SL lenses...


Donzo98

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

A neurosurgeon complaining about the price of Leica lenses, now THAT’s hilarious!

 

I would trust a neurosurgeon like that because it means he/she is keeping good surgical indications. It’s much easier to be a rich neurosurgeon...

 

Leica cameras are not the “best at everything”. That is why pros do not use them widely. “Best” pro camera includes pro support. Canon has 24h turnaround for CPS Platinum members and loaner programs. In the realm of professional sports, companies like Canon can bring a fleet of lenses and bodies. Did you want to try a different lens for a specific event? Sure. Did you hear get stolen? Here are loaners.

 

Then think about the most famous photographs. What mattered was less about distortion, sharpness, bokeh. It was about exposure and content. If you are a wedding photographer and you misfocus a critical moment or misjudge the exposure or your flash fails to fire, you cannot recover. Adding lightning fast AF and extended recoverability to poor exposures prevents you from losing the IMAGES THAT YOUR CUSTOMER WANTS.

 

And like the sports photographers, there is a backup plan if your gear breaks.

 

What Leica offers is excellent optics. Some of them are even contracted out but even those are great due to Leica design specs (it is ok to replace those two elements with a single exotic one — our customers prefer that and will pay). They offer the pleasure of increased photographic engagement (something a hobbyist values more). They offer superior color at the expense of that unlimited recovery of say a Sony. These optics result in limited production, not unlike the exotic telescopes of today.

 

In that regard, Leica is the true luxury/premium item. They are not set up to be professional cameras with the service and support infrastructure. They deliver a small and inconsequential benefit to most customers of “even better than the best Canon/Nikon/Sony/Fuji”. In 2018, most people find Canon/Nikon/Sony/Fuji to deliver a small and inconsequential benefit over a smartphone (evidence: collapse of digital camera market).

 

Leica will continue to price themselves higher and higher because as Canon/Nikon/Sony/Fuji keep getting better, that last 1% costs THAT much more to reach. Add the Leica profit margins and higher costs from low volume production and that’s what happens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK... whatever that means.

It means the equilibrium price, i.e. where the market clears. See here: http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/sis972

 

You’re part of the demand curve because you’re willing to engage in buying. You pose the question here, ‘should I be willing to engage in buying so that Leica gear clears at the prices it does?’ You’re basically wondering whether your demand curve should shift downward because the prices of related goods that are substitutes are lower. Gordon gave you the answer. BTW, another way your demand curve would shift downward is if your income dropped.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Donzo, we are almost neighbors.  Maybe you can fix my back. :)

I think the issue of value is a legitimate question to ask.  The answer is not an absolute but different for different people.  Some are happy with Nikon or Canon or even Oly MFT.  As noted, great equipment does not make a great photographer.   I'll tell you why Leica has value for me (lots of M lenses, and M10, SL and 24-90, Q, and even a CL).  I want the absolute best and am willing to pay for it so that I can push myself to be better, and can make no excuses that my equipment is insufficient.  That is it in a nutshell.  There is also the craftsmanship that makes me smile.   None of this may be rational, of course, and "value" also gets decided in the marketplace.  There is enough demand for Leica gear at Leica prices to sustain their business.   That means there are many people out there who see the value even if they have different reasons.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Donzo, we are almost neighbors.  Maybe you can fix my back. :)

I think the issue of value is a legitimate question to ask.  The answer is not an absolute but different for different people.  Some are happy with Nikon or Canon or even Oly MFT.  As noted, great equipment does not make a great photographer.   I'll tell you why Leica has value for me (lots of M lenses, and M10, SL and 24-90, Q, and even a CL).  I want the absolute best and am willing to pay for it so that I can push myself to be better, and can make no excuses that my equipment is insufficient.  That is it in a nutshell.  There is also the craftsmanship that makes me smile.   None of this may be rational, of course, and "value" also gets decided in the marketplace.  There is enough demand for Leica gear at Leica prices to sustain their business.   That means there are many people out there who see the value even if they have different reasons.

 

 

I am happy to chat with you offline about your back any time... shoot me a PM.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Donzo I am just curious, as I am an owner of several M lenses, why you consider the SL lenses to be expensive? My Summilux M would cost $4400 new now; the new SL lenses have auto focus and incredible resolution and in the case of the 75mm is only about $300 more. The SL 50 1.4 Lux is available “used” at dealers for around $4200. With all this brand new technology, the SL lenses actually seem a bit of a bargain compared to what like Leica charge for M glass.

 

I would of course prefer Leica products to be less expensive, but if you consider the limited production, history and the quality, not to mention the fact that they are not owned by some disgusting gigantic conglomerate, I am pretty OK paying a premium so long as it keeps them doing what they do. If any of the above need to be sacrificed to bring about cheaper products, I for one would not consider it worth it, and I certainly hope that the people running the company feel the same way. From most indications they do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Donzo I am just curious, as I am an owner of several M lenses, why you consider the SL lenses to be expensive? My Summilux M would cost $4400 new now; the new SL lenses have auto focus and incredible resolution and in the case of the 75mm is only about $300 more. The SL 50 1.4 Lux is available “used” at dealers for around $4200. With all this brand new technology, the SL lenses actually seem a bit of a bargain compared to what like Leica charge for M glass.

 

I would of course prefer Leica products to be less expensive, but if you consider the limited production, history and the quality, not to mention the fact that they are not owned by some disgusting gigantic conglomerate, I am pretty OK paying a premium so long as it keeps them doing what they do. If any of the above need to be sacrificed to bring about cheaper products, I for one would not consider it worth it, and I certainly hope that the people running the company feel the same way. From most indications they do.

 

 

The Leica SL stuff is not that expensive when you compare it to other insanely expensive Leica stuff :)

 

If you compare to similar focal length AF glass of other brands... it is very expensive.

 

Like I said though... I am very happy with the image quality from the SL glass, more so than their M counterparts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Leica SL stuff is not that expensive when you compare it to other insanely expensive Leica stuff :)

 

If you compare to similar focal length AF glass of other brands... it is very expensive.

 

Like I said though... I am very happy with the image quality from the SL glass, more so than their M counterparts.

Agreed - I had the Nikon 1.4 24 & 85, and while they were half the money, they did not give me that magic look of the M glass. I am excited to pick up the SL 35 Summicron whenever that comes out as I expect it will probably live on my SL.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed - I had the Nikon 1.4 24 & 85, and while they were half the money, they did not give me that magic look of the M glass. I am excited to pick up the SL 35 Summicron whenever that comes out as I expect it will probably live on my SL.

I have the 90 coming tomorrow... looking forward to playing with it. Pics to follow.... :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the 90 coming tomorrow... looking forward to playing with it. Pics to follow.... :)

I think you have just made very clear to the world, including Leica, why their prices are not insane, but just matched to the market...........

 

Of course it would be nice to think that the cost of anything was just its cost of production plus a small profit margin, but the world has never been like that, for cameras or for neurosurgeons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Leica charges what they do because they can. Charge what the market will bear. Since there are few real competitors for Leica glass, they can get away with it and they do, obviously.

 

In my case, I'm a new Leica owner. I purchased my first Leica, the M10 in November 2017 along with two Leica lenses. Both lenses were way out of calibration from the factory and I had to send them to the NJ Leica repair center for adjustments. I dropped them off in the first week of Dec and didn't get them back until the second week of January. Not great for my first Leica experience.

 

Since then, I retrained myself to do manual and zone focusing effectively so I have purchased 3 more Leica lenses and a second M10 body. I plan on taking my M10s and 4 Leica lenses (Summilux 50, Summicron 35 and 75 and Super Elmar 18) on my travel vacation to New Zealand later this year.

 

My other system for the past 4 years, which I continue to use, is Fuji. I sold all of my pro Canon gear after switching to Fuji and have been very happy with the improved quality, compact size and much less weight.

 

All of that said, the Leica M10 with 35, 50 and 75 lenses cost about 5 times more than the equivalent Fuji kit. Are the images taken with my Leica 5 times better? Of course not! But, the Leica images have a unique quality and the sharpness and micro-contrast across the whole frame is remarkable. I'm hooked!

 

Regards,

Bud James
 
Please check out my fine art and travel photography at www.budjames.photography or on Instagram at www.instagram.com/budjamesphoto.
Edited by budjames
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Leica charges what they do because they can. Charge what the market will bear. Since there are few real competitors for Leica glass, they can get away with it and they do, obviously.

 

In my case, I'm a new Leica owner. I purchased my first Leica, the M10 in November 2017 along with two Leica lenses. Both lenses were way out of calibration from the factory and I had to send them to the NJ Leica repair center for adjustments. I dropped them off in the first week of Dec and didn't get them back until the second week of January. Not great for my first Leica experience.

 

Since then, I retrained myself to do manual and zone focusing effectively so I have purchased 3 more Leica lenses and a second M10 body. I plan on taking my M10s and 4 Leica lenses (Summilux 50, Summicron 35 and 75 and Super Elmar 18) on my travel vacation to New Zealand later this year.

 

My other system for the past 4 years, which I continue to use, is Fuji. I sold all of my pro Canon gear after switching to Fuji and have been very happy with the improved quality, compact size and much less weight.

 

All of that said, the Leica M10 with 35, 50 and 75 lenses cost about 5 times more than the equivalent Fuji kit. Are the images taken with my Leica 5 times better? Of course not! But, the Leica images have a unique quality and the sharpness and micro-contrast across the whole frame is remarkable. I'm hooked!

 

Regards,

Bud James

 

Please check out my fine art and travel photography at www.budjames.photography or on Instagram at www.instagram.com/budjamesphoto.

Bud,

Many of us can relate to your experience. I do for sure. Therefore I consider it s love - hate relationship with Leics.

Talking about hooked on Leics glass, you should never try the SL native lenses (I sincerely advice you). I only intended to stop st purchasing the two zooms (24-90, 90-280) as I already have the 21lux, 35lux, 50noc, 90corn M lenses and M10. The image the SL lenses produced made me carry on buying the 75corn, 16-35 and now I’m waiting for the coming 35corn as the images produced from the SL native lenses are just a level more constrasty than the M lenses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bud,

Many of us can relate to your experience. I do for sure. Therefore I consider it s love - hate relationship with Leics.

Talking about hooked on Leics glass, you should never try the SL native lenses (I sincerely advice you). I only intended to stop st purchasing the two zooms (24-90, 90-280) as I already have the 21lux, 35lux, 50noc, 90corn M lenses and M10. The image the SL lenses produced made me carry on buying the 75corn, 16-35 and now I’m waiting for the coming 35corn as the images produced from the SL native lenses are just a level more constrasty than the M lenses.

 

I seem to have the same illness. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 - Although my illness is in the early stages as I have only 3 SL lenses.  In addition I did buy the 28mm Summilux M for use on the SL !

 

I understand it gets worse before it gets better....! Hang in there... :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 - Although my illness is in the early stages as I have only 3 SL lenses. In addition I did buy the 28mm Summilux M for use on the SL !

That’s funny :) Early stages... only 3 SL lenses... LOL

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...