Jump to content

Leica Noctilux-m 50mm f1.2 ASPH black version is it limited run?


JimmyCheng

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, pedaes said:

Seems correct for a in production regular lens!

Price is mow 7090, and I don’t recommend this store. The woman there is not very kind, not very knowledgeable, and her website is clearly out of date because she doesn’t have that lens in stock and cannot get it even if she tried. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jdlaing said:

4000 AA 35mm lenses.

Oh, no. Wrong. Sorry. 

There is a maximum of 2000 copies, which was what Leica planned for the first batch. Rumor says they they actually stopped producing the lens around 1400 copies. The wiki page is not accurate. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Nope. But since you’re stubborn, I’ll take the time to explain. 
There war 4000 serials assigned. There were less than 2000 lenses produced. They had a massive production issue and could not efficiently grind the glass. 
they stopped the production half way to move on to the Pre Fle, simpler design in 1994. 
research it, you will find many sources explaining. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Steven said:

Nope. But since you’re stubborn, I’ll take the time to explain. 
There war 4000 serials assigned. There were less than 2000 lenses produced. They had a massive production issue and could not efficiently grind the glass. 
they stopped the production half way to move on to the Pre Fle, simpler design in 1994. 
research it, you will find many sources explaining. 

Actually 4,007 and I know where 4 of them sit right now from the end of the serial number range.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Steven said:

I have in my procession a 50 1.2 reedition, unopened box, which I bought because I could, but I dont intend to keep it. I dont like 50mm that much. 

My question is, should I sell it now around 10K (paid 7k) for it, or should I hang on to it and the value will keep going up if they stop production ? 

The silver version is limited edition; the black is a regularly serialized lens within the ‘classic’ line.  It currently retails for $7895, on pre-order for patient buyers, which means that someone with a strong dealer relationship should pay less.  No favor for anyone willing to pay $10k unless they really don’t care.  In this market, one could stumble into far greater investment returns in short order.

Jeff

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Steven said:

1800 is the amount of 35AA around.... It's rare enough to cost 25K... 

In the days before the internet people didn’t have this information. Who knew at the time the AA was going to be a small run? So people bought it and used it. It is not just about total produced but the remaining mint in box samples that are going for $25k. 

Edited by rtai
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Steven said:

I have in my procession a 50 1.2 reedition, unopened box, which I bought because I could, but I dont intend to keep it. I dont like 50mm that much. 

My question is, should I sell it now around 10K (paid 7k) for it, or should I hang on to it and the value will keep going up if they stop production ? 

Why does it even matter with the amount of money or purchasing power you seem to have?

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 6/10/2021 at 6:28 AM, JimmyCheng said:

I'm just not sure if it is a good investment

This one is easy to answer.

No lens, or any mass produced, machined product is an investment, let alone a good one. When people talk about "investments" in lenses, it's just feelgood wishful thinking to justify spending money on something they like/want (nothing wrong with that), trying to convince themselves that they're not only getting it cause they want it, but also because it's a "wise" financial decision. Well, it's not. And when people claim it is, it's usually a lens that at most doubled in price (in absolute terms) over like 30 years, which many times doesn't even cover inflation, so at best you're breaking even. In very, very few cases, you might "win" a small amount even given the inflation. Does that make it a good investment? Doubtful. The same amount of money, even in a very conservative, low risk + low interest investment, would give you much more over the same span of decades.

So with that out of the way, nobody other than Leica knows the exact planned production numbers or whether those will change. It's up to them, and they can change their mind at any time. Unless there's a legally binding announcement/agreement for which can be used in a "misleading advertisement" lawsuit against them, they can change their minds and not keep their "promises" all they want, and there isn't anything to be done about it. In fact, many companies have historically done this, repeatedly, ranging from luxury cars, to luxury watches, bags, etc etc. .

In any case, if the money you spent on it wasn't disposable to you, then maybe you should sell it (if you won't lose much - or anything at all - doing so), and treat your short ownership of it as a low cost/free equipment loan. But definitely don't tie money you can't lose or that you need, into a lens with the hope that it'll "appreciate" based on a rumour/hearsay/"promise" that would have a private company acting against their own financial interests.

Just my 2¢.  

Edited by giannis
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, giannis said:

No lens, or any mass produced, machined product is an investment, let alone a good one.

While I never bought any Leica item for investment purposes, some turned out to be a decent investment. I bought a mint silver MATE 16 years ago for 1260 Euro. A comparable one now sells in a shop in Vienna for 7800 Euro (even higher prices on ebay). That's 12% per year, not bad. And no, Leica cannot just produce more of this lens, a supplier stopped producing one of the aspheric lenses. However, I will never realize these returns because I will never sell this lens.

But in general I agree with you. Stocks are a much better investment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Steven said:

Is it a nice lens anyway? Should I just keep it an use it ? Any image thread of that specific lens ? 

It is a fantastic lens, Steven. I love it more so than my f1 Noctilux and I think it is a lens that could be carried around daily. It is also really sharp at infinity (but dreamy at 1m), so it has distinctive characters. Here is a brief video I did about this lens and compared against my f1 Noctilux (v4)

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, giannis said:

This one is easy to answer.

No lens, or any mass produced, machined product is an investment, let alone a good one. When people talk about "investments" in lenses, it's just feelgood wishful thinking to justify spending money on something they like/want (nothing wrong with that), trying to convince themselves that they're not only getting it cause they want it, but also because it's a "wise" financial decision. Well, it's not. And when people claim it is, it's usually a lens that at most doubled in price (in absolute terms) over like 30 years, which many times doesn't even cover inflation, so at best you're breaking even. In very, very few cases, you might "win" a small amount even given the inflation. Does that make it a good investment? Doubtful. The same amount of money, even in a very conservative, low risk + low interest investment, would give you much more over the same span of decades.

So with that out of the way, nobody other than Leica knows the exact planned production numbers or whether those will change. It's up to them, and they can change their mind at any time. Unless there's a legally binding announcement/agreement for which can be used in a "misleading advertisement" lawsuit against them, they can change their minds and not keep their "promises" all they want, and there isn't anything to be done about it. In fact, many companies have historically done this, repeatedly, ranging from luxury cars, to luxury watches, bags, etc etc. .

In any case, if the money you spent on it wasn't disposable to you, then maybe you should sell it (if you won't lose much - or anything at all - doing so), and treat your short ownership of it as a low cost/free equipment loan. But definitely don't tie money you can't lose or that you need, into a lens with the hope that it'll "appreciate" based on a rumour/hearsay/"promise" that would have a private company acting against their own financial interests.

Just my 2¢.  

Thanks. 

I bought some lenses last year that have already doubled in price though. I bought a lens last week that I can now sell for 25th more of the price I paid. Lenses can be a good investment when bought wisely. 

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...