Leica Plasti line (Plasticron, Plastilux...)

[Capuccino-Muffin]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Absurd? Yes.

But not stupid, nor risible.

It is much more of an enlightening question that aims to the understanding of what makes us spend money on things that, in the end aren’t (logically) worth it and yet, are worth it on a paychological level, or  maket poinf of view, or spiritual, or...

 

For example, there is the truly asked question as to why spend 20$K on Leica equipment when a cheap 1K$ DSLR kit can and will outperform the Leica? 
Why?

The answers are many. And this always begs the question: why always bring it down to money? Yes, usually it’s the economically suffering people that always bring it down to money.  
 

But here is a question that might enlighten us a bit further about our spending habits and lifestyle. 
Because l’art-de-vivre is indeed an art.

So here it is:

If Leica started a new Plasti line (in a world where this would NOT hurt its corporate image, prestige, and sales), in orher words CETERIS PARIBUS. Would you be buying?

For example, Leica starts offering the 35mm APO-Summicron in an ALL Plastic body, plastic feeling, super light, plastic aperture blades, plastic smelling, but retaining the SAME OPTICS. Would you buy?

-Would you buy a PlastiCron Apo 35mm for 1800$?

-PlastiNoct 50mm f1.2 for 1900$?

-PlastiLux 50mm asph 1100$?

 

Yes?

no?

why?

 

 

[pop]

Depends on the properties of the plastic.

Merely saying a lens is made of metal and glass does not make it superior lens. Merely saying it's made of plastic does not make it inferior, either. It all depends on the properties of the material. There are even plastics I couldn't afford.

[Capuccino-Muffin]

“All the great Optical advantages, but with a shitty feeling”

😂

[Capuccino-Muffin]

1 minute ago, pop said:

Depends on the properties of the plastic.

Merely saying a lens is made of metal and glass does not make it superior lens. Merely saying it's made of plastic does not make it inferior, either. It all depends on the properties of the material. There are even plastics I couldn't afford.

Let’s not overthink this. See it as Plastic the economical alternative.

Think nikon and canon. Think Nikon’s 28-80mm G line. Think Nikon 50mm f1.8 plastic.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[jaapv]

Actually, I think this is a bit of a contentless thread. Why should Leica not use an optimal material for the purpose intended should that be the case? Why should it  immediately be pejoratively nicknamed?

[pop]

20 minutes ago, Capuccino-Muffin said:

See it as Plastic the economical alternative.

If that's a central part of your thread, you should have said so right at the beginning.

Time was when a marriage ring made of Aluminum (or Aluminium, depending on where you live) would have been a very expensive and rare item. Nowadays it isn't. Well, perhaps, they have become rare.

There are artificially made substances (a.k.a. plastics) with very properties that are very desirable for a given task. Also, if anyone thinks that all plastics are cheap, they are not well informed.

[Jared]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, Capuccino-Muffin said:

Absurd? Yes.

But not stupid, nor risible.

It is much more of an enlightening question that aims to the understanding of what makes us spend money on things that, in the end aren’t (logically) worth it and yet, are worth it on a paychological level, or  maket poinf of view, or spiritual, or...

 

For example, there is the truly asked question as to why spend 20$K on Leica equipment when a cheap 1K$ DSLR kit can and will outperform the Leica? 
Why?

The answers are many. And this always begs the question: why always bring it down to money? Yes, usually it’s the economically suffering people that always bring it down to money.  
 

But here is a question that might enlighten us a bit further about our spending habits and lifestyle. 
Because l’art-de-vivre is indeed an art.

So here it is:

If Leica started a new Plasti line (in a world where this would NOT hurt its corporate image, prestige, and sales), in orher words CETERIS PARIBUS. Would you be buying?

For example, Leica starts offering the 35mm APO-Summicron in an ALL Plastic body, plastic feeling, super light, plastic aperture blades, plastic smelling, but retaining the SAME OPTICS. Would you buy?

-Would you buy a PlastiCron Apo 35mm for 1800$?

-PlastiNoct 50mm f1.2 for 1900$?

-PlastiLux 50mm asph 1100$?

 

Yes?

no?

why?

 

 

I think the question about what Leica owners would do has already been answered. The Summarit line of M lenses was, in a lot of ways, intended to exactly fit this requirement; optically as good as the reference Summicrons, but with slightly less expensive fit/finish/materials. It didn’t sell well at all. All four Summarits were optically excellent. They were also compact, light, and moderately priced. Nobody bought them, and they were quickly discontinued. Was it because they were half a stop slower? I doubt it. The Elmer and Elmarit lines are even slower and still sell well at certain focal lengths—a couple are even revered. Leica buyers aren’t looking for optical quality alone.

[Capuccino-Muffin]

1 hour ago, pop said:

If that's a central part of your thread, you should have said so right at the beginning.

Time was when a marriage ring made of Aluminum (or Aluminium, depending on where you live) would have been a very expensive and rare item. Nowadays it isn't. Well, perhaps, they have become rare.

There are artificially made substances (a.k.a. plastics) with very properties that are very desirable for a given task. Also, if anyone thinks that all plastics are cheap, they are not well informed.

Sir, how could I be more clear? My post was about a 1100$ Plastic Summilux. Just stick to that.

 

[jaapv]

16 minutes ago, Jared said:

They were also compact, light, and moderately priced.

And made out of metal... The material had nothing to do with it.

[jaapv]

11 minutes ago, Capuccino-Muffin said:

My post was about a 1100$ Plastic Summilux

Which is a nonsensical thing. Precision-molding plastic of the required quality would be as expensive, if not more expensive than machining it out of metal. That the mechanical parts are so expensive, sometimes even more so than the optical parts, is caused by the extremely narrow tolerances required. It was, for instance, the reason that the APO-Summicrons could not be made until recently. The design was a decade old, but the impossibility of machining the mechanical parts to the required tolerances which has only recently become feasible held the production back.

[Capuccino-Muffin]

32 minutes ago, Jared said:

I think the question about what Leica owners would do has already been answered. The Summarit line of M lenses was, in a lot of ways, intended to exactly fit this requirement; optically as good as the reference Summicrons, but with slightly less expensive fit/finish/materials. It didn’t sell well at all. All four Summarits were optically excellent. They were also compact, light, and moderately priced. Nobody bought them, and they were quickly discontinued. Was it because they were half a stop slower? I doubt it. The Elmer and Elmarit lines are even slower and still sell well at certain focal lengths—a couple are even revered. Leica buyers aren’t looking for optical quality alone.

Yes.

However my example is that the customer could buy any existing Leica lens but at a great discount, because it would be made of plastic.

Also, the said Lens would have a pejorative name.

1450$ PlastiNoct 75mm f1.25, anyone?

Edited August 21, 2022 by Capuccino-Muffin

[jaapv]

4 minutes ago, Capuccino-Muffin said:

However my example is that the customer could buy any existing Leica lens but at a great discount, because it would be made of plastic.

 

Quite, but that is the nonsense. It would probably be more expensive, as the material and the fabrication would be more expensive.

[Jared]

3 minutes ago, Capuccino-Muffin said:

Yes.

However my example is that the customer could buy any existing Leica lens but at a great discount, because it would be made of plastic.

Also, the said Lens would have a pejorative name.

1450$ PlastiNoct 75mm f1.25, anyone?

The point is the same. Leica customers won’t pay for anything they perceive as less than the best—not just optically, but mechanically. Your example is just a more extreme version of the Summarit line.

In other words, I don’t think it would sell even if it were just as good optically, Even without the pejorative name.

[jaapv]

On top of that the price of bulk plastic, depending on the type, is about 2 Euro a kg, and Aluminium? About 2 Euro a kg...🤣

[erniethemilk]

2 hours ago, Capuccino-Muffin said:

“All the great Optical advantages, but with a shitty feeling”

😂

Sounds like a Fujifilm X lens 😂

[Capuccino-Muffin]

20 minutes ago, jaapv said:

On top of that the price of bulk plastic, depending on the type, is about 2 Euro a kg, and Aluminium? About 2 Euro a kg...🤣

The achievement of using Plastic is to cripple the product to the point of it feeling shitty.

A Holga, if it was made of aluminum, could be sold at a premium because shitty feeling gone.

Actually this is a question for another forum: Would you pay 100$ for a Holga Made out of Aluminum?

200$ if made of Brass?

[jaapv]

13 minutes ago, Capuccino-Muffin said:

The achievement of using Plastic is to cripple the product to the point of it feeling shitty.

Completely disconnected from reality. In many industrial products (including for instance exotic cars,) plastics are used to create a Premium experience.

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Capuccino-Muffin]

13 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Completely disconnected from reality. In many industrial products (including for instance exotic cars,) plastics are used to create a Premium experience.

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

But why oh why has this forum become a one-upmanship place?

Please stick to my original post which is clearly about cheapening a lens. It is NOT about space aircraft science not about super-plastics.

I repeat: my original post is NOT about space aircraft science, space age materials or advanced science. It is about cheapening lenses with plastics because the next material in line for that specific purpose would be cardboard, and that would be out of the question.

 

(Now please, cardbord lovers, no need to one-up me on the subject of cardboards. Yes, there are super advanced cardboards out there, for which I do not care one penny.)

[Capuccino-Muffin]

Wow, a lot of plastic lovers in here.

I guess my original question has been answered: some people would buy a PlastiLux but only if it was 200% the price of the original Summilux? LoL...

 

(yes, that’s humor)

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[thomasstellwag]

 

it is totally useless to reduce someting technical to a common name "plastic" for a wide field of products  and it doesn´t make sense to lead a kind of envy discussion under the alias of it

"professional" lenses, used  today in challenging till extreme environment are made from metal inlet and artificial material cover to make them work everytime and everywhere, that is state of the art engineering

looking at the number of Leica users buying Voigtländer, you see, that there is a customer base for better priced good lenses

 

Edited August 21, 2022 by thomasstellwag
removal from possibly provocative contend