Another Price King Lens

[Anbaric]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, wizard said:

Unfortunately, the link you provided does not work here. But I have just checked Leica's 2002 German price list. The Summicron M 2/50mm was listed for € 1155,- in 2002 (both black and silver versions). Whether that equals £599 at the time I do not know, but the current price for that same lens is € 2550,-, which certainly isn't quadruple, but is more in line with what your expectation was (roughly double the price).

It's the Wayback Machine, which can be a bit flaky at times - it doesn't always work for me either! To be fair, the pound would have been higher back then, pre-Crash and pre-Brexit, and UK VAT a little lower. That £599 is also a dealer price rather than a recommended retail price, which might have been higher. But wages here have only gone up ~1.72x over that period, so even a £1500 Summicron would be less affordable today (though of course high-end camera lenses aren't the only things that have gone up in price faster than salaries have). If German dealers were charging the RRP back in 2002, you could have saved a couple of hundred Euros at historical exchange rates by shopping in London, which would have been easy pre-Brexit. And that M6-TTL+35/2 deal would have been quite a steal.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[charlesphoto99]

For me the reason to use Leica lenses (new, old, used etc) vs the 'others' is the haptics. Leica lenses just look, feel and focus differently, regardless if the optical quality of other brands meets or exceeds that of Leica. Personally, I wouldn't/couldn't afford a new Leica lens these days, which is a bit sad. I'm glad I got all that I need (used) when I could. 

[adan]

A word to the wise....

On the whole, it is not a good idea to discuss Leica's financial history - unless one actually remembers Leica's financial history.

Yes, Leica prices were lower in 2002.

And -  Leica - was - going - bankrupt - at - those - prices.

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/6984380949/leica-financialtrouble

In 2005, Leica Camera AG (then a publicly-traded stock company) had to file a document with German authorities stating that, at current rates of losses (€10 million in 2004), it had less than one year's operating capital remaining.

This was the point where Dr. Kaufmann increased his investment, to acquire 51% of the Leica Camera stock. Whereupon he fired the top two executives at Leica, and brought in a Swiss financial turn-around expert (Dr. Josef Spichtig), on a 2-year contract to fix Leica.

And yes, that required rationalizing prices to a level that produced a sustainable profit, as well as getting the first M digital (M8) out the door, and killing the unprofitable traditional-SLR "R" system.

On the subject of Leica becoming a luxury product:

In the year 2000 - four years before its crisis, and before the intervention of Dr. Kaufmann, the French luxury fashion house Hermès had acquired 36% of Leica stock. 

So that was already in the works.

All Dr. K did was turn Leica into a relatively successful luxury brand, rather than a failing one.

[Anbaric]

5 hours ago, adan said:

And -  Leica - was - going - bankrupt - at - those - prices.

That's what I meant by ' Perhaps Leica would not have survived without it.' I don't blame them for choosing a strategy that allowed them to survive (and thrive), but the downside is that their current production is becoming increasingly irrelevant to many of us. I'm glad that Leica are still around (who else is going to tell me the city my 1939 IIIb was first delivered to?), but I'm about as likely to buy a £7200 Summicron as a £6200 Mont Blanc pen, and I suspect neither would improve my artistic output in any way that matters.

They might, of course, have taken a different path, as they did with Minolta and Panasonic and now (to some extent) do with Sigma - partner with an overseas company that can help them keep production costs reasonable. But if you go the full luxury route you can only do this sparingly without diluting the brand (people will notice if every other product is a rebadged Fuji like the Sofort). Expensive production methods become an end in themselves, justifying the expensive prices you sell your flagship products for, and their aura justifies the markup on the Sofort you had Fuji make a lot more cheaply.

[BernardC]

21 hours ago, Anbaric said:

It's the Wayback Machine, which can be a bit flaky at times - it doesn't always work for me either! To be fair, the pound would have been higher back then, pre-Crash and pre-Brexit, and UK VAT a little lower. That £599 is also a dealer price rather than a recommended retail price, which might have been higher.

The UKP was trading for twice what it is now, relative to the Canadian dollar. I remember it well, because my spouse was studying in the UK at the time.

So right off the bat, double that £599 to £1200 to compensate for the pound losing half its value. That's not Leica's fault.

Ffordes currently list the Summicron at £2250. In other words, half the price hike is due to Fx, and the other (smaller) half tracks with worldwide inflation. That's not too bad, given that Leica had the aura of a dying brand in 2002.

[Anbaric]

11 hours ago, BernardC said:

The UKP was trading for twice what it is now, relative to the Canadian dollar. I remember it well, because my spouse was studying in the UK at the time.

I think they stopped making Leicas in Canada some time ago. Over this period, the Euro has rise against the pound by about 1.35x. UK VAT has also gone up by 2.5%, to be fair.

Edited February 14, 2024 by Anbaric

[sometimesmaybe]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 2/13/2024 at 3:12 AM, hepcat said:

There are a lot more factors that go into making a photograph.  Whether or not you're using a Leitz (or Leica) lens just isn't that important in the final result unless you're photographing test charts in a lab

this is so true. im currently supporting 4 different systems (GFX, M, EF and m43), honestly i struggle to see any real difference. i just like the process of researching and buying the gear 😅

[pgk]

9 hours ago, Anbaric said:

I think they stopped making Leicas in Canada some time ago. Over this period, the Euro has rise against the pound by about 1.35x. UK VAT has also gone up by 2.5%, to be fair.

I may be wrong but I think that the 50mm f/1 Noctilux was produced under contract by Elcan (by then no longer owned by Leica) until 2008. But production of most lenses had stopped well before that probably most went in 1990 when Elac was sold to Hughes. There some info here: https://gmpphoto.blogspot.com/2017/09/a-very-important-part-of-leica-history.html but little about the M lens production and when it finished

[newtoleica]

The first and only NEW Leica I bought was an M9 in 2009. It’s always been used for me. The good thing about Leica quality is that it’s usually fine buying used. Just don’t mention the hassles getting an APO 75 that focuses properly…. 

[pgk]

1 hour ago, newtoleica said:

Just don’t mention the hassles getting an APO 75 that focuses properly…. 

I was lucky - second copy worked fine. I'm happy with the Summarit now though😄.

[BernardC]

12 hours ago, Anbaric said:

I think they stopped making Leicas in Canada some time ago. Over this period, the Euro has rise against the pound by about 1.35x. UK VAT has also gone up by 2.5%, to be fair.

I mentioned the Canadian dollar because I have personal experience. I bought UKP frequently around the time mentioned.

This is about the value of the pound, which is very different now compared to 2002. The large drop in relative value makes historical price comparisons complicated.

It would be interesting to see NYC and German prices from 22 years ago. I suspect that the rate of increase was much lower.

[hydet]

All good points, but can you give me an alternative to my M11M with an 35mm APO attached?  Or my M-A with a 50mm Summilux attached?  For me, these are important tools, albeit expensive ones, for the work I do.  

Edited February 15, 2024 by hydet
grammar

[RexGig0]

Some scattered thoughts, after reading through all of the posts:

Regarding other lens brands, as a user of three systems, I fully agree that Leica is not the “best of the best.” Some individual Leica M lenses are certainly the very best, within specific parameters, in my opinion. Whether any individual Leica M lens is worth paying eight to ten times more than its logical counterpart, of another brand, has to be judged on a lens-by-lens basis, in my opinion.

An example: I added the Leica M system because of ONE specific lens, the Summilux-M 50mm ASPH. I had just retired from a stressful occupation, in which one of my duties* had been to photograph living, breathing crime victims, dead suicide victims, crime scenes, and evidence. (Folks with different job descriptions photographed murder scenes.) After 7+ years of producing images with as much as possible within the depth of focus, with NO background blur, I wanted to create images with  beautiful focus transitions and beautiful background blur. I wanted to re-learn to care about photographing people. I needed a therapy lens, a meditative lens. This Summilux served my needs, with its perfect combination of slightly uncorrected optical aberrations.

Five years later, I decided to add a “more perfect” M lens, in the “normal” focal length range. The veiling flare, and ghosts, that a Summilux-M 50mm ASPH can produce, can be a hindrance, at times, especially when photographing people, pets, vehicles, and such things, who/which are outdoors, in bright sunlight, shaded by the wonderful Live Oaks here in SE Texas. Even the mighty APO Summicron-M 50mm ASPH does not seem to deal with flare as well as its logical competitor, the Cosina Voigtlander 50mm APO Lanthar. Even if they cost the same, the APO Lanthar seemed to be a technically better choice. The price of about $1K US, for the APO Lanthar, made this an “easy button” choice.

If we factor-out flare resistance, well, the 50 APO Lanthar is noticeably larger than the Leica APO M 50. The Leica option is a marvel of fitting wonderfully-corrected optics into a very small size envelope, with a sliding hood. Some shooters will value the compactness and/or sliding hood of the Leica APO, and may see that as being worth the price difference. I actually appreciate a lens barrel that I can firmly grasp with my left hand, especially if I have to move on steep or uneven terrain.

For a “price king” Leica lens, I can stay within the 50mm focal length, and nominate the Elmar-M 50mm f/2.8 collapsible lens. With “modern” optics, and compact size when collapsed, it is easy to like this lens. Vintage collapsible lenses will better-suit those shooters who do not prefer the modern rendering. When I want to drop an M camera into a large pocket or very small pouch/bag, or try to get through screening, into a venue that does not allow “professional” cameras, this price king doubles as a prince of conceal-ability.

I enjoyed using manual-focus lenses, well before I started using the Leica M system. Nikon DSLRs have tremendously helpful, accurate electronic visual aids, that appear in the bottom part of viewfinder. Nikon made some wonderful F-mount manual-focus lenses. Cosina has made, and still makes some wonderful Zeiss- and Voigtlander-branded lenses, for the Nikon F mount, so, it has made perfectly good sense for me to add M-mount Zeiss ZM and Voigtlander VM and LTM lenses.

I would enjoy using a rangefinder system, with cameras about the size of Leica M cameras, even if I owned no Leica lenses or Leica cameras. I have very nearly acquired a Zeiss Ikon M-mount 35mm film camera, on occasion. It may yet happen.

 *I do not claim to have been a “professional photographer.” I do not claim to be any kind of expert. I did strive to produce the best possible images, while a public servant.

[Anbaric]

On 2/15/2024 at 12:26 PM, BernardC said:

I mentioned the Canadian dollar because I have personal experience. I bought UKP frequently around the time mentioned.

This is about the value of the pound, which is very different now compared to 2002. The large drop in relative value makes historical price comparisons complicated.

It would be interesting to see NYC and German prices from 22 years ago. I suspect that the rate of increase was much lower.

I think this says more about the Canadian dollar than anything else, which was at a historic low even against the US dollar in 2002. I remember going to Vancouver in the 2000s and being pleasantly surprised by the spending power of my exchanged currency, a much better deal than I got in the US. The Euro is a much more relevant comparison here because Leicas, after all, are made in the Eurozone. Between 2005 and 2010, the Euro rose against the pound by about 25%. Over the same period, the price of the Leica 50/2 at the shop mentioned above shot up from £758 to £1435, a rise of 89%.

Today, Leica are selling a 45 year old design for more than 3.5x the price of the comparable Zeiss, and more than 2.5x the cost of the optically far superior Apo-Lanthar, which should really be compared to Leica's £7200 APO (8x the price of the Voigtländer). Yes, it's relatively expensive to make things in Portugal and Germany, but it's not exactly cheap to run a factory in Japan, either. Yes, Leica generally has the edge in construction quality, but the Cosina-made lenses are by any standards fine pieces of optical engineering. I'd expect a price differential, but a significant chunk of the 'Leica premium' is just the name and the brand image they have carefully nurtured in the boutique era.

[BernardC]

1 hour ago, Anbaric said:

Today, Leica are selling a 45 year old design for more than 3.5x the price of the comparable Zeiss,

It's 3x today at Ffordes, but I would argue that the price difference is partly justified by a difference in construction. I have a Zeiss 50, and the build quality is noticeably worse than any Leica lens that I own. For instance, the focus is rough in portrait orientation, and smooth in landscape orientation. That's something I can live with, but I'm under no illusion that it's the bargain of the century. It's a cheaper product for a cheaper price. Nothing unusual about that, you pay 3x more for a pair of boots that will last a lifetime, compared to boots that last a year or two.  Another consideration is that the ZM lens is likely discontinued and selling from old stock. I doubt they built more batches in the 6 years since I bought mine, and it probably wasn't fresh then.

All of that is beside the point, of course. Leica introduced a series of cheaper M lenses a decade ago, and they got flack for it, even though those lenses had no compromise in build quality or optical quality. They aren't competing at the bottom of the market with new lenses (used lenses being a different matter, of course).

You confirm my point about Fx. You can get different numbers by comparing with a different currency and picking a different base year, but the overall trend is that the UKP has declined relative to other currencies over the past two decades. This needs to be taken into account when comparing historical prices. How much of an effect this has on a specific date is arguable (there's always some arbitrage going on), but you need to compare several currencies in order to separate the "Leica effect" from influences outside of any company's control.