Why no new lenses from Rodenstock, Schneider, Cooke?

[scaryink]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Digital M8 owners appear to be quite affluent and not afraid to spend some serious dollars on quality lenses.

 

I am wondering why these three excellent lens producers do not make any current production m mount lenses. This would certainly appear to be an additional large market in conjunction with LF, digital MF and cine lens.

 

Digital M users also have quite the fetish for all things German/European so price shouldn't be an issue.

[Walt Calahan]

Cooke is making their money building cine lenses. They do plan on starting their LF production back up I'm told. Their LF glass is very rare.

 

Can't speak for Rodenstock or Schneider.

[wlaidlaw]

I understand from a quiet conversation a couple of months ago, with a friend who used to work for Zeiss UK, that their excellent ZM lenses are not exactly "flying off the shelves". Why then would any other manufacturer seek to enter this field to snatch part of a very limited market? They would have to be super competitive in either price or performance. Not something calculated to produce big profits.

 

I would guess that Leica themselves, are not currently struggling to meet the demand for M fit lenses. I also suspect that sales of the modern Summarit range have been disappointing. I personally know and meet with about 8 to 10 M users and I think I am the only one with any Summarit lens (a 75mm).

 

Unless Zeiss totally surprises us all and comes out with a digital Ikon, I think the ZM range will be allowed to gently fade away. If a full frame M9 comes out in the next five years, there would be a brief flurry of extra sales but then that would be it.

 

Wilson

[luigi bertolotti]

Wlaidlaw... count a +1 with Summarit 75... : but I think you're right on Summarit sales... am I wrong or one of Stefan Daniel's assertions in the recent meeting was that Summilux 50 sales exceed Summarit 50's by a factor of 10 ?

 

Anyway, I think it's such a niche market that Rodenstock/Schneider (now 2 brands of the same Company, I seem) has no reason to invest on it... and I should be curios to investigate CV financials of their RF lenses' biz....

[vla]

+ one more 75mm summarit owner, very pleased with that lens ...

markus

[Nicoleica]

I too have a Summarit, but mine's a 35. I'm very happy with it indeed.

[wlaidlaw]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I was not saying there was anything wrong with the Summarits, I was only saying I suspect the sales have proved a great disappointment to Leica. My 75 "Mit" is a perfectly good lens, although not up to the standard of a 75 Summicron. However at the use frequency of a 75mm on my M8, I just could not justify the cost of the Summicron.

 

Wilson

[stunsworth]

The problem with the Summarits and Zeiss lenses is that they are competing with used Leica glass from a price perspective. The Voigtlander lenses on the other hand tend to be lower than any equivalent lens from Leica, new or used. Remember the first lenses introduced were low priced 15mm and 25mm lenses.

 

I can't imagine the film body is exactly selling well either.

[wlaidlaw]

 

I can't imagine the film body is exactly selling well either.

 

In Eurovision Song Contest terms - NUL Points.

 

Wilson

[carstenw]

To get back to the original point, I am not sure that a Rodenstock or Schneider M lens would necessarily be any better than Leica lenses. The strength of those lenses in LF comes in part because they are symmetric, rigid designs. Leica really does have top-notch lens-making technology, and for anyone else entering the market, only price can be a clear advantage. When you are another small German maker, you cannot compete on price. Labour is expensive here.

[jaapv]

Actually Schneider did build a few lenses for Leica, and the PA Curtagon-R (IIRC) was offered both as a Schneider lens and a Leica badged version.

[wlaidlaw]

Actually Schneider did build a few lenses for Leica, and the PA Curtagon-R (IIRC) was offered both as a Schneider lens and a Leica badged version.

 

Aren't the various Leica badged Angulon's Schneider designs as well?

 

Wilson

[jaapv]

Yes, that Is what I would say from the top of my head as well.

[UliWer]

Rodenstock is no producer of lenses for photograhic instruments any more; they concentrate on glasses. Their former lens department belongs to Linos and still makes a few designs for medium or large format cameras. Schneider's production for photographic gear are mainly lenses for cinema cameras and projectors as well as some small stuff for compact cameras (Samsung) or cell phone cams.

 

So after the split from Microsystems Leica Camera AG is the last producer in germany concentrating on the photographic consumer market. Competition is essential for the difference between a living market and a churchyard. So let us hope that Cosina/Voigtlaender and Zeiss will go on with products for the M-System.

[roydonian]

Several years ago, Cooke considered offering its classic Speed Panchro cine lens in a Leica mounting, and asked members of what was then the UK-based Leica Historical Society if they would be interested in purchasing this lens if it were to be built.

 

I don't know what response they had.

[bill]

Digital M8 owners appear to be quite affluent and not afraid to spend some serious dollars on quality lenses.

 

I am wondering why these three excellent lens producers do not make any current production m mount lenses. This would certainly appear to be an additional large market in conjunction with LF, digital MF and cine lens.

 

Digital M users also have quite the fetish for all things German/European so price shouldn't be an issue.

 

I'm really not trying to be funny, let alone insulting, but this is a classic Leica-fan blinkered and romantic view of the world. It makes assumptions then bases an unrealistic proposition on a personal and uninformed view.

 

The primary reason why any company, let alone those mentioned, do not produce M-mount lenses is because they do not realistically believe that they can make money by doing so. The M-mount market is relatively small. There is not a lot of unmet demand. The market is dominated by Leica at the "top" end, and CV at the "bottom". Leica's USP is quality, CV's is value for money. They are at opposite ends of the value proposition.

 

Anyone else who wants to play will have to either a) out-quality Leica or undercut CV. The middle ground - good quality at a good price - is a killing field, neither one thing nor the other. Zeiss have found this, as have others who have dabbled from time to time. Leica and CV have the market largely to themselves for a reason - the cost of market entry vs. the ROI does not stack up.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[wlaidlaw]

Several years ago, Cooke considered offering its classic Speed Panchro cine lens in a Leica mounting, and asked members of what was then the UK-based Leica Historical Society if they would be interested in purchasing this lens if it were to be built.

 

I don't know what response they had.

 

I would have thought that this lens would have needed a lot of modification to get a large enough quality image circle, remembering that 35mm cine film is only 24mm x 18mm frame size (30mm diagonal), due to the film running vertically. A 35mm still camera has a 43.27mm diagonal.

 

Wilson

[earleygallery]

Anyone else who wants to play will have to either a) out-quality Leica or undercut CV. The middle ground - good quality at a good price - is a killing field, neither one thing nor the other. Regards,

 

Bill

 

Going a little off topic but I have made this point in other threads calling for 'more affordable' options from Leica.

 

Leica obviously listened in part to the demands for more affordable products (lenses and M bodies especially) and brought out the Summarits. Result? most people (going from the forum sample anyway) prefer to plump for a cheaper alternative and save for the Leica, or buy s/h.

 

Its a bit like the divers watch syndrome (sorry to make comparisions with Leica's and watches - hate it when people do that but you could apply it to 4WD vehicles too) - how many people actually go diving to 100M with them? (or seriously off road). But you could try to sell something that looks the same but isn't waterproof or doesn't go off road, and you can bet nobody would be interested.

 

(I would qualify the above by adding that if/when the FF M arrives, there could be a market for an alternative lower cost body based on the crop sensor)

 

Getting back on thread, M users currently have an enormous selection of optics both new and s/h to choose from, why do you want more?

[luigi bertolotti]

.....Getting back on thread, M users currently have an enormous selection of optics both new and s/h to choose from, why do you want more?

 

Add also the fact that M is a RF and NOT a SLR... and this poses many limits on the lenses one can imagine to make... a 3rd party cannot invent "the compact zooms for M" or "the mirror teles for M"... ; CV has already been capable to fill some side niches with their 12 and 15... now is trying to enter with "the Noctliux alternative"... any 3rd party should have to struggle with "usual" focals with some peculiarity... really a difficult-unworthy task.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[roydonian]

I would have thought that this lens would have needed a lot of modification to get a large enough quality image circle, remembering that 35mm cine film is only 24mm x 18mm frame size (30mm diagonal), due to the film running vertically. A 35mm still camera has a 43.27mm diagonal.

Wilson

 

When I said "Speed Panchro cine lens" I wasn't implying that Cooke were proposing the lens in the version used in cine cameras. The reference to 'cine' was just to put the lens into context for readers who might have wondered what the Speed Panchro was.

 

Cooke were almost certainly proposing a Speed Panchro variant custom-designed to cover the 24 x 36mm format. I dropped out of the LHS when it became The Leica Society, so have no idea if the proposal attracted any interest from members.