Are Leicas really too expensive? And what about Nikons? History tells the tale!

Leicas have always been expensive, but is Nikon far behind?
Comparing old and current prices for both reveals amazing insights!

By Jason Schneider

If you haven’t shopped for a Leica lately and want to experience sticker shock, just cruise one of the major photo retailer’s websites and check out the current prices being asked for new Leica cameras and lenses. While nobody doubts that Leica turns out unique and exceptional cameras and superlative optics, are their prices now out of line with other top companies in the imaging space? Have they outpaced even rampant inflation? To put it all in perspective we’ve compared Leica and Nikon prices from the 1950s to the present and converted them all into 2023 dollars to reveal some surprising facts.

Leica I (Model A) with 50mm f-3.5 Elmar.jpeg
Leica I (Model A) of 1925 was the first Leica sold to the public. At an initial price of $75.00 it certainly wasn't cheap (see text).

The very first Leica, the Leica I (Model A) was initially priced at $75.00 when it debuted in 1925. It was a princely sum, equivalent to $1,303.40 in 2023 dollars. Three years later, in 1928, E. Leitz Wetzlar upped the price of the “Leica A” to $95.00, equivalent to a staggering $1,689.59 in 2023 dollars. And remember this was for a spartan, minimalist “precision miniature” 35mm camera with a non-interchangeable, scale focusing 50mm f/3.5 Elmar lens and timed shutter speeds ranging from 1/20-1/500 sec. Obviously, this camera was intended for well-heeled connoisseurs, not for the mass market. However, it sold remarkably well despite its steep price because it was a unique, meticulously crafted camera with a timeless, ergonomic form factor, that was capable of outstanding performance—a formula for success Leica has steadfastly pursued even up to the present day.

To give you the best idea of how Leica and Nikon prices have evolved over the years it helps to select a line of products that has remained more-or-less comparable for several decades—it will not do to compare, for example, the prices of top-tier 35mm rangefinder cameras with those of late model DSLRs or today’s most advanced mirrorless marvels. Fortunately, there are two great lines of 35mm analog cameras that have retained their discrete identities over the course of more than 5 decades, the Leica M series (1954 to the present) and the Nikon F series (1959-2018). Note: Since it’s nearly impossible to determine actual selling prices for cameras, which are largely undocumented except possibly in ads, we’ve compared official factory prices, which reveal the broad trends. Many cameras and lenses, including those listed here, are often sold at discounted prices and in general it’s fair to say that Leica items are more often sold at list price or with smaller discounts than Nikon items. We therefore advise caution in drawing conclusions based on direct comparisons.

Price evolution of the Leica M

The landmark Leica M3 was introduced in 1954 at the price of $288.00 body only ($3,178 in 2023 dollars) and $447.00 with 50mm f/2 Summicron lens (a hefty $4,931.91 equivalent in 2023 dollars!). By April 1959 the price of a Leica M3 with a first generation 50mm f/1.4 Summilux lens was $468.00, equivalent to $4,80626, in 2023 dollars, a teensy price drop compared to 1954 when you factor in the faster lens. However, by 1962, a Leica M3 with (improved 2nd generation) 50mm f/1.4 Summilux would set you back $513.00, or $5,075.23 in 2023 dollars, and by 1965 the same outfit sold for $516.00, a slight drop to $4,908.57 in 2023 dollars. For the record, in 1965 a new Leicaflex (the original 1964 model now known as the “Standard”) was priced at $406.00 ($3,862.17 in 2023 dollars) body only, and $585.00 ($5,564.94 in 2023 dollars) with 50mm f/2 Summicron-R lens.

Leica M3 double stroke with collapsible 50mm f:2 Summicron.JPG
The landmark Leica M3, double stroke version shown here, cost $447.00 with collapsible Summicron lens in 1954, but that was a pile of dough!

By 1968 you could buy a new Leica M3 or M4 body (take your pick) for the grand sum of $288.00 ($2,521.46 in 2023 dollars) or an M2S (an M2 with self-timer) body at the bargain price of $249.00 ($2,180.01 in 2023 dollars). The newly released Leicaflex SL was then priced at $465.00 body only, or $639.00 with 50mm f/2 Summicron-R ($4,071.11 and $5,594.49 in 2023 dollars respectively). Prices jumped a bit in 1969 with the Leica M4 with 50mm f/1.4 Summilux rising to $612.00 ($5,116.61 in 2023 dollars), and the price of a Leicaflex SL with 50mm f/2 Summicron increasing to $738.00 (a whopping $6,170.03 in 2023 dollars).

Leica M5 with 50mm f:2 Summicron.JPG
The Leica M5, shown here with 50mm f/2 Summicron lens, was a fine camera, but considered inelegant. Its high price didn't help sales either.

By 1972 the Leica M5 arrived, and its initial price was $675.00 body only ($4,874,40 in 2023 dollars) and $948.00 with 50mm f/1.4 Summilux lens (a hefty $6,845.83 in 2023 dollars). If you think that’s high, only 2 years later in 1974 the M5/Summilux combo was priced at $1,320.00, equal to a staggering $8,479.91 in 2023 dollars! Many complained that the Leica M5 was “inelegant” and “un-Leica-like” but its high price surely contributed to its lack of success in the marketplace as well. By the way, the last of the Wetzlar-made Leicaflexes, the SL2, was priced at $987.00 body only, equal to $6,340.66 in 2023 dollars.

Leica M6 with 50mm f:1.4 Summilux-M.JPG
Leica M6 of 1984 looks gorgeous in black with matching second generation 50mm f/1.4 Summilux that was in production from 1961-2004!

The brief tale of the Leica M6, which debuted in 1984, is also fascinating. In January 1985 it was selling for $1,497.00, equivalent to $4,219.42 in 2023 dollars, but by March 1986 it shot up to $2,100.00 ($5,702.41 in 2023 dollars), and by July 1989, it is referenced by at least one reliable source at $3,375.00 (equal to a mind-blowing $8,312.00 in $2023 dollars). Judging by that standard, the forthcoming beautiful new black 2023 edition of the Leica M6 qualifies as an absolute bargain at a mere $5,295.00 and it even comes with a presentation box and a leather Leica strap! Or, for only 400 bucks more ($5,695.00), you can snag a classic black or chrome Leica MP, originally billed as a metered manual exposure version of the late lamented autoexposure M7. Finally, if you don’t need no stinkin’ meter (or its telltale front-mounted battery compartment cover) you can save a blistering 100 bucks (compared to the MP), by opting for the last of the meterless Leica Ms, the timeless classic Leica M-A, in your choice of black or chrome.

Is a new analog Leica M expensive? Sure, but that’s a Leica tradition that goes back nearly 100 years, and the current prices do not, in my arrogant opinion, reflect an excessive escalation when you factor for inflation over the last half century.

Price evolution of the Nikon S and Nikon F

Nikon (Nippon Kogaku) was Leica’s most successful rival in the glory days of elite interchangeable-lens rangefinder cameras in the mid-1950s, though by the late ‘50s Canon also became a leading contender. Sadly, the Zeiss Contax never really evolved beyond the lovely Contax IIa/IIIa of 1950 (a simplified, more reliable iteration of the prewar Contax II and III) and it was ultimately discontinued by 1961.

Nikon S2 with 50mm Nikkor-H.C lens.jpeg
Gorgeous Nikon S2 of `1954-1956, shown here with 50mm f/2-H.C Nikkor was first Nikon with 24 x 36 format and life-size 1:1 viewfinder.

The first Nikon to really compete head-to-head with the Leica M3 and M2 was the Nikon S2 of the md ‘50s. It was the first Nikon to provide a standard 24x36mm full frame format, and the first with a large life-size 1:1 viewfinder with a single, fixed, etched frame line for the 50mm lens, and a ratcheted single stroke film wind lever. Like its predecessors, the Nikon S and Nikon M, the S2’s in-body rotating bayonet lens mount and rangefinder mechanism are based on (but not identical to) those in the Contax. However, Nikon’s engineers wisely chose to use a Leica type rubberized cloth horizontal focal plane shutter instead of the Contax’s pesky and more complex vertical metal slat roller blind shutter—and the S2 also had its top shutter speed raised to 1/1000 sec to be competitive with the Leica.

The price of a Nikon S2 in 1955 was $299.50 with 50mm f/2 lens (equal to $3,329.24 in 2023 dollars), and $345.00 with the iconic 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor-S.C ($3,835.02 in 2023 dollars). The latter is about $1,000 2023 dollars less than a comparable Leica M3 with 50mm f/1.4 Summilux, ana in line with the general notion that Nikon cameras cost roughly 30% less comparable Leicas at that time.

Nikon SP with 50mm f:1.4 Nikkor-S.jpeg
The glorious Nikon SP of 1957-1960, shown here with iconic 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor-S lens, was the last and most advanced rangefinder Nikon

The most advanced Nikon rangefinder 35, the grand and glorious Nikon SP of 1957-1960, which famously has a full array of projected, user selected parallax compensating frame lines for lenses 50-135mm and a separate wide-angle finder usable for 28 and 35mm focal lengths, was undoubtedly the closest thing to an archrival the Leica M-series ever had. And in 1958, Nikon also unveiled the Nikon S3, a simplified, lower cost model, with a life-size viewfinder and fixed etched frame lines for 35mm, 50mm, and 105mm lenses. In 1958, the Nikon SP with 50mm f/2 lens was priced at $369.50 (equal to $3,861.50 in 2023 dollars) and $415.00 with a 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor-S.C (the equivalent of $4,337.00 in 2023 dollars. The “economy” Nikon S3, was offered at $309.50, a paltry $3,234.46 in 2023 dollars. Conclusion: in the heyday of the elite rangefinder 35 Nikons were not exactly cheap, but you could save about 30% by opting for a Nikon camera as opposed to a Leica. Of course, that doesn’t take into consideration which one you’d rather shoot with. Personally, I’d pick the Leica M3, which (for me) has better ergonomics and handling and a brighter, crisper, range/viewfinder, albeit with fewer frame lines than the SP. As for Nikons, I’ve always been partial to the S2, a masterpiece of understated precision with a wonderful (and uncluttered) life-size viewfinder.

Nikon F with plain prism and 50mm f-1.4 Nikkor.jpg
The Nikon F of 1959, shown here with plain prism and legendary F-mount 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor-S lens, sparked the SLR revolution the '60s.

When the Nikon F debuted in 1959 it created a sensation and revolutionized the photographic marketplace. Nikon’s first SLR was a rugged full system camera with an interchangeable prism and focusing screens, a large bayonet F mount, a titanium foil focal plane shutter, a fully removable back for mounting professional accessories including motor drives, and a single stroke ratcheted film advance lever. It was, in short, the pro SLR version of Nikon’s top-tier rangefinder cameras and by 1962 it was complemented by a full line of F/mount lenses ranging from a 21mm ultrawide to a 1000mm super-tele. The interchangeable prism allowed Nikon to offer a succession of ever more sophisticated coupled meter prisms allowing users to upgrade their cameras as new and better TTL metering systems were developed, a striking example of non-obsolescence that attracted many pros and serious enthusiasts and helped establish the Nikon’s reputation as the top professional SLR.

Nikon F2 with 50mm f:1.4 Nikkor-S and DP 1 prism.jpeg
The Nikon F2, 1971 successor to the Nikon F, shown here with 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor-S and DP 1 meter finder, is one of the best SLRs of its era.

The original 1959 selling price for a Nikon F with plain prism and 50mm f/2 lens was a surprisingly low $186.00, equivalent to a measly $1,901.18 in 2023 dollars. However, by late 1963, the Nikon F was evidently such a hot item that the prices had skyrocketed to $233.00 body only with standard prism (equal to $2,274.79 in 2023 dollars) and $90 ($878.68 in 2023 dollars) for a 50mm f/2 lens, and a whopping $155.00 ($1,513.27 in 2023 dollars) for a 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor. Soooo…the most popular combo, a Nikon F with the 50mm f/1.4, would have set you back $388.00, a stupendous $3,788.07 in 2023 dollars. The follow-up Nikon F2 (1971-1980) was listed in 1972 at $660.00 with Photomic finder and 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor-S (equal to $4,766.08 in 2023 dollars) though discounts were widely available.

The Nikon F6: Last of the line, maybe the best, and a bargain to boot!

The Nikon F6 (2004-2020) was Nikon’s ultimate flagship 35mm SLR, a pro-caliber machine that incorporated all the latest advances. These included an 11-area AF system with 9 cross-sensors that provides exceptional speed and performance, a rugged, weatherproof die-cast chassis with magnesium alloy covers, 41 Custom Settings with a customizable function button, a high-tech Kevlar and aluminum alloy 150,000-cycle shutter with speeds to 1/8000 sec, an improved 1005-pixel Color Matrix Metering System, and i-TTL Balanced Fill-Flash and Creative lighting System functions. Other features: 7 interchangeable focusing screens, maximum burst rate of 5.5 fps (8 fps with optional MB-40 Battery Pack), and full viewfinder information. The last reliable selling (not list!) price we could find for a brand-new Nikon F6 body is $2,549.00 in 2019 ($3.011.29 in 2023 dollars) though it was widely available at $100-$200 less during its last 10 years of production. These days you can snag a clean fully functional Nikon F6 for about a grand on the top online auction sites; about $100-$200 more for one with a 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor. If you’re a film dinosaur like me, that’s a pretty good deal on a truly great camera.

Nikon F6 with 50mm f-1.4 G.jpeg
Last of the Nikon F line, the Nikon F6 off 2004-2020, shown here with 50mm f/1.4D AF Nikkor, may well be the ultimate analog SLR of all time.

An addendum on 50mm f/1.4 Summilux price evolution

As you may know, the original 50mm f/1.4 Summulux-M of 1959 was based on the old Summarit optical formula, and it’s a nice lens with pleasing rendition (especially for portraiture) but it’s not nearly a sharp as the exceptional revised version of 1961-1962 that was designed by the legendary Dr. Walter Mandler and remained in production until it was replaced by the 50mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH. in 2004!

50mm f:1.4 Summilux-M type 1.jpg
The first 50mm f/1.4 Summilux of1959-1960, aka the Type 1, was based on the Summarit. It's a nice lens, but not as sharp as its successor.

Well, the original 50mm f/1.4 Summilux debuted at $188.00 in 1959 (equivalent to $2,033.42 in 2023 dollars), increased to $216.00 for the new version in 1962 and 1964 (equivalent to $2,136.94 and $2,074.70 respectively in 2023 dollars), and decreased to $210.00 in 1965 (equal to $1,997.67 in 2023 dollars). After some further fluctuations it settled down to $229.00 in chrome, and $252 in black in 1969 (equivalent to $1,914.55 and $2,106.84 respectively in 2023 dollars). Near mint used examples of the second version of the non-ASPH. 50mm f/1.4 Summilux are currently available on the top online auction sites at around $2,500-$3,000 per copy, so you’d have to say they hold their value very well.

50mm f:1.4 Summilux version 2.jpg
The second iteration of the 50mm f/1.4 Summilux that debuted in 1961 is superb, a timeless classic that was in production until 2004!

The latest Summilux-M: Hyperinflation, or just that better costs more?

50mm f:1.4 Summilux-M ASPH. 2023 Edition.jpg
The forthcoming Summilux-M 50mm f/1.4 ASPH. of 2023 is pricey, but it may be the best M-mount Summilux ever and it gets down to 1.5 ft.

The new Leica Summilux-M 50mm f/1.4 ASPH. Lens (Leica M, Black, 2023 Version) is of course an optically upgraded lens and may well be the finest 50mm f/1.4 Summilux in M-mount that has ever been produced. Featuring virtually the same superlative optical formula as the classic Summilux M ASPH. introduced nearly 20 years ago, the new lens offers a few notable updates. Perhaps most significant, like the APO-Summicron-M 35mm f/2 ASPH., the revised 35mm Summilux-M features close-focusing down to 1.5 feet (enabling compelling closeups that can be focused in Live View on digital Leica Ms) thanks to a newly developed patent-pending double cam focusing unit. Also new are an eleven-bladed diaphragm for enhanced bokeh when stopped down, and a built-in retractable circular lens shade. Not surprisingly, acquiring the latest, most flexible, and maybe the best 50mm Summilux-M ever comes at a price, namely $4,495.00 in 2023 dollars, and you may have to wait a bit because it’s just been announced, and is currently listed as “coming soon.” The upside: The previous version, which looks stunning in silver (still currently available but out of stock) costs $300 more!

A realistic end-user’s choice in 1963: Leica M3 vs. Nikon F

In 1963, 4 years after the introduction of the Nikon F, a Nikon F with plain prism and 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor was priced at $388.00, and 9 years after the Leica M3 debuted, it was priced at $513.00 with a (superb generation 2) 50mm f/1.4 Summilux. The difference in 1963 dollars is $125, which doesn’t sound like it would be a game changer for many buyers, but it represents a whopping $1,220.38 in 2023 dollars. Indeed, that’s one reason the Nikon outsold the Leica by more than a 10:1 ratio!

At the time, the 50mm f/1.4 Summilux was the finest series production f/1.4 lens in the world, but the 35mm SLR was in its ascendency due to its greater optical flexibility, TTL viewfinder, and inherent freedom from parallax at all distances. Its lineal descendant, the DSLR, remained the dominant camera type among serious shooters until a few years ago when the mighty mirrorless finally took its place.
 
Last edited:
It's difficult to know if there's something of interest or value in an article until you've read it, Jason.
BTW: By and large, I enjoy your articles and usually find something of value in reading them.

The constant harping on prices when it comes to Leica and other high end camera gear, however, is a noisome drudge to me. I read the article because you wrote it, I thought there's be some interesting bits of info there, but the ensuing discussion becomes all the same thing I hear over and over and over again on every forum when it comes to the cost of things, particularly Leica things.

G
There is a consensus
 
It seems Leicas will always be two things, controversial and expensive.

Leica is indeed both but you also need look beyond the simple cost of buying into kit. Where can you still find an OEM who stocks parts and will repair film cameras and their lenses from mid last century? Canon? Nikon? Zeiss? I’d bought a 1958 50mm Rigid years back with internal damage to its focus in mechanism and additional damage by someone who tried to repair it. So severe that even DAG couldn’t fix. As a last ditch effort before selling it off for parts, I sent it to Leica. Cost me quite a bit however it was returned to spec and now operates flawlessly. Just today there’s a new thread by Phil Forrest ilooking for someone to work on his Nikonos V. A lot younger than a Barnack, M2/3/4 or a 1950’s Summicron
 
Last edited:
I have been thinking about buying a Leica since 1973, and I still need some more time to think about it. Every time I am about to whip out the old credit card, I think how a Leica is really expensive, less versatile than my SLRs, and the only reason to own one is to say you own one. And that last reason has its drawbacks, because most of the people I have met who own Leicas are so self-satisfied about owning a Leica, I'd be embarrassed to carry one around in public. I may get one anyway, but I need some time to think about it.
 
Last edited:
I have been thinking about buying a Leica since 1973, and I still need some more time to think about it. Every time I am about to whip out the old credit card, I think how a Leica is really expensive, less versatile than my SLRs, and the only reason to own one is to say you own one. And that last reason has its drawbacks, because most of the people I have met who own Leicas are so self-satisfied about owning a Leica, I'd be embarrassed to carry one around in public. I may get one anyway, but I need some time to think about it.
Understand.

Now, go borrow one. Do you like a 50mm lens? 35mm? Which ever, get one of them borrowed with it. Just that lens to keep it simple. Doesn't need to be a Leica lens - can be a Canon or Nikon or Chiyoko or, even, yes, Leica. Just so it's a good clean lens. If it's a film Leica, run a half dozen rolls through it and if it's digital shoot at least that much as well. That will give you an idea of if USING a Leica is for you.

See, I'm a broke SOB. I work as an overnight audit clerk at a hotel. I don't make **** for an income.

I CAN NOT AFFORD a Leica.

And yet I have found ways to do so anyway. Why? Because I like the process. I like HOW I take pictures with my M 240. I like the look of the pictures I get with my Canon 50/1.4 or my Chiyoko 50/2 Super Rokkor because they look very distinctly different (under the right circumstances) from the images I can get from my Nikkors and my D7100. A Leica is not just another mirrorless camera. It's manual focus for one important thing and for another YOU chose everything.

So I spend my inheritance. I sell things. I take things to the pawn shop. I do without. I eat lots of ramen and peanut butter sandwiches.

Because to _ME_ that Leica is worth every F'n penny.
 
I CAN NOT AFFORD a Leica.

And yet I have found ways to do so anyway. Why? Because I like the process. I like HOW I take pictures with my M 240. I like the look of the pictures I get with my Canon 50/1.4 or my Chiyoko 50/2 Super Rokkor because they look very distinctly different (under the right circumstances) from the images I can get from my Nikkors and my D7100. A Leica is not just another mirrorless camera. It's manual focus for one important thing and for another YOU chose everything.

So I spend my inheritance. I sell things. I take things to the pawn shop. I do without. I eat lots of ramen and peanut butter sandwiches.

Because to _ME_ that Leica is worth every F'n penny.
Please describe in detail the "process" that you find so engaging with a Leica. I have been using manual and automatic exposure SLRs with manual focus lenses for 50 years, so I am familiar with the "YOU chose everything" part of the "process". Is their something else?
 
Last edited:
It just is for me. I find it easier to focus with the RF than on the GG of an SLR. I find having the area around what will be in the image visable to me quite useful to me when composing my image than it would to have only what will be in the image like in an SLR finder. Does that help? I feel like we're talking past each other and I'm not sure how to fix that.
 
Well, a difference is that Mr. Hiroshi designed a fast lens, that was introduced before the Summilux, but with minimal / no focus shift. And then in 1964, Nikon introduced the Olympic Nikkor 50mm f/1.4, which not only was probably the equal of the V2 Summilux, but also had minimal / no focus shift.

I was hoping somebody would mention the Olympic Nikkor 50/1.4! I'm guessing that version was scarce enough (and late enough to the party, which by then had become mostly SLR-centric) that it never made it into a lot of in-period lens tests; industry journalists may not even have realized it was different from the older one for which they already had tests on file...
 
It just is for me. I find it easier to focus with the RF than on the GG of an SLR. I find having the area around what will be in the image visable to me quite useful to me when composing my image than it would to have only what will be in the image like in an SLR finder. Does that help? I feel like we're talking past each other and I'm not sure how to fix that.
We are not talking past one another. You said you liked the "process" of using a Leica and I asked you to expound on that. You now you say you prefer rangefinder focus. Preferring rangefinder focus is a perfectly valid reason for preferring a Leica. Is their anything else unique to the process of using a Leica that you are enamored of.
 
Last edited:
the ensuing discussion becomes all the same thing I hear over and over and over again on every forum
That's what forums are all about...discussions. And yes, you might hear things more than once. :)

I find the price discussion interesting and relevant, but it's always worthwhile to put things into perspective. In prior years I spent as much as $4500 on a camera body ($7200 in today's money) more than once, but there is no way I would ever do that again. That's just me. I am not going to be critical of anyone else who decides to spend that much or more, as each person has their own perspective and determination of value. Speaking of hobbyists; those who use cameras as tools to make a living have differing criteria.

Perhaps the real story here is how our governments continue to devalue currencies...
 
I was hoping somebody would mention the Olympic Nikkor 50/1.4! I'm guessing that version was scarce enough (and late enough to the party, which by then had become mostly SLR-centric) that it never made it into a lot of in-period lens tests; industry journalists may not even have realized it was different from the older one for which they already had tests on file...
This is a really great article on the original Olympic Nikkor if you have not already seen it. NIKKOR - The Thousand and One Nights No.77 | NIKKOR - The Thousand and One Nights | Nikon Consumer

Imho, the coolest part of the story was that when Nikon was considering remaking the S3, the designers originally wanted to copy the original 50mm f/1.4 Sonnar-derivative, but another designer convinced it instead to recreate the Olympic Nikkor (a much better idea). So they recreated the lens using modern glass and multicoating, which greatly improved performance over the original. It's a real shame that Nikon did not market the lens as a standalone and/or consider making a batch in M39/M mount.
 
…most of the people I have met who own Leicas are so self-satisfied about owning a Leica, I'd be embarrassed to carry one around in public…

LOL! I’ve used that reason to avoid buying certain cars, but that’s another subject entirely.

I may get one anyway, but I need some time to think about it.
The only thing I think is special about a Leica rangefinder for me is simply how solid it feels plus the sensation of a fine mechanism running inside it. I don‘t get that feeling with a Nikon S2, Contax IIIa, or QL17 - even though my photos from those cameras are equal to that of my Leicas.

Maybe size or form is the main factor in this feeling.

The viewfinder on an M6 is the clearest, most contrasty, and enjoyable viewfinder I’ve used on any camera - except one (which I don’t have): the Mamiya 7 II, which I think is the best.
 
Last edited:
And as a comedic diversion... :ROFLMAO:
 
Leica had a really nice edge because of their lenses. If you compare a Nikon Z7 ll and prime of your choice, the nikon is 98% of Leica image at 20% of the cost. I own the M10R and 50,75, 90 APO plus many others. Great glass if you can afford it at 7 t0 $10,000 @.

Nikon 35,50, 85 1.8 Are exceedingly good lenses and are up there with the best available and cost 5 to $800 each.

If I mate the best Leica APO glass on Z7 ll and do , you will be hard to tell the images apart same time, same place, same exposure. They are slow and need zoom manual focus or add on auto focus adapter for which I have no experience.

My go to kit is Z6 2 or 72 , 26 @.8, 40 2.0 and 85 1.8. Short of real pixel peeping , you will love them.
 
Perhaps the real story here is how our governments continue to devalue currencies...
Devaluation is a consequence of bad policy decisions.

~~~~ wavy lines ~~~~
Once upon a time in a small Central European village, the townsfolk realized that they spent a lot of their money obtaining a certain plant, which in addition to its nutritional value, had other benefits that could be used in crafts. By good fortune, the townsfolk elected a mayor who encouraged and supported them in growing the plant locally.

The vilage and the townsfolk thrived: there was a plentiful supply of the plant and it was inexpensive to use the byproducts of the plant for their crafts.

Summers came and went and life was good for a while. But ominious warnings came about growing this plant - there was a claim it may destroy the farmland. The new village mayor forbade people from growing the plant.

Soon, even more than before, the villagers relied on neighboring villages to supply the plant. The neighboring villages were more than happy to increase the price of the plant, even while increasing their own production of it.

So it was that the village became poor: The food that they had which contained the plant was more expensive; the goods they imported which used the byproducts of the plant were more expensive, and their fertile land remained unused.
~~~~ wavy lines ~~~~


The real bargain today in cameras is the Nikkormat. High quality, rugged, all mechanical, fully featured, and F-mount lenses.
 
Last edited:

There is more than one opinion on this. Two camps, cost-push, price-pull. And if you lined up all the economists in the world they would not reach a definite conclusion. That's all I remember from Econ 101 and 102 in the late 60's.

The Leica is just a camera, sheesh. A good one, yes. It can make a good picture better but it cannot make a bad picture good. That's our job.
 
Back
Top Bottom