airfrogusmc
Veteran
If that made an affordable M60 I'd buy two.
And I remember when Leica M was double the top of the like Canon (F-1s) and Nikon (F3s). Now the M 240 is about the same price as the top of the line nicanon.
And I remember when Leica M was double the top of the like Canon (F-1s) and Nikon (F3s). Now the M 240 is about the same price as the top of the line nicanon.
Scheelings
Well-known
You mean at official inflation prices... do you believe your government's inflation statistics?
Huss
Veteran
Do you have a better number?
Huss
Veteran
I'd have to agree. I have my Nikon F6 in front of me, and my M-E. Both current production cameras (let's ignore the fact one is a film camera).
The Nikon F6 is less than half the cost of my M-E, yet its build quality is so much better, it's not even funny. Forget all the features it has (multi mode metering, AF, fast film wind etc).
A Nikon D4 again is much much better built than an M240.
So with Leica, you're not getting the best build quality. You're not getting the best sensors. You're definitely not getting the reliability. But you are paying the most.
The only reason I shoot Leica is for the small lenses, the RF and the stripped down form, but that does not explain away the cost. Going into Leica Store Beverly Hills does explain what I am paying for...
JP Owens
Well-known
As much as I nostalgically want Leica to succeed, technology has killed the thing that made Leicas so appealing for many. I've found 50 year old Leicas at estate sales that haven't been used in years, taken them out of the musty leather bag, put in a roll of film, and they worked perfectly. And continued to work for years with no attention. And changed fundamentally little since the M3.
Digital took all of that away. Who will care about an M240 in 50 years? Or 10 years?
Leica digital M's are an anachronism the day they are born. They will not live long enough to wrap themselves in the Leica myth. Or to justify the high price.
Digital took all of that away. Who will care about an M240 in 50 years? Or 10 years?
Leica digital M's are an anachronism the day they are born. They will not live long enough to wrap themselves in the Leica myth. Or to justify the high price.
Huss
Veteran
I'd agree with you JP. My M3 cameras are just incredible, and knowing that they are going to be like this for decades to come is something else.
My M-E, already needing sensor #2, is the opposite.
My M-E, already needing sensor #2, is the opposite.
Michael Markey
Veteran
I think posts 65 and 66 have neatly summarised the problem for Leica .
JP Owens
Well-known
Well, it's not just that the cameras are digital. Or just that they are expensive.
I have a 5D Mk II that has over 400,000 exposures on it. I've beat the hell out of it. The only "service" it has had is my occasionally blowing the dust off the sensor with a can of air.
Yes, it was expensive when I bought it. But that was five years ago. And when the shutter goes, I'll toss it in the trash without regret.
A Leica M240 seems too precious a thing to be treated so harshly and disposed of so easily. And that's part of the problem.
I have a 5D Mk II that has over 400,000 exposures on it. I've beat the hell out of it. The only "service" it has had is my occasionally blowing the dust off the sensor with a can of air.
Yes, it was expensive when I bought it. But that was five years ago. And when the shutter goes, I'll toss it in the trash without regret.
A Leica M240 seems too precious a thing to be treated so harshly and disposed of so easily. And that's part of the problem.
Skiff
Well-known
Good grief ... what's their problem?
I gave them nearly eight grand middle of last year ... did they waste it?
Well, with that amount of money you could have feeded your Nikon F6 (or any film M) with the best films for at least another 50 years.......
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
You can believe inflation statistics - but they are fairly meaningless when it comes to evolving products. It is easy to track the value of bread or milk across time. But what was the price of a flatscreen TV, digital camera or portable computer in the mid fifties?
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
As much as these specials revolt me personally I still think Leica are making great cameras. I have no regrets at all about buying a 240 last year ... price aside it offers a level of versatility that has been lacking in their digital flagship up until now and I expect to own it for quite a while.
If I came into money I wouldn't hesitate to own the MM as well.
It's not all bad IMO.
If I came into money I wouldn't hesitate to own the MM as well.
It's not all bad IMO.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Well, with that amount of money you could have feeded your Nikon F6 (or any film M) with the best films for at least another 50 years.......
That's an equation I try not to think about!
ian_watts
Ian Watts
Yes, it is better to compare the prices of life's essentials like housing, fuel, bread, potatoes, etc. It's also useful to compare salaries and wages for jobs that are relevant across the time span. These provide a more meaningful benchmark to evaluate how expensive Leica stuff is today compared with 50 years ago. For example, how many loaves of bread did a Summicron cost in 1965 and how many today? What proportion of a classroom teacher's salary buys an M-A today and an M2 in 1965?
JP Owens
Well-known
In 1965, the average wage for a public school teacher in the U.S. was $6,485 per year. Today, it is $49,109. An M3 body in 1965 sold for $288.
robert blu
quiet photographer
How about three points:
1- support film Ms sales with introduction of a good scanner (in the class of 5000ed or 5400)
2- support sales od digitals cameras with a digital enlarger, to print fioles on a darkroom,
3- support both with a munch better after sales service.
robert
1- support film Ms sales with introduction of a good scanner (in the class of 5000ed or 5400)
2- support sales od digitals cameras with a digital enlarger, to print fioles on a darkroom,
3- support both with a munch better after sales service.
robert
leicapixie
Well-known
Sadly Robert, Leica no longer care about Film Photography.
A friend of mine was a judge/critic for LFI Gallery..
His services NO LONGER reqd. as LFI no longer accept Film pix..
I wrote to Andreas Kaufman and got ZERO reply.
So building a scanner, or selling another brand, ain't gonna happen.
Spare parts for older Leica-M are no longer easily available..
I was informed that a part i need, was obsolete.M2.
Some Investment companies are dangerous.
Doing supper with the Devil.
One might become the meal..
Perhaps it is not the case here.
Leica should never have built the new plant!
"Hasselblad Deja Vue".
Hasselblad soon after building that wonderful new building in Gottenberg, ceased as the company, Victor had started.
Last edited:
lynnb
Veteran
I'm hoping that 3D printing will solve the spare parts supply problem for old film Leicas, but that will still leave the problem of supply of trained service technicians to do the job.
HHPhoto
Well-known
They do care about film photography.
That's why they introduced the new Leica M-A last autumn.
They are offering now three film M cameras at the same time.
That is the first time in history they are doing that.
And at the Leica Akademie in Wetzlar this year new workshops in traditional film photography are offered again.
At photokina they said their sales for the film M's are already increasing. So they intend to do more in the film area in the future.
Leica is now facing the same problems as all the other digital camera manufacturers:
- markets are completely over-saturated with digital cameras
- the normal consumer is not rich and has to work very hard for his money: he simply cannot afford buying a new digital camera in a 2-3 year cycle as the manufacturers wants to force them to do
- therefore the sales for digital cameras are in a very strong decline:
http://www.cipa.jp/stats/dc_e.html
Cheers, Jan
airfrogusmc
Veteran
Isn't Leica one of the only companies that still have a 135 format film camera in production?