Does Leica take advantage of their M users?

The SL lenses, IIRC, produce data that requires considerable computational correction in-body to produce high quality images. Creating a (very) large lens with the desired optical corrections is a far easier task than correcting matters in the optical formula of the glass (for the most part) and packing it into the tiny, compact package that the M resides in. The price differential, to some extent reflects this.
 
Yeah, but the created the 50mm APO M six years ago and the price keeps going up faster than inflation. They are just charging whatever the market will bear, and the M market will bear a lot. It hasn't cried uncle yet.
 
ptpdprinter said:
Yeah, but the created the 50mm APO M six years ago and the price keeps going up faster than inflation. They are just charging whatever the market will bear, and the M market will bear a lot. It hasn't cried uncle yet.
Click to expand...

One is not obliged to buy it new. I bought mine as a factory second, meaning the barrel had a tiny cosmetic imperfection. It’s price was 27% off the full retail and included a full warranty. I’ve seen it for even less, second-hand (~$5-5.3k); by no measure cheap, but it’s the pinnacle of M engineering. Patiently look hard enough and you will find what you can afford.
 
They’re taking advantage of income inequality, not their M users. It used to be the case that they didn’t make a 50mm Summicron ASPH because “it would have been too expensive” (Mike Johnston said that on TOP). Now that the upper limit has been raised, they could finally go ahead with the idea of an exorbitantly priced 50mm f/2 lens. What could be more appealing to a rich guy than making what is usually the cheapest prime lens in a system one of the most expensive if it means they can have the “best lens ever”?
 
Steve M. said:
That very important knowledge of their customers points directly to the fact that the more they charge, the more people will think they're getting, giving bragging rights to the people that buy the more expensive gear.
Click to expand...


(Film) Leica M is the only 'expensive gear' I've ever owned that will perform as well and be just as useful and just as coveted long after I'm dead. I'm confident in saying that, and also in saying that no digital gear, even Leica's, will fare as well. That is baked into the digital device industry's cake and the minds of modern consumers. The oft-mentioned 'price thing' is a red herring used by consumers unsure of the validity of their own desire or need for a given product. Exchanging currency, which is losing worth, for product X, which is also losing worth even while still on the shelf, is complicated.
 
Ultimately the market decides. If Leica didn’t sell enough of the APO for M at the original list, the price would have dropped, with rebates or other incentives or an actual drop in the retail price, or a combination.

When a buyer voluntarily exchanges cash for an item, it means the buyer thinks the item is worth to them as much as, or more than, the cash.

Voluntary exchanges by definition indicate the buyer hasn’t been ‘advantaged.’
 
What I love is the inane trolling with incendiary language ...

  • The M is a small, niche market camera. The L-mount lenses are addressing broad potential sales in the Leica, Panasonic, and Sigma market spaces.
  • M lenses like the APO Summicron 50 are hand-built in Wetzlar. The L-mount lenses are more automated production in larger volumes to meet the demand.
  • The M line camera and lenses sells to an upmarket audience that wants an M and nothing else. The L mount lenses are intended to be competitive in a broader, working photographer marketplace.

But mostly: ANY manufacturer that doesn't "take advantage" of the strengths and weaknesses of the market audience that their products are targeted at is just being foolish and throwing BOTH sales and profits away. The folks at Leica are not fools.

G
 
aizan said:
They’re taking advantage of income inequality, not their M users.
Click to expand...
Excellent point! The income of high-income people has gone up much faster than middle class, and Leica does not target middle class income people with their line of M products.
 
Leica takes advantage more on SL. I'm terribly sorry, but this camera makes no sense if you are not total Leica sucker. My apologies.
 
Leica M lenses..pretty much hold their value if you buy right and wait a few years..
Pretty much anyone who is a camera buff can afford a Leica lens..
I sold my Toyota to get my 1st M3 w/DR..
You find a way..if you really want it..

Today..dont drink...smoke..eat out..go to movies..or do any extraneous things that eat up funds..for awhile..
..and in a year or 2..you will be flush w/Leica..


I dont think they have taken advantage of me..I can get my $$ back on all Leica stuff I have purchased in the past 35 years..and in some cases much much more..
As in..I bought my Noct f1 for $1300-..
Guess what it goes for now..
But I dont buy as of now..an M digital body..as I dont see the value in that..
But the 240 M-E..may change my mind..
 
Sorry, wifie and kids. We are eating cereal and celery. No movies, no trips. Papa wants to be flushed.
 
jsrockit said:
Does it matter? Do you think it`s a conspiracy and that it is not made in their factory? or are you thinking it`s not the factory in Germany and that somehow matters?

I take what they say as ... this lens is so great, that it even taxed your beloved Leica factory to its limits so pay us now.

They refer to them as plants sometimes, factories other times...

http://en2.leica-camera.com/service/leica_plant_germany/
Click to expand...

You’re not curious about that statement? It suggests Leica is making it at a facility that they own. When that is clearly not the case. Do you know of a Leica factory in Japan?
Previous Leica lenses have been made by Sigma and Panasonic (and Minolta but they no longer exist per se). Now that there is the L collaboration I am genuinely curious to know who makes what.
I use 2 Sigma Art lenses in the Nikon mount and they are fantastic, superbly built, crazy sharp, focus super fast and are big n heavy! They both were under $1000.
 
Huss said:
You’re not curious about that statement? It suggests Leica is making it at a facility that they own. When that is clearly not the case. Do you know of a Leica factory in Japan?
Click to expand...

Maybe I`m not getting it... does it say Made in Japan on the lens?
 
If I bought one of these $8000 Leica 50mm lenses, would I be able to tell a difference among photos from it vs. photos made with my $80 Jupiter-8? Or my $500 Konica M-Hexanon 50? Just wondering, in case I happen to find a suitcase of cash lying about.
 
No, but you'd be surrounded by beautiful woman at each cocktail party where you casually wear a Leica and whisper sweet words into your ear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom