Does Leica take advantage of their M users?

H

Huss

Veteran
Local time
7:51 AM
Joined
Sep 19, 2014
Messages
9,859
Leica just announced the all new 50 APO Summicron for the SL series (L mount)

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1500020-REG/leica_11185_apo_summicron_sl_50mm_f_2_asph.html

This is the state of the art 50 Summicron for the SL, with AF and weather sealing.

Leica also has the 50 Apo Summicron for the M mount:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...Summicron_M_50mm_f_2_0_ASPH.html?sts=pi&pim=Y

This lens of course is not AF and does not have any weather sealing.

So why is the M mount lens $8000, while the all new weather sealed AF L mount Apo "only" $4500?
Does Leica view M mount users as suckers/rich hobbyists? While the L mount for the SL is seen as pro spec equipment, and professionals actually care about the cost of their gear?
 
I've wondered the same myself. I can't think of a valid reason, other than perhaps the technical difficulty associated with producing a lens with that level of performance in a very compact size. But even that seems a bit far fetched.

It seems most logical to me that Leica is taking a "hit" on new SL lenses to attract users to the system.
 
Charging what the market will bear. Plus the SL lenses are so huge any buyer would also need a bodybuilding course and plentiful supplies of steroids.
 
The resale market for used SL camera (and maybe lenses) has not been good. The prices do not stay level or increase, unlike what we see with M lenses.
 
The SL exists in a market with healthy competition at the FF sensor size from just about all the main players in the game. Their rangefinders are the only ones digitally so they can mark up as they see fit to make money in a much more niche market. The unfortunate reality of this is that we pay more for the rangefinder gear.
 
If I were seeking the best possible all around standard lens I'd just get the Canon RF50/1.2. You have to bear with the R body but it's not that bad in reality.

Any of these f/2 lenses, be it $4500 or $8000, I don't see much point getting them unless you're one of these "suckers/rich hobbyists"...
 
bayernfan said:
I've wondered the same myself. I can't think of a valid reason, other than perhaps the technical difficulty associated with producing a lens with that level of performance in a very compact size. But even that seems a bit far fetched.
... .
Click to expand...

... well exactly THIS.

Why is it far fetched? Construction of a lens in MUCH bigger volume (SL) and a different lens to sensor distance is much easier than achieving cutting edge performance within the constraints of the M-mount.
 
I seriously doubt Leica prices things based solely on the cost of manufacture. Surely they must factor in 'what the market will bear.'
 
icebear said:
... well exactly THIS.

Why is it far fetched? Construction of a lens in MUCH bigger volume (SL) and a different lens to sensor distance is much easier than achieving cutting edge performance within the constraints of the M-mount.
Click to expand...

L and M are both mirrorless and the L is actually closer to the sensor. Which is why Leica sells an M-L adapter.

And you actually think the SL series sells better than the M? From what I have seen people buy Leicas for the M and if they look at the SL they cross shop with other brands that offer far more for far less.
 
Agree with Erik. Japanese-made "Leica" lenses will.....never.... sell for the same as Leica, made by Leica, just like if Carl Zeiss in Germany made the 35mm f1.4M Distagon.....the price wouldn't be $2,061 like it is at B&H.

Whatever the reason is, is of no consequence. It is, what it is. Speculate away.....won't change the price structure.
 
From today’s official press release:


All glass elements in an optical imaging system – for example lenses – refract light in certain colours to a different extent. This leads to the effect that not all rays of light from a multi-coloured subject are focused at a single imaging point – the result of this is chromatic aberration. In the new APO-Summicron-SL 50 mm f/2 ASPH. these chromatic aberrations are minimised by apochromatic correction. For this, the majority of the lens elements used in the construction of the lens are made from specially formulated, high-quality glass types with anomalous partial dispersion that push even the innovative manufacturing methods of the Leica Factory to the limits of the technically possible.

Hmmm, what Leica Factory are they talking about?
 
I think another reason is that Leica feels that they will sell far more of the 50mm f2 SL lenses that their distant cousin the 50mm f2 APO M.

Joe
 
'Does Leica take advantage of their M users...'



Well, of course... They're a commercial company. They'll charge what they think the market will tolerate/expect, and they'll charge in line with the market position of the product.


M is positioned as a luxury item (more than the SL) and M users have 65 years of history showing they will tolerate/expect an awful lot.
 
jsrockit said:
Hahaha, love it... pure snobbery calling it a Japanese lens. Japanese lenses are great too...
Click to expand...

"....that push even the innovative manufacturing methods of the Leica Factory to the limits of the technically possible"

So are Leica saying it is made in a Leica Factory, or they lacked the skills to make it and so had to have a Japanese mfg (Sigma?) make it for them?

What is the Leica Factory that they refer to?
 
Maybe Leica is actually being nice. Perhaps they COULD have priced the M mount lenses at $16,000 or even $20,000, and priced the AF L bits and pieces at $9000 or even $15,000. It's their lenses, and they can price them any way they wish. You quickly understand that you're getting a bargain at the current prices.

Leica knows their customers all too well. How else could they get the prices that they charge? 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.

Also, the more Leica charges, the more Leica makes. Sounds like they're actually protecting their customers. If Leica goes under by giving their gear away at the fire sale prices of only $9000 and $4500 (see Kodak for "going under" data), no one will have any of the new, hyper expensive stuff that they sell to dentists and others of that ilk.

It's all relative, and how you look at it.
 
Huss said:
What is the Leica Factory that they refer to?
Click to expand...

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/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom