trph_2000 said:
What are the alternatives
in size and cost for other digital equipment if you really do shoot a 35
and 50mm (or even 75mm) at 1.4 (let alone 1.0) ?
While I agree with you on why we shoot an RF and that there's a lot invested in Leica glass to those that own it, in terms of a cost break down using 35 and 50 and.. well.. let's say 85mm.... digital equipment; here's how I figure it looks:
Assuming brand new equipment @ today's B&H USD prices (not including shipping)
Leica
Body:
M8 $5495
Lenses:
35 ASPH Summilux $3895
50 ASPH Summilux $3295
75 ASPH Summicron $2995 (Lux not listed so I'm assuming it's not being produced)
Total cost: $15680
Canon (could just as well be Nikon imho)
Body:
1Ds MK III $7995 (one can make an argument for the 5D but I figure someone somewhere will whine "But the 5D is not the top of the line camera!!!"
😀)
Lenses:
35 L $1119
50 L $1295
85 L $1664
Total cost: $12073
Now.. the pros/cons comparison:
Leica:
Pros - small-ish, lighter, easy to carry, status symbol, excellent lenses
Cons - expensive, crop sensor, no "pro" support (if you're a pro that is
😀), $1775 to "upgrade" if you want a quiet shutter
Canon:
Pros - less expensive, full frame, excellent fast lenses, pro support (CPS)
Cons - heavy, not compact or small-ish
Which would/should someone choose?
If it were me, and I was going fresh, from brand new, I'd buy a 5D with those lenses and use the money left over to buy an M7 or MP and a 35 Lux (diff in price b/w a 5D and 1Ds MK III is $5886 USD
😀) - that's the difference and cost for wanting to shoot digitally with fast excellent glass
😀
Cheers,
Dave