Pricing of the CV 21mm f/4?

[erikhaugsby]

So as of late I've found myself in the market for a 21mm, and the only reasonable choice right now is one of the two CV 21mm f/4s. However, I for the life of me can't understand why the M-mount version costs $90 more than the LTM version when it doesn't include the viewfinder!
Now, I realize that to use the LTM lens on my M2 I'd need the extra LTM->M adapter, but even with that included I can still have the lens, viewfinder, and adapter for less than just the M-mount lens.

Does Leica still have a patent on the M-style mount such that they can charge CV to "rent" the design?

I don't get it. I love the design of the M-mount 21 (not to say I dislike the LTM version enough not to get it), but I just can't get over the extra (edit: $163) I'd have to spend just to get the M-mount lens and finder.

 

[RF-Addict]

So, get the LTM version - that's what I did too. Optically it is supposed to be the same lens.

 

[erikhaugsby]

Optically it is supposed to be the same lens.

So I've heard, too.
I'm just curious to know if there's a specific reason for the price discrepancy.

 

[drewbarb]

The patent on the M-mount expired a few years ago, so no one's getting any rent; none of the price hike goes there. More likely, it's more expensive to machine the mount and put the lens in it accurately. But the screwmount version of the same lens formulation is cheaper, fits on more cameras, and comes with a finder. So get it while you can.

 

[Captain]

When the the similar style Voigtlander 21, 25, and 35mm lenses came out they were acclaimed for their optical quality but there was criticism that they weren't as well constructed as some other brands of rangefinder lenses. At the time I often read that people would gladly pay a bit more for improved build standards. I have found that each other the M mount replacements has a superior build quality and I think it was admirable that Voigtlander listened to the concerns of users and acted upon it. Something Leica rarely does.