The last batch, Noctilux - Collector Edition - $16,000

[kevin m]

Yet another pointless 'bash Leica' thread.

It's a forum, Roger, not the pages of Shutterbug, so you have to deal with people whose opinions differ from yours, and calling them "bashers" does nothing but ensure a flame-fest.

If you're going to use the term "basher" to describe people who disagree with your POV that Leica is now primarily a manufacturer of luxury goods, then would you object to being called a "cheerleader" for the company? That seems fair to me, as your comments seem like those of a hired advocate's.

It seems to me that collecting and photography are two completely separate activities, and that they might have the Leica brand in common does nothing to change that. How about a separate forum for the collectors???

 

[Captain]

Yet another pointless 'bash Leica' thread.

I dont think so, everyone has the right to different opinions in any discussion so I think your being a bit quick to judge. Just think if there were no public objections to the ridiculous prices Leica asks for some times then they would think thats the green light to charge everything to extreme. I think they need that dose of salts to help keep them realistic, thats how basic democracy works.

 

[Roger Hicks]

If you're going to use the term "basher" to describe people who disagree with your POV that Leica is now primarily a manufacturer of luxury goods, then would you object to being called a "cheerleader" for the company? That seems fair to me, as your comments seem like those of a hired advocate's.

Sure, call me a cheerleader. I'll do anything I can to ensure that Leica stay in business. And as I'm in more-or-less regular contact with Leica; have close on 40 years' experience using Leicas; and sometimes put my money where my mouth is with new kit, instead of always buying second-hand; given this, I can't help feeling feel that my POV may be worth slightly more than some -- far from all -- of the other people on the forum. In fact, if I didn't think that, I'd be more reticent about what I say.

Actually, you've slightly misrepresented me. 'Luxury goods' does not carry quite the same weight as 'luxury cameras'. 'Goods' includes a lot of designer label rubbish, of extremely modest inherent value. Love 'em or hate 'em, Leicas are still excellent cameras.

Cheers,

Roger

 

[Roger Hicks]

I dont think so, everyone has the right to different opinions in any discussion so I think your being a bit quick to judge. Just think if there were no public objections to the ridiculous prices Leica asks for some times then they would think thats the green light to charge everything to extreme. I think they need that dose of salts to help keep them realistic, thats how basic democracy works.

You're missing the point here. Business is not a democracy.

Besides which, no price is 'ridiculous' if you can get it. You may consider it exorbitant: that's your privilege. But if the company can get the prices they're asking, and if what they are selling is essentially a luxury (e.g. not basic food or shelter, and readily exchangeable with a cheaper but inferior product) then they have no need whatsoever to take any account of those who complain that their goods should be cheaper.

Cheers,

R.

 

[sepiareverb]

You're missing the point here. Business is not a democracy.

Besides which, no price is 'ridiculous' if you can get it. You may consider it exorbitant: that's your privilege. But if the company can get the prices they're asking, and if what they are selling is essentially a luxury (e.g. not basic food or shelter, and readily exchangeable with a cheaper but inferior product) then they have no need whatsoever to take any account of those who complain that their goods should be cheaper.

Cheers,

R.

Well said Roger. If Leica gets what they ask for things the price must be right, or right enough. Plenty of folks shelled out for the M8 and happily use it, lumps and all. I guess calling this a "Leica prices bashing" thread might be more correct?😀

Then there is always this:
http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=61225
not much bashing going on there.

 

[kevin m]

Sure, call me a cheerleader. I'll do anything I can to ensure that Leica stay in business.

The difference is, you don't seem to care if they do that by any means necessary - including pimping out their own heritage - and I'm only interested in their continued survival as a maker of useable photographic tools.

...have close on 40 years' experience using Leicas; and sometimes put my money where my mouth is with new kit, instead of always buying second-hand; given this, I can't help feeling feel that my POV may be worth slightly more than some -- far from all -- of the other people on the forum.

Pshaw! I paid cash for my Leicas (all second hand, all excellent values) and used them to make a modest living, so you'll understand if I feel my opinion on the subject takes a backseat to nobody's, including yours.

Actually, you've slightly misrepresented me. 'Luxury goods' does not carry quite the same weight as 'luxury cameras'. 'Goods' includes a lot of designer label rubbish, of extremely modest inherent value. Love 'em or hate 'em, Leicas are still excellent cameras.

If we can't agree that a $16,000 Noctilux in a fancy wood box isn't chiefly "designer label rubbish," then we have no common ground.

You should be aware that throughout history, the very idea of "luxury" goods has usually been tied to a superiority of utility, and that's something that's slipping away from Leica as we speak. Let's hope they put the windfall from this gussied up, Lladro figurine of a lens to good use and make some improvments to the M8.

 

[kevin m]

There is no real proof that they would sell three times as many M8s as they do now if they lowered the price 30%...

Forget lowering the price 30%, just make the thing as useable a tool as was the M6TTL and they'll sell like hotcakes.

The market is there, waiting. Leica, or somebody, just has to tap into it.

 

[Roger Hicks]

(1)The difference is, you don't seem to care if they do that by any means necessary - including pimping out their own heritage - and I'm only interested in their continued survival as a maker of useable photographic tools.

(2) Pshaw! I paid cash for my Leicas (all second hand, all excellent values) and used them to make a modest living, so you'll understand if I feel my opinion on the subject takes a backseat to nobody's, including yours.

(3)If we can't agree that a $16,000 Noctilux in a fancy wood box isn't chiefly "designer label rubbish," then we have no common ground.

(4) You should be aware that throughout history, the very idea of "luxury" goods has usually been tied to a superiority of utility, and that's something that's slipping away from Leica as we speak. Let's hope they put the windfall from this gussied up, Lladro figurine of a lens to good use and make some improvments to the M8.

Dear Kevin,

Numbers added to your points for ease of response:

(1) Yes, we're both interested in their survival as manufacturers of usable cameras. What are you doing towards this goal?

(2) Well, yes, you would think your opinion is worth more. I'll leave it to others to judge which of us presents the better case.

(3) No, we have no common ground, because you aren't (a) reading what I wrote or (b) thinking. The key lies in the words 'very little inherent value' as applied to 'designer label rubbish'.

4) Yes, I am aware of that. You can name a better rangefinder camera?

Cheers,

R.

 

[photovdz]

What is a pity is that those 100 lenses will never be used by anyone reasonable...

I understand the commercial gimmick ... but It should be doubled by a good communication for real photographers : like taking two noctilux on a world tour (like the "little Oly project" here or the "Olympus OM1 tour" of the OMList) where known photographers, big and lesser big name could use them for a day... making a 2x 365 international photo contest.

By the way, as almost everybody here, I bought my first leica second hand... A "Leitz logo" M6 or the first 1000 batch for 900€ in 2001... (with box and evrything)... it was stolen and because I managed to explain that it was rare, I got enough just enough money from my insurance to buy a new 6TTL... the only camera I ever bought new...

 

[Roger Hicks]

Sir,
Your POV is not a truth, it's an opinion and as such is worth no more than another's.

I suggest you be more reticent about what you say.

There's informed opinion, and uniformed opinion.

Mine is more informed than some (and therefore worth more) and less informed than others (and therefore worth less).

Your suggestion will therefore go unheeded.

Cheers,

R.

 

[tmfabian]

Dear Fred,

Exactly. If people buy second-hand Leicas or Leica lenses because it's all they can afford, fine: that was my situation for the first 20 years or so that I used Leicas. And (as I understand it) Dr. Kaufmann's too, though perhaps not for so long.

But to snivel and whinge that new Leicas should be cheaper does not really add a great deal to the debate. It's just going over familiar and unproductive ground. Do these people REALLY believe Leica could drop their prices that easily?

Cheers,

R.

I'm not rich, I live a modest life, but I managed to buy both my M7 and M8 new as well as both of my lenses new. I really truly wanted these cameras and lenses and I saved every penny I could for a mere 6 months (3 months for the m7 and a lens and 3 months for the m8 and a lens)
If someone wants one of these lenses and can afford it, who cares, let them buy it. I have no negative feelings towards leica for doing this either, they saw an opportunity which the market could handle and pursued it...in all honesty it is a sign that leica is making smart financial decisions and that should make us all happy.
I doubt that many of the folks that whine and moan about the extraordinary price of these final 100 noctilux ever considered purchasing one when they were priced well within reach.
I actually find the whole package nicely thought out with regard to a specific portion of the market, creating a display box of high quality to honor the end of a historic lens and the collectors purchase.
I find no difference in this compared to comic book collections or baseball card collections. There is of course a significant portion of the public that is upset that no one will ever open that first edition comic or engage in that ever joyful experience of card trading, but then again most people had the chance to own those items when they were new and cheap, only when the value increased do they get all cranky.
Ya'all need to give the bickering a rest and just go out and snap some pictures instead of complaining about what some rich person is doing with their money.

 

[TJV]

The only thing that makes me sad is that I waited over a year and paid in full for a new Noctilux only to be told I'd be waiting another six months. At that point I got my money back - my choice, I could have waited it out. A big part of me wishes I waited as there's no chance I'll have the funds to buy one again for may years, if ever. The times I've held one and the few photos I've taken with it were a real pleasure. I hope some of these kits will actually be appreciated for what they were designed for - taking photos.

 

[gdi]

I may get one - but first I need a new shirt...

http://www.elitechoice.org/2008/05/...versary-unveils-world’s-most-expensive-shirt/

 

[sepiareverb]

What is a pity is that those 100 lenses will never be used by anyone reasonable...

Oh come on. The same argument runs around the other way when a 'New in Box' M3 or such comes on the market, at a similar premium- pity to use it, it's worth keeping for posterity etc.

I understand the commercial gimmick ... but It should be doubled by a good communication for real photographers : like taking two noctilux on a world tour (like the "little Oly project" here or the "Olympus OM1 tour" of the OMList) where known photographers, big and lesser big name could use them for a day... making a 2x 365 international photo contest.

Should? Why? You can get an M8 free for a day, just stop in and ask- or is that only for folks who've bought something new?

 

[kevin m]

...no hobbyist might use one but certainly there are people that use lenses ORDERS more expensive than $16K for *work* on a day in day out basis and in fact depend on them for work....Some of you guys need to put this in perspective.

I've used lenses much more expensive than this silly Nocitlux for work. So what? I didn't pay a day rate to rent a humidor when I did. 😉

 

[Tom A]

I could really not care if a Noctilux went for $16000 as it would not be my $16000 spent on it! This is a 40+ year old design, which was a sensation when it came out - today it is old hat and technology! My only problem is that it twists the "value" of Leica's other offerings.
Leica does not make anything on used lenses (except the odd repair or service) and most of the Leica lenses sold are just that - used, 2nd hand or even 5-6th hand! To stay in business they need to sell the new stuff and at the moment they have competition, something they have not been used too for decades. The run of the mill lenses, 21,24,35,50 and 90's are available from other manufacturers at 1/3 to 1/4 of their prices! You can talk about day-rates and that, but today there are only a handful of shooters who ask and get the $5000/day jobs and most likely they use DSL's or Digital MF for the file sizes the client requires.
I used to shoot commercially for years and, yes, occasionally you had to buy or rent specific lenses that were designed to solve yours and the clients problems. Nikkor 8mm f2.8 fish eye, Hasselblads Super Achromat 250's, 100f3.5 Planar etc.If you bought it you had to calculate how many jobs were needed to pay it off. If you rented it, you just charged the client.
A $16000 50mm lens would not "compute". Modern film and digital sensors would make it possible to use a "mundane" 50mm f1.4 Asph or even a 50mm f1.5 C-Sonnar/50f1.5 Nokton. The client would not be any wiser, if you knew how to use either of these lenses. Clients really dont care what you are using - they want results, on time and within budget!
If someone wants to buy a $16000 Noctlux, good for the dealer and Leica. They both make money for them and thats needed to stay in business. Now, what happens to the value of these lenses if and when someone comes out with a 0.85/50mm at Photokina? Maybe Leica will have one for their "show and tell" - watch values drop through the floor!

 

[cmogi10]

Forget lowering the price 30%, just make the thing as useable a tool as was the M6TTL and they'll sell like hotcakes.

The market is there, waiting. Leica, or somebody, just has to tap into it.

But I read on the interweb that the M6 was the worst camera Leica made?

 

[amateriat]

Oh, hell...is it any different than this?

Not that this is my thing at all, though...


- Barrett

 

[Roger Hicks]

I'm not rich, I live a modest life, but I managed to buy both my M7 and M8 new as well as both of my lenses new. I really truly wanted these cameras and lenses and I saved every penny I could for a mere 6 months (3 months for the m7 and a lens and 3 months for the m8 and a lens)
If someone wants one of these lenses and can afford it, who cares, let them buy it. I have no negative feelings towards leica for doing this either, they saw an opportunity which the market could handle and pursued it...in all honesty it is a sign that leica is making smart financial decisions and that should make us all happy.
I doubt that many of the folks that whine and moan about the extraordinary price of these final 100 noctilux ever considered purchasing one when they were priced well within reach.
I actually find the whole package nicely thought out with regard to a specific portion of the market, creating a display box of high quality to honor the end of a historic lens and the collectors purchase.
I find no difference in this compared to comic book collections or baseball card collections. There is of course a significant portion of the public that is upset that no one will ever open that first edition comic or engage in that ever joyful experience of card trading, but then again most people had the chance to own those items when they were new and cheap, only when the value increased do they get all cranky.
Ya'all need to give the bickering a rest and just go out and snap some pictures instead of complaining about what some rich person is doing with their money.

Dear Tim,

I could not agree more.

Cheers,

R.

 

[gdi]

I could really not care if a Noctilux went for $16000 as it would not be my $16000 spent on it! This is a 40+ year old design, which was a sensation when it came out - today it is old hat and technology! My only problem is that it twists the "value" of Leica's other offerings.
Leica does not make anything on used lenses (except the odd repair or service) and most of the Leica lenses sold are just that - used, 2nd hand or even 5-6th hand! To stay in business they need to sell the new stuff and at the moment they have competition, something they have not been used too for decades. The run of the mill lenses, 21,24,35,50 and 90's are available from other manufacturers at 1/3 to 1/4 of their prices! You can talk about day-rates and that, but today there are only a handful of shooters who ask and get the $5000/day jobs and most likely they use DSL's or Digital MF for the file sizes the client requires.
I used to shoot commercially for years and, yes, occasionally you had to buy or rent specific lenses that were designed to solve yours and the clients problems. Nikkor 8mm f2.8 fish eye, Hasselblads Super Achromat 250's, 100f3.5 Planar etc.If you bought it you had to calculate how many jobs were needed to pay it off. If you rented it, you just charged the client.
A $16000 50mm lens would not "compute". Modern film and digital sensors would make it possible to use a "mundane" 50mm f1.4 Asph or even a 50mm f1.5 C-Sonnar/50f1.5 Nokton. The client would not be any wiser, if you knew how to use either of these lenses. Clients really dont care what you are using - they want results, on time and within budget!
If someone wants to buy a $16000 Noctlux, good for the dealer and Leica. They both make money for them and thats needed to stay in business. Now, what happens to the value of these lenses if and when someone comes out with a 0.85/50mm at Photokina? Maybe Leica will have one for their "show and tell" - watch values drop through the floor!

Tom, as usual you have found the words to respectfully sum up the situation.

A $16,000 50mm lens may seem illogical to most, including me, but as long as it is not my $16,000 it doesn't bother me. The fact that a lens costing 1/45 as much can also deliver the goods in almost any situation only indicates that buyers are purchasing for reasons other than photographic utility. If it makes them happy, then I am all for it.

And like you, my only complaint is the effect that the extremely high prices have on other lenses. But that is simply the current state of affairs, we live with it if we want to stay in the RF game with Leica lenses - buy new and ante up, or buy used and save significant money. I know my choice is rational for me - a mix of Leica, CV and konica lenses that are cost effective.