Tom A
RFF Sponsor
Leica was always a premium priced products. So we look at the prices from the 50's - M2's for $230 ($10-15 premium for black paint!), lenses running $150 and up to premium lenses like the 50 Summiluxes or the 35 Summiluxes. Put it in perspective what you made in those days. Working for a paper in the early 60's $230/month! It took some skimping to buy a new M2 or another 50!
Today Leica's prices reflect this. A MP is $4000, a Summilux Asph $3000 - probably pretty close to what a paper shooter would make today/month!
Leica was caught off guard in the late 90's. Suddenly there were alternatives, Konica, CV and then later Zeiss/CV's. They were priced reasonably - and they offered focal lengths and speeds not available from Leica.
Rather than trying to fight with pricing (look at the Summarit line and the rather lacklustre sales of a Leica "economy" series of lenses) - they decided to go all out with premium priced and performance, the 35f1.4 Asph, the 21/24 Asph, the 28f2.0 Asph (promptly upstaged at that Photokina by the VC 28f1.9 Asph!). Most of these new lenses are good, some very good, but at a price (partly exchange rate, partly extreme labor cost in EU). Later, they followed up with two of the best lenses ever made, the 50f1.4 Asph and the 75f2 Apo-Asph, neither of which has been surpassed by the competition- yet!
This Photokina thy showed the 21f1,4 and the 24f1,4 - both first in their focal length and really good (but $6000/each!) and my favourite, the 24f3.8 Elmarit - the first MTF "flat liner"!!!!
None of this come cheap - research, testing, manufacturing etc is still in Euro and they have to make it back, somehow.
Zeiss have tried to do their own, the 15f2.8 and the 85f2 - both priced at Leica level and not hot sellers by any means.
By farming out manufacturing to CV, they have managed to produce lenses of similar quality to Leica (and in some cases better than Leica) for a reasonable cost.
Cosina is a big lens manufacturer - they make their own glass ( major cost to Leica as they have to buy "off the shelf" from outside) and the camera/lens part of the operation is reasonably small - the rest is highly specialized optics (high speed lenses for surveillance, beam splitters for video systems, projection systems etc). They also make short runs - make a couple of 1000 lenses and that's it. They are designed to return investment on a short run. The use of common barrels (Zeiss) cuts down on design cost and manufacturing, without sacrificing quality. The Cosina lenses are built to very high standards and represent an astounding value for money - compared to Leica.
As for CV lenses as collectible, Oh yes - one of these days when the SC mount line is sold out, they will increase in value and even lenses that are now out of production, such as LTM 21/4, snap-shot Skopar 24f4 and the 75f2.5 will hold their own in a while. Not huge returns, but enough that you can buy one, use it and resell it without major loss.
There is also an emotional factor here. users of old Leica's want to get lenses of the same vintage - just to see what the big deal was! They are getting old (the lenses, that is) and clean, mintish ones are rare - thus getting higher priced, which drags the "user" stuff up too Are they worth it? Looking at them pragmatically - no! A 50's Summicron is not as good as the Planar 50f2.0 ZM today. The early 60's Summilux 35f1.4 is not as good as the 40f1.4 Nokton or 35f1.4 Nokton - but if you want to relive the 60's, that's what you want to have!
Today Leica's prices reflect this. A MP is $4000, a Summilux Asph $3000 - probably pretty close to what a paper shooter would make today/month!
Leica was caught off guard in the late 90's. Suddenly there were alternatives, Konica, CV and then later Zeiss/CV's. They were priced reasonably - and they offered focal lengths and speeds not available from Leica.
Rather than trying to fight with pricing (look at the Summarit line and the rather lacklustre sales of a Leica "economy" series of lenses) - they decided to go all out with premium priced and performance, the 35f1.4 Asph, the 21/24 Asph, the 28f2.0 Asph (promptly upstaged at that Photokina by the VC 28f1.9 Asph!). Most of these new lenses are good, some very good, but at a price (partly exchange rate, partly extreme labor cost in EU). Later, they followed up with two of the best lenses ever made, the 50f1.4 Asph and the 75f2 Apo-Asph, neither of which has been surpassed by the competition- yet!
This Photokina thy showed the 21f1,4 and the 24f1,4 - both first in their focal length and really good (but $6000/each!) and my favourite, the 24f3.8 Elmarit - the first MTF "flat liner"!!!!
None of this come cheap - research, testing, manufacturing etc is still in Euro and they have to make it back, somehow.
Zeiss have tried to do their own, the 15f2.8 and the 85f2 - both priced at Leica level and not hot sellers by any means.
By farming out manufacturing to CV, they have managed to produce lenses of similar quality to Leica (and in some cases better than Leica) for a reasonable cost.
Cosina is a big lens manufacturer - they make their own glass ( major cost to Leica as they have to buy "off the shelf" from outside) and the camera/lens part of the operation is reasonably small - the rest is highly specialized optics (high speed lenses for surveillance, beam splitters for video systems, projection systems etc). They also make short runs - make a couple of 1000 lenses and that's it. They are designed to return investment on a short run. The use of common barrels (Zeiss) cuts down on design cost and manufacturing, without sacrificing quality. The Cosina lenses are built to very high standards and represent an astounding value for money - compared to Leica.
As for CV lenses as collectible, Oh yes - one of these days when the SC mount line is sold out, they will increase in value and even lenses that are now out of production, such as LTM 21/4, snap-shot Skopar 24f4 and the 75f2.5 will hold their own in a while. Not huge returns, but enough that you can buy one, use it and resell it without major loss.
There is also an emotional factor here. users of old Leica's want to get lenses of the same vintage - just to see what the big deal was! They are getting old (the lenses, that is) and clean, mintish ones are rare - thus getting higher priced, which drags the "user" stuff up too Are they worth it? Looking at them pragmatically - no! A 50's Summicron is not as good as the Planar 50f2.0 ZM today. The early 60's Summilux 35f1.4 is not as good as the 40f1.4 Nokton or 35f1.4 Nokton - but if you want to relive the 60's, that's what you want to have!
__hh
Well-known
Economics 101 - Supply & Demand have an inversely proportional relationship
simonSE15
Established
This thread also made me think of my OM gear.
Being fairly new to rangefinders and not being able to afford M glass I went for a Canon ltm lens (50mm 1.8).
As far as image quality goes I think my zuiko 50mm 1.4 blows it clean out the water. I bought an M3 for street shooting so I am not comparing like for like but my thought is that for portraits the OM system offers much better value for money than the M system. I have not used any high end M lenses but have not seen a photo that convinces me otherwise.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Interesting that you should say that ... I also have the 50mm 1.4 and it is indeed a very good lens and probably better all round than my 1.2 Zuiko which can be pretty quirky wide open ... which is why I bought it luckily. At 1.2 in certain conditions it can give a pretty good imitation of a Noctilux!
David Murphy
Veteran
All of them if I can, and the CV Bessa R2C or R2S if I can find them.
tog2000
Newbie
Supply and demand. Leica supplies few and the demand is high. Leica M lenses do not devalue if kept mint with box and papers.