MarkoKovacevic
Well-known
I was considering a new camera after my spotmatics meter broke, and I was considering the Bessa R2A/Nikon F5. I ended up going for the Nikon, even though the bodies were similar in price, because the RF lenses were expensive for me. They started at 3-400, while the same nikon lens would be 150 or so.
Why are the lenses so expensive?
Also, what do you guys think of the 50mm F2.8 EL-Nikkor lens for the darkroom?
Why are the lenses so expensive?
Also, what do you guys think of the 50mm F2.8 EL-Nikkor lens for the darkroom?
eli griggs
Well-known
The 50mm 2.8 is a well regarded lens by many, however if it displeases you, I'll swap you a 50 F4, even stevens 
Eli
Eli
thomasw_
Well-known
Well each of us has our sense of what is expensive or worth the cost, but quite objectively, getting into RFs does NOT have to be expensive!!! Hardly. You can get a very nice FSU set up .... for a cost that won't have you missing any meals or mortgage payments. Try a Zorki 4 and a fast Jupiter 50/1,5. Someone on here might even sell you such a kit for under 200 bucks. If that is still too much, try a fixed lens RF like a Canon QL17; with its 40/1,7 lens, you'll have a very versatile kit for under a 100 bucks. Best of luck finding what fits your needs/wants/budget ratio.
MarkoKovacevic
Well-known
I do have a Zorki 4 now, but I mean getting a reliable RF system, with a built in meter, and something that would be comfortable to use everyday. My Zorki is nice, but the missing features and durability keeps it from being a main camera.
Justin Low
J for Justin
I believe it would be largely due to production volumes and economies of scale.
ray*j*gun
Veteran
Justin is right. Rf lenses are very low volume products, as such you pay much more for similar quality vs. SLR lenses.
Ray
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
I'm not entirely sure that quantity alone explains price differences between RF and SLR lenses. Looking at, say, 50mm lenses bought new I see a Canon EF 50mm/f1.8 at around US$85, an EF 50mm/f1.4 at US$325 (both from Adorama) and a Voigtlander 50mm/f1.5 Nokton at US$360 (Cameraquest). Sure, nobody is producing $85 lenses for RFs - but even if they did I doubt many RF users would buy one given some of the compromises involved (plastic construction including lens mount, harsh bokeh, obvious 5-bladed aperture diaphram) in the cheap Canon. At the next higher price-point there's not much difference in cost (though arguably an image quality advantage to the Nokton).
Heading north from there, well, sure there are expensive lenses for RF cameras - but have you seen the prices on some Canon L lenses (and equivalent high-end Nikon etc.)? Yikes!
...Mike
[Full disclosure: I own the EF 50/1.8 but not the other two. And I have some expensive RF and Canon SLR lenses.]
Heading north from there, well, sure there are expensive lenses for RF cameras - but have you seen the prices on some Canon L lenses (and equivalent high-end Nikon etc.)? Yikes!
...Mike
[Full disclosure: I own the EF 50/1.8 but not the other two. And I have some expensive RF and Canon SLR lenses.]
Last edited:
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
I think Justin hit it on the head. How many Cosina lenses in an entire run? Probably an order of magnitude fewer than a comparable Canon or Nikon lens. "How do we do it? Volume, volume . . . " - T. Waits
Incidentally, my understanding of Mr. K's design philosophy is to design the best lens he can and then pull back on the cost of materials, workmanship and QC until he has hit an "acceptable" level. This is why (sort of in reverse) you can have a 28/2 from Cosina which costs 1/6 of its Leica counterpart. You get 90% of the image quality at a fraction of the price. Note: I'm making up the numbers, but you get the idea . . .
Ben Marks
Incidentally, my understanding of Mr. K's design philosophy is to design the best lens he can and then pull back on the cost of materials, workmanship and QC until he has hit an "acceptable" level. This is why (sort of in reverse) you can have a 28/2 from Cosina which costs 1/6 of its Leica counterpart. You get 90% of the image quality at a fraction of the price. Note: I'm making up the numbers, but you get the idea . . .
Ben Marks
pesphoto
Veteran
the 50mm F2.8 EL-Nikkor lens is excellent. I may have an extra if interested and in the US.
Wimpler
Established
Rangefinder lenses are more expensive for several reasons:
1) They are usually better made then consumer grade SLR lenses.
2) Their design (the rangefinder focussing) requires more parts, more precise parts and are more difficult to assemble.
3) Lower demand.
Also, I strongly doubt new products will not be more durable then your zorki.
1) They are usually better made then consumer grade SLR lenses.
2) Their design (the rangefinder focussing) requires more parts, more precise parts and are more difficult to assemble.
3) Lower demand.
Also, I strongly doubt new products will not be more durable then your zorki.