Why do you think of the price of the new 50mm Summicron?

Araakii said:
Go to any local camera store that carries them and they will tell you how many people have already put in a pre-order. The world is very big. Even if only 0.000001% of the population want it. That's still a lot of people.
Click to expand...

That's only 70 people, but I get your point. :p
70 lenses = about $500k.
 
Livesteamer said:
I am sure it is better but... I can't help thinking of the law of diminishing returns. Pay a lot more for a little better. Joe
Click to expand...

To those who can afford it, money/cash has even higher diminishing returns. Once all your lusts are taken care of, there's very little an extra $10,000 can do for you.
 
Leica just made what they can make like no other: the best 50mm lens technical possible. Nobody is forced to buy it. It is a flagship product which helps maintain the company's image as a first class innovative lensbuilder. In that sense it is a very wise marketing decision to build it. Will it sell?? Does not matter!
The "only for the rich and famous" and "for collector's and not for photographers" arguments float the net after every single productintroduction by Leica.
Point is the rich and famous buy only the best they can afford and in the long history of photography there are only very few serious photographers who never owned or used a Leica. Often only for personal work.
So if you can not afford: look at the 2nd hand market or buy Zeiss or Voightlander and be happy. I admire Ferrari for the way they build their cars, without envy not being able to afford one. Waite.... if i would sell my house i could even afford two of them.
So it is also about priorities in life.
For the record: i will not buy the new 50 summicron!!
 
I will buy one for my mom. She has a Sony NEX, so I need to get an adapter as well. But I am sure she will enjoy her new lens.
 
Someone would argue (and had argued) that since you use Leica, you pay the Leica price.

From the normal photog's perspective a $2,295 50/2 lens is ridiculous enough. That is the Leica price many here are willing to pay fo; yet even that has its limit, which is known as sanity.

That is, the $7,150 price tag is way beyond what used to be the Leica price; or more precisely, Leica is trying to redefine the term, that people paying $2,000 for a 50/2 are not the ones paying enough, and should be ruled out.

Utter lunacy out of greed, that is.
 
mfogiel said:
One could say the same about Leica M7 - why is it 7 times more expensive than Bessa R4A, and why therefore nobody would buy it... As far as I am concerned, I use Tri X for most of my photos, and frankly even a Planar 50/2 is an overkill in terms of resolution on this film, however, if I had a 50MP digital M, perhaps the new Summicron WOULD make a lot of difference, and I think this is precisely why it has been produced.
Click to expand...

This makes a lot of sense. The 50mm was due for an upgrade. I read the review and specs. It's an APO and ASPH. Either way I bet it sings sweetly on either the new M Monochrome or a film body.
 
Archlich said:
Someone would argue (and had argued) that since you use Leica, you pay the Leica price.

From the normal photog's perspective a $2,295 50/2 lens is ridiculous enough. That is the Leica price many here are willing to pay fo; yet even that has its limit, which is known as sanity.

That is, the $7,150 price tag is way beyond what used to be the Leica price; or more precisely, Leica is trying to redefine the term, that people paying $2,000 for a 50/2 are not the ones paying enough, and should be ruled out.

Utter lunacy out of greed, that is.
Click to expand...

Greed is when someone wants to buy something that's out of their purchasing power for cheap.
 
I wonder what a Zeiss lens with same specs would cost. The new Leica Motion Picutre lenses are superb, but the Zeiss are better. So I imagine that Zeiss Oberkochen can produce an equal or better lens than Leica if they set their mind to it.

The price is high and I personaly feel that too much correction and sharpness isn't really all that great. But leica will have a market for this lens, and they will sell a lot of it. I personaly can't afford the lens, but I think its a good move from Leica. Entry level Summicron> Intermediate Level Summilux > Pro Level APO Summicron. The Levels are equal to Leica mystique or the Leica club

Dominik
 
Last edited:
$$$$$

$$$$$

My 50mm stable:
Summitar= $275
Summarit=$275
Summicron=$175
summilux=$700
I love each and every one for different reasons.... i need nothing
 
Archlich said:
From the normal photog's perspective a $2,295 50/2 lens is ridiculous enough. That is the Leica price many here are willing to pay fo; yet even that has its limit, which is known as sanity.

That is, the $7,150 price tag is way beyond what used to be the Leica price; or more precisely, Leica is trying to redefine the term, that people paying $2,000 for a 50/2 are not the ones paying enough, and should be ruled out.

Utter lunacy out of greed, that is.
Click to expand...

In other words, all the emotional uproar we've seen over the last days is the clamouring of people who've been paying $2,000 for 50/f2 lenses because it makes them feel special, but now there's something better that even they cannot afford and now they feel ruled out.... is that what you mean?
 
Araakii said:
Greed is when someone wants to buy something that's out of their purchasing power for cheap.
Click to expand...

That is not the commonly accepted definition of that word. Not even close. I infer that you're speaking some language other than English.
 
J. Borger said:
Leica just made what they can make like no other: the best 50mm lens technical possible.
Click to expand...

The best 50mm lens technically possible would cost a good bit more than that. Check out the prices on the optics for steppers if you want a sense of perspective. And note that it's Zeiss and Nikon who control that market -- not Leica.
 
semilog said:
That is not the commonly accepted definition of that word. Not even close. I infer that you're speaking some language other than English.
Click to expand...

I feel like I am really taking this too seriously, but oh well.

greed

   [greed] Show IPA
noun excessive or rapacious desire, especially for wealth or possessions.



If someone's desire to own the best, top of the line 35mm lens even if his or her financials does not permit is not considered an excessive desire for possession, I do not know what is.

I will not buy the 50mm summicron by the way although I can afford it. Like many others here I feel like I can spend the money on other things. But I do not point my fingers at the seller for not selling it to me for 2 grand.


In fact, greed is already abundant in this forum (myself included). I would actually consider even owning the old 35mm summicron v5 to be excessive.
 
Well, I don't know. I still say Leica's reputation comes from lenses that they used to make. So a new Leica lens is of little value to me. The old stuff is that good.
 
rxmd said:
In other words, all the emotional uproar we've seen over the last days is the clamouring of people who've been paying $2,000 for 50/f2 lenses because it makes them feel special, but now there's something better that even they cannot afford and now they feel ruled out.... is that what you mean?
Click to expand...

Yes, obviously. And some people also feel that they need to keep up-to-date with the best stuff because either they are photographers so they have a right to, or because they need to use the best gears to make sure that their stuff remains good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom