why wide-angle lenses are expensive?

LeicaFoReVer

LeicaFoReVer

Addicted to Rangefinders
Local time
1:03 AM
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
1,372
Why wide-angle lenses for rangefinders are expensive, except the cosina voigtlander?

I want to but a lens between 21 to 28mm with a decent price but there is only one option I have, CV.

If I want to buy a 50 or 90mm there are many options like old leica lenses or canon or nikon, from 150$ and up. But when it comes to wide angle, the prices are high so if you want a decent price, you have only one option, CV.

For example 21mm super-angulon, it is very expensive. Is it because it is a lengendary lens or what? And I dont know any other 21mm from canon or nikon. There are zeiss lenses but above 600$ I suppose.
 
Last edited:
I am not a tech but I have been told by people who know (like Brian Sweeney) that wides require much more work to manufacture and are more difficult to design so that they produce accurate images.
 
Easy. They are a lot harder to design and to make. Making fast wide-angles is harder again.

A long-focus, slow lens can use as few as 2 glasses and deliver excellent results. At 90mm a triplet or Tessar-type (4-glass) is fine at f/2.8 to f/3.5, though 5 glasses will be better. At 50mm you need at least 4 and preferably 5 glasses even for slow lenses: a 5-glass f/2 is pushing it. At (say) 21mm you're generally looking at 6 or 7 glasses (or more), often more exotic glass, with deeper curves.

Cheers,

R.
 
Lenses around 50 mm are among the most easy to design and make and they used to come with the camera if you bought a camera/lens combo. That was pre zoom lens era.
With the simple lens design and the high manufacturing numbers, tooling , design, and other fixed costs were spread over many units and cost per unit was low.

As you get away from 50mm , either shorter or longer , the designs get more complicated, fewer units are sold, and fixed costs are greater per unit with a resulting higher cost per unit.

All manufacturing is based on these principles. Sell price = design/research/engineering cost+fixed manufacturing cost+variable manfacting costs+ sales costs+profit.

CV lenses are made in Japan/China? with lower costs for employees/some ancient 50 year old machinery already amoritiized , far less quality control, cheaper materials, and much less sophisticated designs, so their lensers are cheaper. That said they are remarkable for the price and meet many users needs.

Understand Germany has some of the highest labor costs in the world due to the socialist nature of the labor market there. Leica has a difficult time getting rid of workers when times are slow so they must be careful how many they employ.

Other brands such as Nikon and Canon were from a different era when Japan was recovering from World War 11. Costs were low, but quality was high for the era, but not up to current computer generated designs. Understand these are old lenses and the technology was not there the make the nearly perfect wide angles that can be made today.
 
But I believe their prices are high? Are they for rangefinders by the way? I check on ebay and there is FD mount 19mm canon.

I really would like to try something other than CV that does not have a modern look...
 
Last edited:
Modern Leica wide angles are just as expensive as modern Leica 50s or longer. Used Leica wide angle prices do not reflect value, but collector/cult status. Why else does a pre-asph Summicron 35/2 v1 or v4 cost as much as a modern 35/2 asph on the used market ?

If you are OK with 28/35, there are a variety of LTM lenses available, much more affordable than Leica glass. What comes to mind are Nikkor 35/2.5, Canon 35/1.8, 35/2.8, 28/2.8, 28/3.5, Komura 35 and 28mm, all excellent and affordable lenses. Compare the price of a Canon 35/2.8, Komura 35/2.8 to a Summaron 35/2.8, where the Komura and Summaron are basically identical in design - the price difference has nothing to do with user value.

BTW, if you are looking for wider, Canon 19 and 25, and Nikkor 20, come up sometimes, at least in SLR mount that can be adapted. Also, there is the Russar 20, not bad at all.

Ronald M said:
Understand Germany has some of the highest labor costs in the world due to the socialist nature of the labor market there. Leica has a difficult time getting rid of workers when times are slow so they must be careful how many they employ.
Click to expand...

So do USPS, Chrysler, Ford or Caltrans.

Japanese labor is not less expensive than German. Maybe 50 years ago.

Roland.
 
Last edited:
I am more interested in <35mm.

I found a canon 28mm on ebay at a decent price. I will see. Thanks.

It would be nice if they had wider than 28mm...Are those 2cm and 1.9cm lenses for SLR only? Are there rangefinder versions?
 
I just bought a Canon/Serenar 28/3.5 with VF and Leica M-mount adapter ring for $429.00.

While not the fastest lens it has a single coat, low contrast and a retro look that works well in B&W. Very small BTW and built well.

I really like this lens and its performance for B&W.

Calzone
 
radi(c)al_cam said:
In this case, and IF scale-focussing is not an issue, you could take ANY older super-wide lens for 35mm-still camera -- you would just need the proper adapter.
Click to expand...

Have you tried doing that? wow it is the first time I heard that thing. interesting. Thanks. Can I find the adaptors on ebay easily? Then links you put dont work.

Now I see that we have 25mm lenses from canon/nikon too. I am surprised now. here we go I have more choices.

I would like to learn more about that adaptor thing so I can use a wider lens, wider than 25mm, on my M6.
 
Your only "cheap" alternative in around 21mm focal length is CV ... Everything else is either "collectible" (for example the Ricoh 21/3.5), difficult to get (Kobalux 21/2.8) or has a "Leica / Zeiss" price-tag....
 
Concerning adapters, I especially use RFs with LTM, so I do not need a fixed-M-mount on my adapters.

(above, I have repaired the URLs)

I am very comfortable with the SLR-lenses adapted on RF, but of course, we speak of antique Super-Wides which have been top-quality and still are unbeaten.
 
so to sum up, I can get:

21mm CV = ~370$
25mm canon = ~550-600$
28mm canon = ~350$

I dont include 35mms as there are many other options other than CV.
For using SLR 21mm on my M6, I am not sure if I can manage to find those adaptors easily..
 
Nikkor made a 25/4 in LTM and Nikon-S mount in the 1950s -- it sells for well over $1,000 today and has an older look.
The Nikon 21/4 in RF mount is among the world's most collectible lenses, valued at several thousands of dollars. Same formula as the older F-mount 21/4 that required mirror lock-up.

The Zeiss Biogon 21/4.5 of the 1950s pioneered this focal length and can be found for under $1000, but it is such an excellent lens that its images look completely modern.

One of the reasons for high prices is relative scarcity. These superwides typically were bought by just a few professionals and serious enthusiasts who understood the important of going really wide. The hobbyists and family photographers who accounted for day-to-day sales wanted long telephotos, not wides, which is why you can find the optically excellent 135/3.5 at under $100, because so many were made and sold.
 
LeicaFoReVer said:
.Are those 2cm and 1.9cm lenses for SLR only? Are there rangefinder versions?
Click to expand...

The Canon 19mm/3.5 was made in both LTM and Canon FD mount. The LTM version is not easy to come by, but the FD version shows up occasionally on eBay. The FD version can be used as scale-focus lens on a rangefinder camera with the addition of the Canon adapter B. The LTM and early FD versions are the same lens design.

I would recommend the CV 21 over the Canon 19mm- it is a much sharper lens, and does not exhibit the vignetting/corner-darkening of the Canon.

As far as the 28mm Canons, the 28/3.5 has more fans that the 28/2.8, although I think that both lenses are OK performers compared to their 1950s counterparts
 
Last edited:
Ronald M said:
CV lenses are made in Japan/China? with lower costs for employees/some ancient 50 year old machinery already amoritiized , far less quality control, cheaper materials, and much less sophisticated designs, so their lensers are cheaper.
Click to expand...

We know this... how? Does anyone own a CV lens that is stamped "Made in China"? Is there evidence for any of the rest of those assertions?

Understand Germany has some of the highest labor costs in the world due to the socialist nature of the labor market there. Leica has a difficult time getting rid of workers when times are slow so they must be careful how many they employ.
Click to expand...

If Germany was actually socialist Leica would be owned either by the state or its workers. In any case, it seems Leica believes it is important that Leica's employees be paid acceptable wages. Otherwise, they could farm the work overseas, much as many Western multinationals have, shamefully, done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom