Why are "Leica" camera so expensive?

They come from a time when the best cameras and lenses came from Germany. They live on their old reputation.

Leica M rangefinder is a very different shooting experience. Manual focus, manual exposure. Plus the M9 is about the same price as the 1DsMkIII.

Here maybe this will help. Written by a Canon lover.
http://www.canonrumors​.com …ica-m9-experience-review/

And the glass is amazing. There are very few lenses in the Canon line up or the Nikon line up and none of hte wide angle lenses in either camp L or non L can touch the 21 1.4 Summilux or the 35 1.4 Summilux when talking about distortion and sharpness.

Going way back to college economics, there are two methods of selling produce. Sell a ton at low margins and make a ton of money. Sell a couple at high margins and make a ton of money. As one of my profs once said, "would you rather sell a 10,000 widgets at $1 profit apiece of one widget at $10,000 profit?"

Terrible ISO performance....meh....​.

different shooting experience than a SLR/DSLR

I thought the 5Dc II and III had a beautiful VF until I looked through an M6 viewfinder.
it was simple, bright and clear, let me see around the frame.
focusing, adjusting your shutter speed and aperture all manually done.
silent, light, unobtrusive.

I have 2 other RF cameras, a Canonet QL17 and a Yashica 35 GSN and have to say that the build and design of the Leica M6 is way better than the other 2.

i've used a M9, my attorney brought his to a Porsche driving school we attended together. After a couple of days of him letting me use - he admitted he didn't know how and didn't really want to learn - he asked me what I thought of it. I told him I don't see any difference IQ between it and my cheap 7D. Things I liked were the size/weight - I could easily drive behind him and shoot it one handed of his car and it was fast. Other than that I didn't see anything special in it.

Leica has always been about the lenses and not the cameras themselves. So, yeah, not much special about the bodies, except they make it easy to use the lenses

Snob appeal. Pure and simple.

When was the last time you saw an iconic photograph in a medium known for excellence that was shot on a Leica and which could not have been duplicated on a Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, Sony, etc.?

In 2001 I moved to Greece and bought a brand new C200 K for the equivalent of 40,000 Euros. Safety being the major attraction.

I was taken aback that they offered 1 year warranty and no extension for sale... "But... it's a Mercedes" the dealer said... "what do you need the warranty for?"

In 6 years of ownership, it cost me 15,000 Euros in maintenance and a multitude of never-ending repairs...

The only way a Mercedes would end up in my garage/driveway, is if somebody gave me a brand new one. And it would stay there until I found somebody to take it off my hands...

Sam6644 wrote in post #14533762
Superior craftsmanship.

Canon and Nikon are Japanese... like a Honda or Nissan.
Leica is Germany... like a Mercedes or BMW.

At the end of the day, they do pretty much the same thing, but anybody who tells you a Honda is made better than a Mercedes has never taken much of a look at a Mercedes.

Worth it? I guess. If it's what you're looking for that. I consider my Canons good enough, and better suited for what I do than a Leica. My Canons are also more disposable than a Leica. I'd care a lot less about where I parked a Nissan than a BMW.

I'm not a jaded auto technician...... If you saw a Mercedes tech service bulletin book a tech uses you'd be shocked. From a mechanics standpoint I know the public has zero idea how poor QC and engineering is in a new Mercedes. The rich get poor throwing money at keeping them running. Consumers have zero idea unless you've worked at the dealership. I have several friends working on them daily at stealerships. Just say "they know they will be forever employed at mercedes"

Craftmanship, small size, great low ISO IQ, unique Leica lens drawing style, shooting experience, lack of any real competition in this area.

For some people these factors justify the price, for others, they dont.

Bet your butt if Sony manages a FF NEX that will adapt Leica lenses, you may see some market movement.

joedlh wrote in post #14534539
Snob appeal. Pure and simple.

When was the last time you saw an iconic photograph in a medium known for excellence that was shot on a Leica and which could not have been duplicated on a Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, Sony, etc.?

Proper tool for the job. There is not a better street camera out there than a Leica M period.

DOF scales that actually work. A camera without all the bells and whistles that many are willing to spend to have. Also has anyone seen this? Check out the 10,000 ISO on this baby.

http://www.slack.co.uk​/slack/Monochrom.html

Its unlikely that most that are die hard DSLR users that like alll the auto everything get the appeal of Leica M but there are many out there that are looking for a much different experience. Nice to have the choice.

I like it due to its small size. Perfect for street photography. The price however, is no good. I can see why famous photogs used this camera. I also see why they used only 1 with 1 lens.

Jethro790 wrote in post #14533677
Is a Mercedes 300SL any different than a Ford Focus?

My old focus was never in the shop as much as my Merc!!! LOL!!

Remember that Leica became famous in the 30's through the 50's. Rangefinder's ruled no SLR's yet