Why Is Leica So Expensive?

JEC wrote in post #9810752
I find that a little hard to believe.
I'm not against Leica, and not "brand fanatic" by any means, but broad brush comments like that are funny sometimes.

It's not that hard to believe. A couple lenses might be lacking in some way, but their market is willing to pay a lot more for better quality. Since they can charge more, they can put more into R&D, and they can use expensive designs that eliminate the aberrations that plague even the vaunted L primes (shorter than 135mm).

Another factor in the cost is the fact that they primarily sell rangefinders, which, for whatever reason, cost much more than SLRs.

robscomputer wrote in post #9810561
Depends upon what you consider a status symbol. A camera cheap or expensive both give an image of the user, either positive or negative. Someone shooting with a Leica would give me the impression of someone very brand loyal, loves the Leica rangefinders. While someone shooting a Canon Rebel would be a new DSLR shooter, maybe his/her first entry to the DSLR world.

Theres not a better street camera period and most of the really great ones shot/shoot with them.

toxic wrote in post #9811373
It's not that hard to believe. A couple lenses might be lacking in some way, but their market is willing to pay a lot more for better quality. Since they can charge more, they can put more into R&D, and they can use expensive designs that eliminate the aberrations that plague even the vaunted L primes (shorter than 135mm).

Another factor in the cost is the fact that they primarily sell rangefinders, which, for whatever reason, cost much more than SLRs.

Though I appreciate Leica's fine quality, I simply doubt they have the vast R&D resources that would outwiegh any other optics giants in the industry.

I simply don't buy into the broad brush comments regarding manufacturers of any kind. Proof is one thing, opinion is another.
Sure, craftmanship is nice.....in a quaint sort of way, but science, physics, and facts ultimately state the truth.
In the world of optics, this is just the way it is.

Extremely well built products (materials), and EXTREMELY GOOD IQ. At least from the images I've seen (only a few), the IQ is INSANE compared to any Canon images I've seen.

JEC wrote in post #9811709
Though I appreciate Leica's fine quality, I simply doubt they have the vast R&D resources that would outwiegh any other optics giants in the industry.

I simply don't buy into the broad brush comments regarding manufacturers of any kind. Proof is one thing, opinion is another.
Sure, craftmanship is nice.....in a quaint sort of way, but science, physics, and facts ultimately state the truth.
In the world of optics, this is just the way it is.

Have you seen the charts for those M Leica lenses? Thats science and there are only a small handful of lenses by the big guys that can run with them. Thats not a quant sort of way.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #9811733
Have you seen the charts for those M Leica lenses? Thats science and there are only a small handful of lenses by the big guys that can run with them. Thats not a quant sort of way.

No, I haven't.

Show me one.

ETA
Then show me some pictures that are better than someone took with a Canon, Nikon, Tamron, or Sigma lens.

I think the "extremely good IQ" may come from the fact that not really any amateurs shoot Leica and they only have expensive prime lenses. If Canon only sold their L prime lineup, and none of their zooms or cheaper lenses, the average IQ would skyrocket as well.

Although, that might also explain their expense. Imagine if Canon only sold the 5Dmk2 and L Primes. They would seem very expensive as a whole, too.

tkbslc wrote in post #9811747
I think the "extremely good IQ" may come from the fact that not really any amateurs shoot Leica and they only have expensive prime lenses. If Canon only sold their L prime lineup, and none of their zooms or cheaper lenses, the average IQ would skyrocket as well.

Although, that might also explain their expense. Imagine if Canon only sold the 5Dmk2 and L Primes. They would seem very expensive as a whole, too.

Theres only a few of Canons very best Ls that can run with Leica M glass. Its all about economics. Leica's customers are much different than Canon's. Look at the way folks complain about the cost of lenses here. Canon has to sell volume. Leicas are built for serious photographers. They manual focus lenses and manual exposure cameras. They don't have a P for professional.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #9809816
Leica's M glass spanks almost everything in the Canon and Nikon line up even most Canon Ls. One word quality.

Yup. Best 35mm lenses ever made. IMO they beat even Zeiss, at least in the 35mm world.

JEC wrote in post #9811745
No, I haven't.

Show me one.

ETA
Then show me some pictures that are better than someone took with a Canon, Nikon, Tamron, or Sigma lens.

If you're really interested in learning its out there find it yourself. Look at the works of Henry Cartier-Bresson, Gary Winogrand, Walker Evans, W. Eugene Smith, Ralph Gibson, Alfred Eisenstadt, Leonard Freed, William Albert Allard, Pete Souza and report back.

"Theres only a few of Canons very best Ls that can run with Leica M glass."

And, in your opinion, which would those be? (out of curiosity).


Leica's customers are much different than Canon's. Look at the way folks complain about the cost of lenses here. Canon has to sell volume. Leicas are built for serious photographers.\

Hmm. ..
.
.
LOL
I'd best sit on my fingers now, than respond to that, but before I do, I'll just say I'm not the complaining type about the cost of lenses, or any other good gear.
BTW..wanna buy a used Delorean? (It's for "serious drivers" only though.)

DrPablo wrote in post #9811838
Yup. Best 35mm lenses ever made. IMO they beat even Zeiss, at least in the 35mm world.

Doc, when did you get the 7D?

Yes Leica M glass is really special and you have to love a company that make digital rangefinder cameras that take all of that great old M glass. They probably could have made a ton more money making everyone buy new glass like all the big boys did but they instead honored their loyal customers buy giving them a body that they can use 40 year old lenses on.

JEC wrote in post #9811914
"Theres only a few of Canons very best Ls that can run with Leica M glass."

And, in your opinion, which would those be? (out of curiosity).


Leica's customers are much different than Canon's. Look at the way folks complain about the cost of lenses here. Canon has to sell volume. Leicas are built for serious photographers.\

Hmm. ..
.
.
LOL
I'd best sit on my fingers now, than respond to that, but before I do, I'll just say I'm not the complaining type about the cost of lenses, or any other good gear.
BTW..wanna buy a used Delorean? (It's for "serious drivers" only though.)

Google is a wonderful thing, look it up yourself if you're really interested in learning something and its not just my opinion so search and get a clue. Canons are not the end all in photography. Yep your right to compare Leica with Delorean Did you know if you want to by an M9 still after they've been out for quite a while you will have to get on a list and wait.

And old Leica M cameras are selling now for more than what they cost new. Hows the price of that 5D classic or 20dD hold'n? Whos driven the Delorean.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #9811924
Doc, when did you get the 7D?

Heya airfrogusmc,

About 2 months ago in anticipation our second child being born (now 3 wks old) and realizing that while I'm still a film guy, I really couldn't take the 25 bajillion low yield snapshots I wanted to using a Hasselblad (and my 300D was just not turning me on anymore after 5 years). I hemmed and hawed between the 5DII and the 7D for a long time and decided the 7D was probably a better choice to get pics of our constantly-moving 2 year old.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #9811924
Yes Leica M glass is really special and you have to love a company that make digital rangefinder cameras that take all of that great old M glass. They probably could have made a ton more money making everyone buy new glass like all the big boys did but they instead honored their loyal customers buy giving them a body that they can use 40 year old lenses on.

Leica just has a following. They're like Rolex. The cameras themselves are a work of art. I got to use an M6 very very briefly last year. Man that thing is sexy. Though no camera feels better in the hands than the Hasselblad, that's not even close (though the 7D is pretty nice).

Thanks for that tip about that Google thing. (Not sure if it'll ever catch on, but it sure was handy tonight)


Canon's the "end all" in photography?
Nah..not a chance, and my choice of motor vehicles doesn't make me a better driver either.

So, maybe we should change the subject rather than bicker.
How many Leica's do you have? Got any pics? What's your favorite lighting?
Why did we get a 20D, 30D, 40D, a 50D, then a 7 or a 5 and 1? Makes no sense to me.
Those silly camera makers...