Why Is Leica So Expensive?

breal101 wrote in post #9813857
I think that a case could be made that Leica has a sort of cult following but unlike most cults they have a very strong foundation to stand on. It's not all in their heads. You really have to experience using a Leica to appreciate the fine fit and finish, the unbelievably smooth and precise controls and above all the results. I've owned Hasselblad, Sinar, Nikon, and now Canon, none were quite as impressive as the Leica for build quality. Hasselblad and Sinar are a close second but Leica is in a class of it's own.

Yep, I first bought a Bessa Voigtlander rangefinder. It's a great camera, and I can even slap on Leica lenses for the utmost in quality. But when I got my hands on the Leica iiif, that was it, after a few months, I just couldn't use any of my other cameras, including my beloved Nikon FM2 (which I will never sell, however). The tactile qualities of the old Barnacks are perfect for me, and I am now questioning if I should even pick up an M2, as I once planned. If this puts me in some kind of cult following, I won't argue.

sjones wrote in post #9813928
Yep, I first bought a Bessa Voigtlander rangefinder. It's a great camera, and I can even slap on Leica lenses for the utmost in quality. But when I got my hands on the Leica iiif, that was it, after a few months, I just couldn't use any of my other cameras, including my beloved Nikon FM2 (which I will never sell, however). The tactile qualities of the old Barnacks are perfect for me, and I am now questioning if I should even pick up an M2, as I once planned. If this puts me in some kind of cult following, I won't argue.

You might want to consider a single stroke M3. Many consider them to be as good as it gets in the Leica line. Don't make the mistake I made getting one in perfect just of the manufacturing line condition. It was so pretty I didn't use it as much as I should have fearing putting a scratch on it. Eventually after years of badgering and increased offers I sold it to a collector friend, a decision I regret. Heck, as much as I love digital I might even shoot a roll of film once in a while if I still had that camera.

breal101 wrote in post #9814021
You might want to consider a single stroke M3. Many consider them to be as good as it gets in the Leica line. Don't make the mistake I made getting one in perfect just of the manufacturing line condition. It was so pretty I didn't use it as much as I should have fearing putting a scratch on it. Eventually after years of badgering and increased offers I sold it to a collector friend, a decision I regret. Heck, as much as I love digital I might even shoot a roll of film once in a while if I still had that camera.

I was initially considering an M3, but at the time, I wanted a finder that accommodated 35mm and 50mm frame lines, which pushed me over to the M2. Some folks claim that the M2 (although the 'cheaper' variant of the M3) was Leica's best product, but I'm sure M3 users could dispute this. Anyway, as I am now pretty much dedicated to using just a 50mm (love wide angle shots, just not my personal style, though), I am reconsidering the M3, as its finder for the 50mm is better. And yes, should I get one, might as well get it in user condition…already have a 50mm Zeiss M-mount that would work fine on it.

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.

SLRs, for the general public, are status symbols. Even though they are getting cheaper, they're what, $500-600 to start? That's a lot of money these days when people can be using it for essential items (don't forget, POTN is anomalous with all the people seeming having good gear and thinking good gear makes for a better photographer). However, of course, Leicas are status symbols for photographers, but what has been pointed out, they're also very good cameras and lenses.

I'd be surprised if anyone could really tell the difference between shots taken with a Bessa/Voigtlander kit vs a Leica kit. Quality rangefinders and primes are all quite good.

nphsbuckeye wrote in post #9814304
SLRs, for the general public, are status symbols. Even though they are getting cheaper, they're what, $500-600 to start? That's a lot of money these days

Except that just 5 years ago the average new P&S camera was $400 to $500. So with inflation the $500 to $600 dSLRs you mention are actually like P&S cameras of 5 years ago.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #9813769
Mike you think a new photogrpaher thats never shot before could use cameras lke Leica rangefinder a 500C/M or an 8X10 Deardorff.? Put a 5D on P. These are not cameras for those that don't have some knowledge. Also right tool for the right job. Just saying professional photographer can mean a hundred different things. Some things are better served by large format, some are better served by medium format, some are better served by a range finder and some SLR.

No, probably not. My point was your comment sounded a little like only the "serious" photographers use Leica and everything else is beneath them.

I know what you meant though. Didn't mean any offense.

tkbslc wrote in post #9814459
I'd be surprised if anyone could really tell the difference between shots taken with a Bessa/Voigtlander kit vs a Leica kit. Quality rangefinders and primes are all quite good.

Again, as an owner of both a Bessa (which I would still highly recommend) and older Leica, it wasn't a matter of image quality but merely the way the Leica felt in hand, a pure delight that enhanced the process of photography, which for me, is as important as the photograph itself. After all, I'm using a a Cosina Voigtlander lens.

Most consumers would never consider a camera that doesn't have auto focus, auto exposure and all the other things they deem a plus that most people go to Leica to get away from so most that post here wouldn't be a their customer base. I'm not saying theres anything wrong with a Canon user its just that someone that wants the bells and whistles are not a the typical Leica customer. I've never though buying quality gear as a status symbol as much as an investment in a tool. My Hasselblads were never status symbols but reliable tools that helped me feed my family, pay the mortgage and sent the kids to school.

HappySnapper90 wrote in post #9814519
Except that just 5 years ago the average new P&S camera was $400 to $500. So with inflation the $500 to $600 dSLRs you mention are actually like P&S cameras of 5 years ago.

Well, those P&Ss were also status systems to many (and still are). But with newer technologies, SLRs are affordable and are open to a new market.

nphsbuckeye wrote in post #9816348
Well, those P&Ss were also status systems to many (and still are). But with newer technologies, SLRs are affordable and are open to a new market.

Yes, five years ago, a US$500 P&S would have been a pro-sumer model, like the Canon G-series. The fact of the matter is that most folks are relying on their camera-phone for shots, whereby even a US$250 P&S is, in comparison, a bit pricey.

The way I see it, it is akin to buying a Rolls Royce. Handcrafted, fine attention to detail, suberb fit and finish, heritage, prestige. Sure there are faster cars, perhaps better looking. But nothing can match the feel of driving one.

I've never had a chance to work a Leica, but I have driven (briefly) a few Rolls and Bentleys. There's just an intangible about it that you cannot describe to someone who hasn't experienced it. I can only imagine this is what using a Leica is about.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #9815719
Most consumers would never consider a camera that doesn't have auto focus, auto exposure and all the other things they deem a plus that most people go to Leica to get away from so most that post here wouldn't be a their customer base. I'm not saying theres anything wrong with a Canon user its just that someone that wants the bells and whistles are not a the typical Leica customer. I've never though buying quality gear as a status symbol as much as an investment in a tool. My Hasselblads were never status symbols but reliable tools that helped me feed my family, pay the mortgage and sent the kids to school.

Airfrogusmc,
You have a point, but you still generalize too much.
"Most consumers"? Yes, you may be half-right in that statement, but this isn't an elitist forum, and no...there isn't "anything wrong with a Canon user". And using your snarky advice about Google last night, "Leica-on-the-Net" didn't exist.


I can truly appreciate your passion for the lens you may (or may not) own. I have my own lens (and non lens) related passions.

The only reason I responded at all to this thread in the first place was your comment about Leica "smacking" Canon in quality.
As I said earlier, I'm not crazy brand loyal, but the Canon series, Nikon lenses, and all the others produce incredible results in the right hands.
Leica has their place amongst those "that produce the right lens for your right reason", but that doesn't make them better or worse a manufacturer, and the people use the others doesn't make them less a "serious photographer".

I didn't mean to keep teasin' you about a product you love. I just sometimes respond to the "high horse" mentality I see sometimes.
If it's 12:01 in the afternoon, you look at your Rolex, and I look at my Timex.....It's still one minute after noon.


At this point, I have about 130 thousand dollars wrapped up in DSLR cameras, video cameras, lenses, software, microscopes, printers, etc for the services I provide, another 70 thousand on audio visual gear, another 450,000 on other products for my business.
So much stuff, it means nothing to me, except for the results I (or my employees) can produce from it to make an impact.

Still, I'm the guy that wears jeans to work, has a smile for anybody, cleans the toilets at my store when nobody else wants to, is happier in my Jeep than a Jaguar, and gets an attitude when it comes to snobbery and elitist attitudes.

This has been an interesting conversation, but I'm done with it.

JEC wrote in post #9818598
Airfrogusmc,
You have a point, but you still generalize too much.
"Most consumers"? Yes, you may be half-right in that statement, but this isn't an elitist forum, and no...there isn't "anything wrong with a Canon user". And using your snarky advice about Google last night, "Leica-on-the-Net" didn't exist.


I can truly appreciate your passion for the lens you may (or may not) own. I have my own lens (and non lens) related passions.

The only reason I responded at all to this thread in the first place was your comment about Leica "smacking" Canon in quality.
As I said earlier, I'm not crazy brand loyal, but the Canon series, Nikon lenses, and all the others produce incredible results in the right hands.
Leica has their place amongst those "that produce the right lens for your right reason", but that doesn't make them better or worse a manufacturer, and the people use the others doesn't make them less a "serious photographer".

I didn't mean to keep teasin' you about a product you love. I just sometimes respond to the "high horse" mentality I see sometimes.
If it's 12:01 in the afternoon, you look at your Rolex, and I look at my Timex.....It's still one minute after noon.


At this point, I have about 130 thousand dollars wrapped up in DSLR cameras, video cameras, lenses, software, microscopes, printers, etc for the services I provide, another 70 thousand on audio visual gear, another 450,000 on other products for my business.
So much stuff, it means nothing to me, except for the results I (or my employees) can produce from it to make an impact.

Still, I'm the guy that wears jeans to work, has a smile for anybody, cleans the toilets at my store when nobody else wants to, is happier in my Jeep than a Jaguar, and gets an attitude when it comes to snobbery and elitist attitudes.

This has been an interesting conversation, but I'm done with it.

You can't find Leica Your kidding right? I like equipment that works. Gear I can rely on to function comfortable, reliable and work with my vision. Its how I feed my family and I don't like surprises on a job and equipment thats constantly failing. I find it snobbish in a way to suggest that anyone that has a Leica has one only as a status symbol. Its just not true. There are many photographers that prefer cameras that are all manual, reliable and well built.

And I really find interesting that you are trying to impress me with al the $$$ you have rapped up in stuff. That has what to do with what?

http://www.luminous-landscape.com …ws/cameras/m9-first.shtml

http://us.leica-camera.com …gallery_new_yor​k/?image=1

http://us.leica-camera.com/photography​/

That was in just a few seconds.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #9815719
I've never though buying quality gear as a status symbol as much as an investment in a tool. My Hasselblads were never status symbols but reliable tools

Same here. I think those that think otherwise are the ones that have money rolling in or just have an ego issue.