Why Is Leica So Expensive?

Where did you say you live again? lol

Leicas are cheaper than other cameras, not more expensive.

Sure, the initial outlay is greater but there is no depreciation. Buy a 1dIIs new and sell it four years later for a net loss of about $4k. That isn't the case with the leica gear.

jetcode wrote in post #9843992
I seriously doubt that Caltar is producing 60 lp/mm

There are plenty of LF lenses that resolve 60 lp/mm.

Caltar is rebranded Rodenstock, and Rodenstock is as good as it gets in the world of LF glass.

http://www.hevanet.com​/cperez/testing.html

jetcode wrote in post #9843992
the MTF charts for Zeiss and Leica lenses state a maximum resolution curve at 40 lp/mm.

Zeiss has claimed over 200 lp/mm resolution for many of its lenses and up to 400 lp/mm on its 25mm Biogon.

http://www.zeiss.de …86db3e547c12571​07004822e3

jetcode wrote in post #9844413
Well thanks for providing that information. Why do MTF's generally show 10, 20, and 40 lp/mm?

That is not a measure of the actual peak resolution of the lens. It's a measure of lens performance (contrast and fidelity) at various apertures and quadrants of the lens (including distance from the optical axis) using targets with 10, 20, 40 lp/mm detail density.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com …eries/lens-contrast.shtml

jetcode wrote in post #9844413
The Caltar is nice but it doesn't resolve like the Leica and Zeiss. I was aware of the Caltar offered as a rebranded Rodenstock N. I've had several LF lenses over the years, Rodenstock, Schneider, Fuji, and Goerz. The 19" Red Dot Artar was something to experience.

No large format lens resolves like a 35mm Leica or Zeiss, or a Canon or Nikon for that matter. The new Schneider Digitars may be an exception.

The reason is that large format lenses are such substantial chunks of glass that it would be inordinately expensive to engineer 100 or 200 lp/mm resolution into them, and it doesn't matter anyway because LF images aren't enlarged very much.

With 35mm you're enlarging an image that is the size of a postage stamp so you need tons of lens resolution for it to survive enlargement. That is why the tremendous optics of Leica and Zeiss, especially when using high resolution films, allows for greater enlargement than most standard 35mm systems.

I have a Howtek 4500 drum scanner, no printer though. I'm very into alt processes, esp cyanotype, van dyck, and lith printing. With two little ones at home, though, I don't have much time.

If you start printing enlarged negatives let me know, there are a few of mine that I'd like to print using contact processes.

people who doubt the Leica quality have not used Leica lens or cameras. once used, it will make you doubt the quality of your equipment. thats why i have all my primes guess what brand...

jetcode wrote in post #9844891
Do you know Jim Galli? He has the most magnificent collection of old school lenses.

http://tonopahpictures​.0catch.com/

Yeah, I've seen his stuff on APUG and printed in View Camera magazine for a long time. I love the look, there's nothing really like it. He sells a lot of those lenses too if you're interested.