Will you pay $7,195 for the new 50 'cron Asph?

[Erik van Straten]

Originally Posted by BobYIL

This is like to use 50/1.4 Summilux Asph. on an M6 and expecting it to compete with a Planar 80/2.8 on a Hasselblad when the prints are enlarged to A2! Is it possible?

Well, it is quite ridiculous to expect acceptable A2 b+w prints from a digital file. Have you ever seen them?

Leica offers to make silver-gelatine prints from the files of the M9M, but they do not mention the price of them. I think that 99,9% of the pictures of the M9M and the new Summicron 50 mm f/2 will be seen on an ordinary computer monitor and nowere else.

Erik.

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Originally Posted by Araakii

I don't know if you have met any Leica owner who has pointed their fingers at you. The Leica owners I know personally (and myself included) don't even talk about our gears to non-Leica owners. We keep most of these things to ourselves. Personally I don't even want others to know that I am using a Leica. I just want to use the tools I like to do my photography.

Any hard feelings that relatively less well-off folks get are probably just projections of their own feeling of inferiority or insecurity.

I have had Leica owners give me crap about not owning a Leica and accusing me of not being a good photographer because I used Olympus and Nikon. This was many years ago, before I ever owned a Leica (I have two M6 now). When I was in art school, I was a photo lab tech at Meijer, a midwestern chain of big-box supercenter stores.

We had a regular customer, an old doctor, who shot Leicas and was always telling me that I would never be a good photographer unless I owned one. The stupid old fool couldn't get it through his thick skull that with the $7.75 an hour job I had, I couldn't even afford to live on my own, let alone buy a camera that cost 6 months of my pay for a body and lens.

Every time he came in, he harped on me about getting a Leica. I finally told him to put up or shut up. Either accept that I'm not buying a camera I cannot f--cking afford, or buy me one yourself if you think its so damned important for me to have one. He shut up.

I own Leicas now, and I like them, but I was a great photographer long before I had them and will be even if I get rid of them.

[rxmd]

Originally Posted by Ken Ford

I think this illustrates a stumble Leica made in developing and marketing this new lens. If their intent really was to offer a "no compromises" 50, the absolute best they could make, they shouldn't have called it a Summicron. (Yes, I know 'cron is the historic name for f/2.0 Leica lenses.) They should have created a new naming sequence that conveys this goal and separates it out from the rest of the line. Think Toyota > Lexus.

Well they did call it APO-ASPH, how many such lenses has Leica made over the decades?

[rxmd]

Originally Posted by Chriscrawfordphoto

I have had Leica owners give me crap about not owning a Leica and accusing me of not being a good photographer because I used Olympus and Nikon. [...] We had a regular customer, an old doctor, who shot Leicas and was always telling me that I would never be a good photographer unless I owned one.

Dorks exist, news at 11. How the hell is this the problem of the manufacturer?

[JayM]

My feelings stem from something based in pop psychology and economic theory.

[Araakii]

Originally Posted by Chriscrawfordphoto

Every time he came in, he harped on me about getting a Leica. I finally told him to put up or shut up. Either accept that I'm not buying a camera I cannot f--cking afford, or buy me one yourself if you think its so damned important for me to have one. He shut up.

I own Leicas now, and I like them, but I was a great photographer long before I had them and will be even if I get rid of them.

So that's it. The anger you have for the current Leica doesn't have much to do with Leica itself. It stems from some negative experience you had when you grew up. The same guy can now point a Canon 5dm3 at someone making $8 at Wal-mart and tell him he will never become a good photographer until he owns the 5dm3.

But this is probably true in most cases. When we say something negative, it's probably just a reflection of our own experience in the past.

[JayM]

Originally Posted by Araakii

So that's it. The anger you have for the current Leica doesn't have much to do with Leica itself. It stems from some negative experience you had when you grew up. The same guy can now point a Canon 5dm3 at someone making $8 at Wal-mart and tell him he will never become a good photographer until he owns the 5dm3.

But this is probably true in most cases. When we say something negative, it's probably just a reflection of our own experience in the past.

You are an epic troll

[redisburning]

Originally Posted by rxmd

Dorks exist, news at 11. How the hell is this the problem of the manufacturer?

it's a problem because he made it a problem.

you shouldn't be surprised; most people are looking for a reason to feel slighted.

[sanmich]

It boils down to this:

- If Leica keeps production of both models, well, good for them for the technical tour de force. Some that want MF resolution, or that need the chromatic correction, will buy the lens. Still too bad Leica didn't keep an acceptable pricing for their regular gear, but we already knew that (based on 10 years inflation alone, the cron should cost 1300$ ish today, but I forget the currency value...)

-Leica decides, after a while, that the old, sub-optimal cron looks bad in their uncompromising lens portfolio, and discontinues it. Of course they can do whatever they want, but it's one big step in making clear that they moved from making tools to jewelery (and I think Harry Lime explained in his very well put post why some will be very disappointed)

[Araakii]

"Inflation" itself is already a term often misused. It's just the average price for a basket of goods and some items fall in value over time while others go up. The most accurate way to measure "inflation", imo, is to look at the average income of the top 1% (or top X% where X is small enough), because they are the ones who drive the prices for all the best stuff in this world.

[CK Dexter Haven]

Everyone is naturally 'hung up' on the price, and how it doesn't seem to relate to the Lux or Noct. Whether it's worth the money or not, though... I will wait to see an actual photograph created with this lens that:
• can't be made with another lens
• demonstrates whatever 'extra' it might resolve is actually necessary in that image
• demonstrates that the more 'clinically close to perfect' a lens is, the better the photograph.

I'm sure we're going to see a glut of sample pictures, that show the super flat field, and lack of vignetting, and a 2% increase in resolving power. And, then we'll be reminded that the people who will buy this lens will use it handheld, on grab shots of labradors and the homeless. Or, that the people who might benefit - landscapists - should probably be shooting a larger format.

I used to admire Leica. Now, i can't decide if they're a joke or if we're supposed to be.

[baisao]

Originally Posted by CK Dexter Haven

And, then we'll be reminded that the people who will buy this lens will use it handheld, on grab shots of labradors and the homeless.

What's wrong with shooting the homeless?

That came out wrong.

[Araakii]

Originally Posted by CK Dexter Haven

I used to admire Leica. Now, i can't decide if they're a joke or if we're supposed to be.

This whole world is a joke. And we are all part of it.

[Keith]

I think there are a lot worse manufacturers out there than Leica ... at least their products are well engineered and well made ... expensive yes!

When I see todays fashion victims walking around in brand new jeans with rips, tears and looking like they've been washed fifty times, I cringe at the thought that these fools likely paid hundreds of dollars for them from some expensive clothing boutique that got them out of some third world sweat shop for peanuts!

That annoys me far more than a high quality optic selling for $7000.00!

[DominikDUK]

$ 7000 is a lot of money but comparing the price of the Summicron to the price of a cine lens say an Arri Zeiss Ultra Prime Planar T1.9/50 the Leica is a lot cheaper the Cine lens cost $ 13100,- that's nearl twice the price. Ok the cine lens is a low volume lens, but I guess so is the new Leica APO lens. Is it as good as the Zeiss cine prime I doubt it, is it better than the average Still camera lens very likely. Will I buy it not likely.

I'll second Keith' opinion, but I also believe that Chris has a point some owners of expensive products are asses. Take a Ferrari extremely loud could be made less loud but the owner wants to show what a big engine his car has. I personaly would buy a car with a quiet engine and more comfort but that's me. Some buy expensive products for bragging and some for using it as the best tools possible.

Dominik

[fireblade]

whats the difference between the price of this lens and Nikon 300/400/500/600/ primes ?
just another tool for those that can afford it.
better images for 99% of the world "amateur" photographers ? ... probably not.

[btgc]

Originally Posted by DominikDUK

Take a Ferrari extremely loud could be made less loud but the owner wants to show what a big engine his car has. I personaly would buy a car with a quiet engine and more comfort but that's me.

Take a Panamera Hybrid and wonder why owners have opted for not so loud engine

[BobYIL]

I think some of the disappointments and frustrations were due to the extent of how far the announced "essentials" were welcomed as essentials. The M9 users will soon figure out that they would be able to do 95% of what could be done with M9M thru PP. They will also find out that the Apo-Summicron will not turn their cameras to a new one to compete against the best FF sensors. This is the digital age; myths do not last in our day as long as the comparison results down to pixel-peeping level are shared thru internet. Real photographers today do not "buy" palliative improvements as innovations.

If they really are into accomplishing something "essential", then should concentrate on how to employ the same sensors used by some top cameras costing less than half of the M9, improve hi-ISO capability at least to the level shared by cameras of $1000-class by still maintaining color, improve the reliability of their cameras, make the bodies weather sealed, not only introduce boutiques but also service stations to stop shipping cameras to Solms for service to take weeks.

[Viktor Sebastian]

Originally Posted by BobYIL

not only introduce boutiques but also service stations to stop shipping cameras to Solms for service to take weeks.

Even if they just managed to do that I would be happy. I had to wait 3 months to have my rangefinder adjusted. *Even* though I am a member of the leica professional programme. Because accidental damage (a knock) nullifies their promise to have 2 work days turn around.

Pathetic really.

Naturally I was very happy that my 5D II, like always, was there to save the day. Which by the way has never needed service.

V.

[clayne]

Originally Posted by jonoslack

Anyway, since that time, and having spoken to people at Leica, as far as I understand it, this is Peter Karbe's really long term project (11 years!) to produce the 'perfect' lens - no expense spared - with different types of glass. The reason it is f2 is because faster lenses inevitably introduce compromises.

Right, so perhaps the other issue at hand would be a sizable percentage of Leica fans who could care less about Karbe designs and would rather see Mandler based designs because the images had more soul rather than outright blazing sharpness and contrast.

That's probably another reason to avoid the newer designs - more and more heading into Zeiss-land. This new lens is absolutely no exception to that - and further reinstills it.

Also... good for a re-read about the 50/1.4 already being APO: http://dfarkas.blogspot.com/2008/09/...-easy-and.html

Personally, I'm not interested in any of the ASPH stuff.

[Araakii]

Originally Posted by clayne

Right, so perhaps the other issue at hand would be a sizable percentage of Leica fans who could care less about Karbe designs and would rather see Mandler based designs because the images had more soul rather than outright blazing sharpness and contrast.

That's probably another reason to avoid the newer designs - more and more heading into Zeiss-land. This new lens is absolutely no exception to that - and further reinstills it.

Also... good for a re-read about the 50/1.4 already being APO: http://dfarkas.blogspot.com/2008/09/...-easy-and.html

Personally, I'm not interested in any of the ASPH stuff.

Yep, I can't care less about the new ASPH stuff either. But it's good to have them so those who want them can go get them and unload their pre-ASPH gems to the used market.

[Araakii]

Originally Posted by Keith

I think there are a lot worse manufacturers out there than Leica ... at least their products are well engineered and well made ... expensive yes!

When I see todays fashion victims walking around in brand new jeans with rips, tears and looking like they've been washed fifty times, I cringe at the thought that these fools likely paid hundreds of dollars for them from some expensive clothing boutique that got them out of some third world sweat shop for peanuts!

That annoys me far more than a high quality optic selling for $7000.00!

Absolutely! But why should people care right? They don't buy those jeans and they don't know those 3rd world workers, but they surely do want to buy this lens for half price :-)

[albygentle]

Originally Posted by alistair.o

I am as a rule! But since I have started living on morphine as a 'vital' part of my daily routine, my gullibility has slowly faded away man...

Wish you get better on your future addiction.

[rxmd]

Originally Posted by clayne

Right, so perhaps the other issue at hand would be a sizable percentage of Leica fans who could care less about Karbe designs and would rather see Mandler based designs because the images had more soul rather than outright blazing sharpness and contrast.

I guess "soul" is really just another euphemism for "flaw". At some point, making things better will make them lose "soul".

[jsrockit]

Originally Posted by rxmd

I guess "soul" is really just another euphemism for "flaw". At some point, making things better will make them lose "soul".

Appears to be used that way a lot here...