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

[Austerby]

I don't see this the same as other posters - it's a lens that will turn the M9 into a MF-quality digital camera without needed a new body. Look at the S2 lenses: the new Summicron is in their category, both performance and price wise. I can't wait to see what it'll do on a M10 onwards.

I won't be buying one, any more than I'm likely to buy an S2 - but I am very interested in its results.

[Keith]

Originally Posted by DRabbit

I just made a very similar argument in another thread on the topic of price. I think Leica has the right to charge whatever they like, but their prices have risen to the point they are excluding many of their own fans and users who accepted the previously high-but-could-justify prices.

Maybe a few have deserted the loyal ranks over the last few years because of cost but as we know there will be as many entering. Somewhere every other day someone will be looking at the M9 and Summicron and thinking "Wow ... that's a fifteen thousand dollar toy I could do with ... I can see that hanging around my neck next time I'm in Monaco!"


But of course you already knew this ... Leica have known it for some time!

[steveyork]

Lots of people want the equivalent of a 'digital CL.'

Leica will never do it. They sold a lot of those CLs back in the 70's, but at the expense of M5 sales. That's what really killed the M5 (along with the shift to SLRs), although the fondlers didn't like the looks of the M5. If Leica produced a 'digital cl,' then their M9 sales would suffer, and a smart company's not going to do that.

But for another company -- one of the other two that still makes rangefinders -- there would be a market. That's where you should pin hopes. But how many of you supported the R-D1? My impression is that it didn't sell well.

[Araakii]

Originally Posted by I Love Film

I'm just going to use it to upset all the poor people, and laugh at them. "Ha ha ha! I have an $8000 lens (with sales tax), and you don't. I don't even know how to use my camera, but I can afford to pay someone to take the photos for me. HA HA HA!"

Too bad for all of you who can't have one. Who is to say who is capable of using the lens better, me or you?

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.

[Araakii]

Originally Posted by Erik van Straten

Well, I am disappointed because a new normal 50mm f/2 lens from Leica is out of reach of the most of us. It is not a special edition item, but just a new version of a standard lens.

Erik.

What makes the new 50 f2 a "standard" lens? Just because 50mm is a standard focal length and f2 is a relatively standard speed? There is no technical aspect of this lens that indicates that it's the "standard" lens that you have seen from any lens maker before.

[hteasley]

Originally Posted by Araakii

What makes the new 50 f2 a "standard" lens? Just because 50mm is a standard focal length and f2 is a relatively standard speed? There is no technical aspect of this lens that indicates that it's the "standard" lens that you have seen from any lens maker before.

I think he means "standard" as in "not a special limited edition". Folks are used to special collectors edition Leica gear being silly-priced, but this is collectors-price while being a normal, non-special-edition lens.

It became a bit more understandable when I read at they're not discontinuing the current 50 summicron: this is a new addition, to be sold alongside the older one.

[Araakii]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

Stefan Daniel once said that those who can't afford a new Leica should just go out and buy a used one. Really? That may have made sense with a film body, where the 'sensor' is upgraded by swtiching the film stock, but is that even a rational suggestion with a digital camera? Would you buy a 6 year old computer for several thousand dollars? The M8 is a buggy mess with a sensor that is at least 6 years old now and never was a stellar performer to begin with. We are not talking about buying a used Nikon D3s, which still is a viable tool for many professionals. The ugly truth is that digital cameras have a shelf life. The march of technology is relentless and unless you are shooting in a vacuum, that is a problem.

You have a lot of valid points. But the release of the new monochrome has already pushed mint used M9 prices to the mid $4000 range. It would probably cost Leica the same money to bring out a new mid level full frame body with lesser specs. So in that sense, yes, you should go out to buy a used M9 if you want one. Leica doesn't make the sensors and I believe there are some cost issues that are beyond their control.

[Araakii]

The world has changed so much since the 50s and not many photojournalists would use a Leica on a daily basis nowadays. If Leica still claims that they produce bodies and lenses primarily for photojournalists, then they are lying. New leica stuff is for people who either really care about the output results regardless of cost, or people who want to travel light but still want the best output possible. Is that anything wrong with this approach? Not at all.

[Erik van Straten]

Originally Posted by hteasley

this is a new addition, to be sold alongside the older one.

Maybe until the older one is out of stock. If not, it must be very clear and proven that this lens is extremely special indeed, but I do not believe that.

Erik.

[BobYIL]

Originally Posted by Erik van Straten

Maybe until the older one is out of stock. If not, it must be very clear and proven that this lens is extremely special indeed, but I do not believe that.

Erik.

Erik, you obviously have been in photography since decades. Do you know any lens on a 35mm film to deliver IQ to match MF? 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?

This sensor is an 18MP one, off-the CFA makes its apparent resolution at best 25% better, corresponding to 28MP max. But it still is an 18MP sensor no matter what lens used with it. In other words its like imagining of using a super lens on an M8 would turn it into an M9! Is it possible?!

Ridiculous "commercials" to only add another myth link to the chain. These will go on until some real-life comparisons against the D800E are published. (The one with the M9 is already in the Imaging Resource site.)

[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