Re: [Leica] Filters, again, very long.

[Jim Brick <jim@brick.org>]

At 03:10 PM 1/27/98 -0500, you wrote:
>Jim;
>Having worked in several camera stores, I can tell you the justification for
>the filter. PROFIT.
>Most of the sales people lament that if you sell a camera, the amount of
>commission is determined by theprofit margin. The margin for cameras is very
>small in the competative market; the margin on a Nikon F3 body( I looked it
>up!), is about 30 dollars, and the salesmen here get 20% of the margin as a
>commission- about 6 bucks!
>If they sell the customer a battery, filter, case and cleaning outfit, their
>commission more than quadruples! It's regretable, but most salesmen hate to
>lose the profit of a filter sale and come up with gloom and doom stories of
>how they protect the lens. Unfortunately, you are right- an impact severe
>enough to damage the solidly built lens will usually do in the body as well!
>Besides, glass is inherently UV protective; Zeiss made very expensive lenses
>with quartz elements for UV photography simply because glass blocks most UV
>radiation.
>Dan'l
> 

I mentioned the UV filter profit motive here on the LUG once, but got
pummeled by many who obviously don't understand this fact. Some of those
folks are still here. It'll be interesting to see if you get lashed as
well. It's OK to get pummeled & lashed... everyone always kisses and makes-up.

Jim