[Leica] Contax SLR Lens Line

[Mike Johnston <70007.3477@compuserve.com>]

>>>Actually, I've heard reports the 300 was great. They have 30 lenses? But no
35 f/2, right Mike J? <G><<<

 Eric,
 As you know, my main beef with the Contax SLR system is that they don't have a
lens wider than 50mm and faster than f/2.8 except for one current and one
discontinued high-speed lens. The current one is the 35mm f/1.4. My feeling is
that this lens is less than useful for general carry-around photography because
of its size, weight, and price. Personally, for my own use, I really need a
semi-fast, semi-compact lens in the 35mm-45mm range. Leica gives you a choice
of all three speeds in a 35mm lens--f/1.4, f/2, and f/2.8 (although I
understand the last-mentioned has recently been discontinued). Zeiss's idea is
to give you a choice of a high-speed lens that is big, heavy, and expensive, or
a light, small, inexpensive lens that is slow. I would rather have a 35mm f/2
than _both_ of these Zeiss alternatives.
 I think this is a weakness in the lens line. Contax has said to me in response
that they feel the market for a 35mm f/2 would be too small to justify the
development and marketing of such a lens. This exposes what I feel is a flaw in
their logic. As Canon and Nikon have learned well, for a pro or a serious
shooter to commit to a camera system, the _system_ must include all the
individual parts the photographer needs. If a photographer wants to shoot
Contax but is being kept away by the lack of one item, then introducing that
item may earn a new customer for the entire system! Whereas, the lack of that
item might keep a customer away from the entire system. So how can it not be
cost-effective? This is how Canon and Nikon win many of their system customers,
even though a number of items in both lines are only marginally profitable, or
not profitable, alone.
 As an analogous argument, imagine if Leica decided that the profit margin for
an R8 motor drive would be too small for the direct sales of the drive to
justify the production costs. Should they then decide not to introduce it at
all? Of course not, because it would prevent many professional users from
buying the R8 and using the R system. It would be worth it to them to provide
the motor drive even if they had to do so at a _loss_. 
 The limitations in the Zeiss lens line are especially frustrating because one
of the initial concepts of the Contax camera was cross-compatibility between
the Contax and Yashica lensmounts. If they had followed this idea through, this
would make for optimum system flexibility--a Contax shooter could use Zeiss
lenses for his most-often-used lenses, and cheaper Yashica versions for
seldom-used lenses. Or, he or she carry an inexpensive Yashica backup body, for
instance, or use less expensive Yashica alternatives for Zeiss lenses he or she
couldn't afford. I've also argued to Contax that they should fill in the gaps
in their telephoto lineup--a persistent, longtime weakness in the line--with
less expensive Yashica-labeled alternatives. But they have not interest; the
Yashica marque is moribund.  
 Sorry to explain these concepts at such length, but I seem to be having
trouble communicating lately, if responses to my recent posts are an
indication. <s>
 Anyway, my current SLR is a Leica R4sP because of the 35mm Summicron-R. If
Contax made a 35mm f/2, I'd probably still be shooting Contax.

>>>But that is changing. National Geographic's bean counters are beating
the photographers down to six week essays rather than six months. Expect a
concomitant reduction in quality of images<<<

 Do you really think so? Is it really necessary for a photographer to shoot a
thousand rolls to make a good essay? I always thought this was to make the
editors' jobs easier, not the photographers'. Personally, if I were required to
shoot 1,000 rolls instead of a hundred to get twenty good pictures, I'd
consider it an insult to me. My best essay I did with less than 40 rolls!

 Although I remember something David Hume Kennerly told me in a supermarket
checkout line in Georgetown (I didn't recognize him, but he was holding a copy
of _Newsweek_, pointing to the cover, and telling the clerk how he shot it
<g>): "There is only one difference between professional and amateur
photographers. Professionals shoot more film and use fewer of the pictures."

 --Mike

P.S. Don't you think Leica missed a trick by not calling the R8 the "Leicaflex
3"? It is really more closely related to the Leicaflexes than to the R series,
all of which were based on Japanese Minolta bodies.