Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/02/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Peter: My lens was cheaper than the Canon because it is discontinued and replaced with the Modular System. This lens was a trade show demo, not the Demo euphemism Leica uses for used items. It was just used to show around, not loan out or rent like Canon does. The last Canon 400 2.8 I saw a few months ago was beat with the front rim of the lens cracked and falling off, only held on by the rubber trim. Canon demos are their rental stock, and are also loaned to some photographers who are well connected. They get a lot of mileage on them. The other mistake most people do is compare list prices. With these expensive lenses, the dealers have a long way to move. The Canon 400 lists in Canada for somewhere around $15,000 CAD, while it sells for $12,000. The Leica probably lists around $17,000, but could be had for probably in the $14,000 range. I had though of buying a Canon 400 2.8 and an EOS 1n with the price difference, but Leica gave me a better deal on their demo lens. I had intended on comparing the two lenses but the Canon Rep didn't get me a demo lens to me before my option on the Leica expired. I am happy with what I have and even have an adapter that allows me to mount it on an EOS. Regards, Robert At 04:52 PM 2/20/99 -0800, you wrote: >Robert, > > >I am surprised that the Leica is less expensive as a demo than the Canon. >Wonder why? Supply and demand perhaps? If the Canon is well used then >perhaps many are using it, as to the Leica probably, fewer just a guess. >Thanks again. > >Peter K