Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/01/19

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] f*** the gauntlet!
From: Ruralmopics@aol.com
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2000 22:24:32 EST

In a message dated 1/19/00 9:07:43 PM, guybnt@idt.net writes:

<< it sounds like you're arguing against yourself: you complain that the
prices are high, then justify your buying a leica because the price is
right. you don't feel a 24mm lens should cost $2,000., then conclude by
saying that though prices are high, camera users don't have to like it.  >>

Guy 

My reasoning made perfect sense to me when I stated it but not when you did. 
I wonder why? Perhaps you didn't understand what I said. 

My first point about price would only be understood by a fellow bottom 
feeder. I certainly wasn't talking about buying an M6. But if you look hard 
enough you can find $600 M4-P and M4-2 bodies. You can find $500 M3 bodies. 
It will be some time before you can get cheap Hexars. As for my feelings 
about the pricing of newer, scarcer (harder to find cheap) Leica products 
(like the 24mm ASPH) being hard to justify, I'll try again. I'll try to keep 
it simple this time.

Point 1: I have been willing to pay the price necessary to build a useable 
Leica system (allbeit by purchasing used equipment) because the advantages of 
the system are worth the expenditure. They are worth the expense because what 
the Leica M camera brings to my approach to photography. If I could use my 
Nikon lenses on  the camera (fully coupled, thank you) I probably would. But 
I can't so I bite the bullet, buy the Leica glass and try not to think about 
the price.

Point 2: Many of the individual items seem overpriced if all you consider is 
the quality of the construction or the superiority of the resulting images. 
But a realistic person understands there are other factors at work -- 
economies of scale, scarcity and others -- that EXPLAIN the cost but don't 
necessarily mean the items are "worth" the price (again, based just on 
quality). It's a fact, Leica stuff is damned expensive. I know it's a cheap 
shot but just look at that proverbial plastic rear cap that even at the best 
retail price costs TWICE what a equivalent Nikon or Canon cap costs. Again, 
economies of scale is a big factor. Quality is NOT.

These two points are not mutually exclusive. In my mind only a person blinded 
by brand loyality would claim that all Leica items return results in 
proportion to the price differential compared to "similar" items in the SLR 
world. 

Again, I'm not slamming Leica. I don't regret getting into it. I enjoy it. 
I'm just stating what should be obvious to anyone who is not so well-heeled 
that they don't have to think about such things. 

Bob (lives where a dollar is still a dollar) McEowen