Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/10/08

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

Subject: [Leica] Zeiss Normal 50mm f/2 Planar T* ZM
From: hopsternew at gmail.com (Geoff Hopkinson)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 10:06:25 +1000
References: <17657877.1255026413985.JavaMail.root@wamui-june.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <7ac27f4f0910081215l7f7d8ec8l87c140e49fcee769@mail.gmail.com> <36172e5a0910081411v232960b3p1054a2815b4b56e0@mail.gmail.com> <7ac27f4f0910081632y4740d82eoec90a900f6b1090b@mail.gmail.com>

Richard, actually I was just commenting on your view on why Leica lenses
cost so much.
You've drifted off track ;-)

Yes the Zeiss designed, Cosina made lens range are excellent performers
(I've had several).
Two of their ZM lenses with demanding specifications are made in Germany and
prices are similar to those from Leica.
85 mm f/2 Sonnar USD 2,912
75mm f/2 APO Summicron ASPH USD 3,295
15 mm f/2.8 Distagon USD 4,015
21mm f/2.8 Elmar USD 4,195
Last Photokina the Zeiss representative commented to a dealer visitor that
Zeiss could not produce a digital M for what Leica sells them for either.
By the way Doug uses the equipment he has because he considers it the best.
However his photos are a result of his amazing skill more than from any
equipment he has chosen.
2009/10/9 Richard Man <richard.lists at gmail.com>

> Nah, I am not missing the points. In fact, you prove my point there -
> the glass is just a part of the cost, the workmanship go into making
> it into elements are the greater part.
>
> Leica lens is ONE of the best, but to assert that it's much better
> than Zeiss etc. do not show up in reality. For example, your most
> excellent pictures. Are you sure they will suffer even visibly when
> you print large if you were to choose a lesser Zeiss lens? Most people
> do not take GREAT pictures at 1.4. Most people do not NEED the tight
> tolerance of the Leica lens. Now, for Doug Herr, that's a different
> story. His fowl pictures get their sharpness and characteristic from
> the Leica lens. Most other mortals? Nah.
>
> That does not mean I don't crave for Leica lens. Far from it. I don't
> NEED them, but I sure WANT them :-)
>
> When fund becomes available, I will pick up the 90/2 AA again, and who
> knows, with all these people migrating to the M9, may be there will be
> a "inexpensive" 24/1.4 out there.
>
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 2:11 PM, Geoff Hopkinson <hopsternew at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > That rather misses the point though Richard.
> > To assist in achieving those design goals, some of those blanks are from
> > extremely expensive and exotic glass types.
> > Grinding and inspection is done one element at a time by extremely
> skilled
> > operators. Assembly into the intricate all metal mounts is entirely by
> hand
> > which themselves are expensive  and made to tolerances of 1/100th of a
> mm.
> > Example of important contributor to Leica lens excellence
> > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/g/l_001/s032.jpg.html
> > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/g/l_001/S07.jpg.html
> >  http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/g/l_001/S09.jpg.html
> >
> >
> > 2009/10/9 Richard Man <richard.lists at gmail.com>
> >
> >> That may be true, but I am betting dollars to donuts that the cost of
> >> blank does not account for the difference in end prices.
> >>
> >> The low number manufactured is the prime reason, and because of that,
> >> they can afford to use high level of tolerance and greater emphasize
> >> on certain design goals (i.e. good performance even wide open), but
> >> those are "side-effects." The main cause is still the simple
> >> arithmetic of "they ain't going to sell many"
> >>
> >> On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 11:26 AM, Doug Herr <
> wildlightphoto at earthlink.net>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Company A can specify glass type ABC with tolerances for refractive
> index
> >> +-0.2% dispersion +-0.25% surface hardness +-0.3% expansion coefficient
> >> +-0.7% and company B can specify the same glass type with tolerances 1/2
> of
> >> company A's requirements and I'll bet company B's glass blanks are gonna
> >> cost more and the finished lenses will show a lot less sample variation.
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> // richard m: richard @imagecraft.com
> >> // w: http://www.imagecraft.com/pub/Portfolio09/ blog:
> >> http://rfman.wordpress.com
> >> // book: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/detail/745963
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Leica Users Group.
> >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Cheers
> > Geoff
> > The new LEICA M9
> > Passion for perfect pictures.
> > http://www.m.leica-camera.com
> >
> > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/
> > http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Leica Users Group.
> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> >
>
>
>
> --
> // richard m: richard @imagecraft.com
> // w: http://www.imagecraft.com/pub/Portfolio09/ blog:
> http://rfman.wordpress.com
> // book: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/detail/745963
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>



-- 
Cheers
Geoff
The new LEICA M9
Passion for perfect pictures.
http://www.m.leica-camera.com

http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/
http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman


Replies: Reply from richard.lists at gmail.com (Richard Man) ([Leica] Zeiss Normal 50mm f/2 Planar T* ZM)
In reply to: Message from wildlightphoto at earthlink.net (Doug Herr) ([Leica] Zeiss Normal 50mm f/2 Planar T* ZM)
Message from richard.lists at gmail.com (Richard Man) ([Leica] Zeiss Normal 50mm f/2 Planar T* ZM)
Message from hopsternew at gmail.com (Geoff Hopkinson) ([Leica] Zeiss Normal 50mm f/2 Planar T* ZM)
Message from richard.lists at gmail.com (Richard Man) ([Leica] Zeiss Normal 50mm f/2 Planar T* ZM)