Chrome vs. Black lenses

I noticed that a few years back Leica used to charge more for their chrome lenses. The prices now however are the same for chrome and black - Leica having actually increased the price of the black lenses while keeping the prices for the chrome lenses more or less the same.

Anyone know why chrome lenses cost more initially? Could it be because of production cost or because they just made a bigger profit then?

As you kmow, chrome lenses weigh much more than their black

counterparts. I believe the chrome lenses cost much more to make BUT

tended to sell less in numbers. If that is the case, why not

increase the price of the black lenses to maximize profits. All

successful companies keep a close watch on the bottom line. In the

Marketplace of 35MM cameras/lenses, survival is dicey at best.

Kajabbi

IMO it is simply the fact that chrome lenses are more complex to

manufacture. Whether or not Leica was worried that too few would be

sold (in contrast to black lenses) still remains to be seen. To quote

somewhat Andrew Nemeth's Leica FAQ:

<p>

The difference in weight between black and chrome lenses is due

to the black lenses being made from aluminium alloy which is then

black anodised, while chrome lenses have to be made from (much

heavier) brass which is first nickel plated prior to the final chrome

plating. Leica has to get this done as the silver-chrome adheres far

more reliably to brass/nickel.