35-70/2.8 R Lens

[wayne_murphy6]

Tin Cheung Camera Company, Hong Kong, has a new

35-70/2.8 R lens for sale for HK$39,000 or about US$5,000 if

anyone is desperate.

 

<p>

 

Following the earlier thread suggesting that this lens was back

inproduction, I contacted the Australian agent who contacted

Leica. The story is that leica are manufacturing this lens on a

very limited scale, but ONLY to fill some back orders. I

understand that Leica are supplying at the original list price but

will not entertain any new orders. Waiting time could be up to 2

years if your dealer has "officially" ordered one.

 

<p>

 

No news on a replacement version. Regards,

[andy_piper2]

Actually that's a pretty good price - I saw a post (Photo Village?) for

a 'new production' unit of this lens for $5,999.

[chris_chen]

Pardon Me Respectfully Please Andy,

 

<p>

 

Is $5000 a good price, when other makes cost much less, body included?

 

<p>

 

Is this a particalarly challenging lens to design given the maximum

aperature?

 

<p>

 

Is the quality of the Leica significantly superior?

 

<p>

 

Please don't go into relative production numbers.

 

<p>

 

I'm trying not to be provocative, contrary to recent posts, but

that's what I just spent for my temporary used car for my temporary

home.

[james_.1]

5 grand is an amazing price. But, I must temper with that the fact

that the 35 & 75 luxes I bought cost me a prodigious 4900 bucks!

Ouch...given the scarcity of the lens, and the fact that a lot of R

users could find such a zoom indispensible (I know I did with my

Canon), well, I guess it's par for the course.

[anon_terry]

Ah, if I may be so bold as to indulge myself again...

 

<p><i><b>Is $5000 a good price, when other makes cost much less, body

included? </i></b>

 

<p>Welcome to Leica.

 

<p><i><b>Is this a particalarly challenging lens to design given the

maximum aperature? </i></b>

 

<p>Maximum aperture is only one aspect of lens design. I'm not an

optical engineer but even I can appreciate that fact.

 

<p><i><b>Is the quality of the Leica significantly superior? </i></b>

 

<p>What do you mean by superior?

 

<p><i><b>Please don't go into relative production numbers. </i></b>

 

<p>Which, unfortunately, has a very large bearing on the value of

Leica items to collectors.

 

<p><i><b>I'm trying not to be provocative, contrary to recent

posts,</i></b>

 

<p>Snicker.

 

<p><i><b> but that's what I just spent for my temporary used car for

my temporary home. </i></b>

 

<p>Are you sure you're shooting a Leica right now Chris? The kind of

questions you're asking are exactly the ones coming from people who

have never before heard of Leica. Just curious.

[chris_chen]

Well,

 

<p>

 

Let me think:

 

<p>

 

M3, M4 Black Enamel, CL, 40 Leitz 'cron, 50 "lux, 28 Ver. III, 35/3.5

all gone one way or another (sold or stolen)

 

<p>

 

Currently with me/without me (emphasis not on me) M2/M3/M4/M6/CLE, 21

SA, two 35 Ver 1 'cron Wetzler, 40 Minolta for CLE, 50/1.5 'rit, 50

4th gen. black 'cron, 50 DR, 65 Elmar, 90 TE, 90 chrome Elmarit, 90

LTM 'cron, 90 LTM chrome Elmar, 135 black TE, 135 chrome Elmarit,

200/4.0 Telyt, Viso II. Glad to be back in the states. It's the

worst system, but better than has ever been devised.

 

<p>

 

Only Leica listed; don't get me started.

 

<p>

 

Nuff Said, 8*)

[doug herr]

<I>Is the quality of the Leica significantly superior? </I><P>I don't

know how good the other brands are but the Leica 35-70 f/2.8 is

every bit as good as the 70-180 APO f/2.8, which itself is

significantly better than the N- and C-brand competition.

[eliot]

$ 5000 is a ridiculous price to pay for a 35-70/2.8 lens, even one

from Leica. This is a collector lens unless and until Leica finds a

way to produce it in quantity at reasonable cost. Then you will feel

foolish at having paid $ 5000 for a lens that will probably sell for

$ 3000 or less new with warranty. The fact that they are making a

small number now suggests that the price will fall even if it is not

mass produced.

 

<p>

 

These lenses were up over $ 7000 not too long ago. Anyone who buys

just risks seeing his investment fall steadily. Sorry. Not a good

buy.

[jerry_pfile]

Not certain of the exact price but believe it was listed when first

introduced at around 3 grand or so.

 

<p>

 

Was dropped from catalog listing last year sometime with the note

that production economics were such that they could not continue.

(Ostensibly due to an extremely high failure rate of the assembled

optics to meet their standards)

 

<p>

 

I suspect that many which were back ordered for individuals were

canceled by them with refunds, but dealers did not withdraw their

orders (which cost them nothing).

 

<p>

 

I would have to laud Leica for fulfilling their back orders to those

dealers at the original price if that is the case, especially when

they probably continue to lose on each one produced. I'm equally not

surprised that dealers would charge whatever the market will bear

when they get them in, due both to the relative rarity, and the

reputation of the lens performance wise. They see the chance to make

some hay.

 

<p>

 

The difference between the authorized dealer cost and MAP pricing (at

least in the US)is smaller than most of you would guess and much less

what it was 4 decades ago in the era of "Fair Trade".

 

<p>

 

No different than the auto dealers of today when a popular model hits

the streets. BTW, their margins are also less than they used to be.

 

<p>

 

Best,

 

<p>

 

Jerry

[mike dixon]

To paraphrase from the classic movie <i>Used Cars</I>: "Five

thousands dollars!!! That's too f*$%in' high!!!!"

 

<p>

 

Sorry, but my 2 M3s and 5 fast lenses cost $1K less than that.

[wgpinc]

Get a Canon EOS 3 and their fantastic 28-70 2.8 lens and spend

$2000. Another $1500 for the new 16-35 2.8 and another $1500 for the

new 70-200 2.8 IS. Nothing wrong with this picture. Good luck.

[kristian dowling]

"Can't resist this one"........If someone is prepared to pay

US$5000, it is worth it.

 

<p>

 

James, like you said, you got two f/1.4 lenses for US$4900. Plus

they weigh less than half that of the 35-70 I think. You did well my

friend. **grin**

[rainer_viertlboeck]

well here i will give you some diferent input....

at first to be constructive: buy a 2/35 a 1,4/50 and a 2,8/90 and you

will have better quality, more possibilities and not more weight and

costs....but i suppose who spend 5000$ for a zoom lense has

everything he can have before...and/or he has some problem with

handling of money isnt it?

well i am shooting in addition to my linhof technikardan 4x5" with an

R8 and with a M4-P ( this camera i like really ) . if i want quality

i allways use my 4x5" - this is high quality on a really other level

than any leica can produce. if i want to carry little weight i shoot

with my m4p with three old lenses: vl15mm 2/35mm and 2,8/90. i love

this equipement for its size and for its quality too.......the R8 i

use mostly cause i can use a 28mm schneider-kreuznach shift, and my

profession is to shoot architecture.

also i have an old 1,4/50mm for her and a vario 3,5 28-90,- 4/70-180,

a 2xconverter and a telyt 560mm, also a 60mm macro. the shift optic

is usefull, the other things i mormally use if i really need to do

it. The R8 came through an occasion to me, its a good camera , but

really not more...usefull in her is that some clients have a lot of

respect to the name leica . this has some worth for me - if you like

it or not. the rest of the r system? the 28mm exists for nikon too

and the other lenses? no idea if they are better or not than the

nikons...they are good enough..and i dont care this little little

differences at all- every larger format is in every optical aspect

better. so the R system is in my hands ONLY for very practical

reasons in use ..and i would do the hell to spent 5000$ in a 2,8 zoom

lense....... . and there are many things to buy around photography

which are creative and interesting. so just i bought a 360degr. pano

camera, which can use my 28mm shift and works with rollfilm- gives

incredible interesting and extraordinary perspectives....for 3000$.

 

<p>

 

if i read the threads here in leica, not all, but 85%, of the people

here are not sounding as they are in any way serious about

photography...only about technic and measurements and the name leica.

as i said before: if you want high quality change the size of your

formats....a.e. a mamya 7 is not big too....and will be so much

better than every leica optic you wont imagine this......(and

cheaper).

it is really rare nowadays to meet a professional photographer who

use leicas , at least here in germany.

and why is this so? because they are to expensive...the optical

difference is NOT visible to good lenses from other companies and

(for me not so important but for many other profs it is just a must)

they were not able to construct an autofocus system. and now happens

the same story with digi bodies. since some years the leica marketing

is telling that next year appear a leica body who can use the

lenses.....lets wait till 2010 maybe than will come this body...but

it seems the company will break down soon for finanzial problems. i

really understand if this will happen. so aristocratic politic they

have made with their products. really ridiculous in some aspect.

 

<p>

 

well, my m4p is a nice camera i like her. i think it was build 81 or

so.

[chris_chen]

Mike,

 

<p>

 

I have more equipment than I can possibly jusify; a car I didn't have

and needed because my company is not providing one on this

assignment. Price a rental recently? I'm given a per diem to cover

my costs, and buying was/is the most pragmatic course, not a 35-70

zoom for an R which I don't have.

 

<p>

 

I'll end up donating it to charity at the end of the job anyway, as I

did the last time I was working stateside and had a $5000 car (was

worth $7300 to the charity).

 

<p>

 

John, I've seen new 35, 1:1.4 for $1199 "buy it now" on ebay, and

Jack F. was recently willing to sell a used 75 for $1350. Although,

you got new passport guarantees. Not to belittle you, but to inform

others.

[Robin Smith]

Rainier said "at first to be constructive: buy a 2/35 a 1,4/50 and a

2,8/90 and you will have better quality, more possibilities and not

more weight and costs."

 

<p>

 

Well, I think the point about this particular lens is that actually it

is "better" than these lenes, or at least on a par - certainly

"better" than the 35/2. I think that the price is too high, but the

thing that I think really counted against this lens was its enormous

size. As Doug says, this is a legendary lens - better or the equal of

the fixed length equivalents and f2.8 too. Sure it is expensive - but

this is Leica-land. It was a bold experiment that shows I think that

really good performance at f2.8 quality does not come cheap. The 35-70

f4 is a bargain in comparison. That extra stop is difficult if you

want it to be really useable. It will be interesting if Leica really

will try again at this lens and whether when they do the quality will

be as high - my guess is that the answer will be no.

[mike dixon]

chris,

 

<p>

 

I had to go back to catch what you were talking about--I was just

using the <i>Used Cars</i> line in reference to the lens, not your

car! Whenever I see something with a price that seems outrageous, the

movie comes to mind.

 

<p>

 

Even within the wacky world of Leicadom, spending more on a single

lens than it costs to put together an entire system (with backups!)

seems a bit odd.

 

<p>

 

[Note, however, that I firmly believe people are entitled to spend

their money any way they choose. They can even send it to me if they

want!]

[albert knapp md]

Leica just made a batch of 100 35-70mm F2.8 lenses of which

11 went to the US. I had the pleasure of seeing and handling

one at Ken Hansen's today. A beautiful lens but too heavy and

the asking price is.......$6800...I hope they redesign it and make it

cheaper but I share Robin's skepticism.

[wayne_murphy1]

Sorry, I should have put the price of this lens in context. The

original list price for the 35-70 /2.8 zoom was HK$25,000.

 

<p>

 

Because the lens was so scarce, discounts would have been

non-existent, but $39,000 is a powerful lot more than the original

list price. I have absolutely no doubt that someone will pay the

ridiculous premium being asked.

 

<p>

 

If you owned one, would you do any different? Honestly now.

[allison_reese]

anan sure likes to pick a fight!

 

<p>

 

chris, why do you have so much stuff? are you a gear hound ;^).

 

<p>

 

i thought you travel a lot and hate to carry too much. sell me one

of your 90's, i only have a 50 and it cost me only 750 w/m3.

[alexander_deme]

Fellow Photographers

 

let us be moderate in our astonishment at the price of this superb f2.8 35-70 Leica R lens. It performs as well or almost as well as the three fixed substitutes needed to replace it.

 

Leica obviously has trouble with QA (quality Assurance) for the super-exacting manufacturing tolerances. So would anyone else.

 

The other manufacturers test statistical samples from batches of lenses and reject a batch if the % of rejects is too high. Thus the innocent buyer sometimes finds noticable sample variations between the lens they bought and the "good" lens selected by the manufacturer to be passed to a Photo Magazine and featured in Magazine tests, whereas Leica seems to quality test every lens!

 

Now to basics. A lens is worth what it earns for a professional. If this lens gets the outstanding shot every time (which a pro would lose while changing lenses), then it is worth the money. For most people it is NOT worth that money.

 

For the 200 or so people who need it, they can afford it. For the rest it is an anachronism. The super fisheye lenses from N. and C. worth reputedly $100,000 and owned only by major media companies or the manufacturer themselves are in the same class.

 

So before we have any more "my car, house, motor yacht, private jet etc cost as much as this lens" can we keep in mind the "horses for courses" philosophy. If you can't afford Leica new, buy second hand. If you can't afford second hand Leica, buy the next best thing. After all, many superb photos have been taken on non- Leica glass as well!! Many of us use more than one brand.

 

Of course I ignore collectors. This breed values scarcity, so such a limited production lens is a MAGNET to them. Happy snaps to all!!