'Leica Summarit-M f/2.5 lenses price reduction'

[Karim Ghantous]

<p>According to Leica Rumors:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>After the introduction of the <a href="http://leicastoremiami.com/collections/new-m-system-summarits#a_aid=4ec1e34531802" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">new line of Summarit-M f/2.4 lenses</a> at Photokina (<a href="http://leicarumors.com/2014/09/16/several-new-leica-m-lenses-announced-silver-nocti-and-35-lux-new-summarits.aspx/" target="_blank">see press release and images</a>), Leica Camera is now reducing the price of the older Summarit-M f/2.5 models</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>It's a good time to buy a new Leica lens. I'm sure many of you will sympathize with me when I immediately thought that it would be a good idea to order the 50mm. I mean, I don't need it and I won't be buying one, but... IT'S CHEAP LEICA, PEOPLE.</p>

[pensacolaphoto]

<p>Where did you order you lens, Karim?</p>

[aplumpton]

<p>Karim, for a recent 50mm Leica lens at a reasonable price, have you considered the discontinued collapsible Elmar-M f2.8? I haven't checked used prices recently, but mine was purchased like new from a Photonetter about 5 or 6 years ago for $600. The black model is particularly light and its rendition does not seem inferior at most f stops (f4 and down, even at f2.8) to my Summicron 50mm version IV, which I sold with an M6 some years ago. </p>

[Richard Williams]

<p>I think Leica's idea of 'cheap' doesn't really overlap with mine! Even at ~25% off, that's still a lot of money for the 50 f/2.5, which must be the slowest double Gauss 50 ever made for the 35mm format. A decent secondhand 50 f/2 would still probably be in the same price range...</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<blockquote>

<p>I think Leica's idea of 'cheap' doesn't really overlap with mine!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It's not Leica's, but Karim's! In Leica-Land, the Summarits are just "less overpriced" than the rest of their lineup (IMHO).</p>

[Karim Ghantous]

<p>Raid, I did not buy one. Arthur, I checked the prices for the 2.8 Elmar. The older ones can be had for under $500; the newer ones can be had for about $750 and up. Richard, I'm not sure I'd prefer a used Summicron to the 50/2.5. Then again, maybe I would. :-)</p>

[Jochen_S]

<p>Now I am confused. Whats the reason to prefer the new but discontinued Summarit? - Owning something new? The need for dotting? Did the Summarits outperform heritage lenses somewhere?<br>

Buying "new" is a desperate measure in my eyes. - Yes I like my Leicas but still, why would I need a "new" lens at the given quality level? </p>

[aplumpton]

<p>Like everyone I like a good deal. Some of my optics are V-C which is a quality level commensurate with my need for occasional use (as for example the 12 mm super wide rectilinear Heliar). I consider those good deals. Leica lenses are indeed very expensive, but if you look at them as long term investments, not so bad. I can also buy a Leica lens and even turn it over (sell to another person) after a short period (say, 5 years) and recover a very high percentage of its cost. A car sold after 5 years has a much smaller value compared to original cost (Which is why I like to keep mine 10 years or longer, treat it or them well and expect its or their cost per year to diminish with time). I also buy a Leica lens for 10 years or use or more, unless I note it is not being used sufficiently. A used lens is sometimes a good option instead of new and that is how I have procured at very reasonable cost a recent Elmar-M 50mm, a 240mm Telyt, visoflex II and III, and a former (alas, sold) series IV 50 mm Summicron. All were in great condition. But like a used car, their history can only be known in part and have to be tested to assure they perform as when new. Unfortunately, the advantage that Leica objectives retain their value well with time can also mean that they also approach new lens cost. But in either case everything is relative, if we keep the objective and use it during a long lifetime. A new lens gives at least some added assurance of that possibility.</p>