steve_york1

Joseph -- That begs the essential question. I think alot of people are saying "I would buy new if new Leica products were a little less expensive. Given it's current price structure, I feel more comfortable buying used." So the strict dichotomey that you envision of Leica purchasers is not so black and white.

 

I don't know if Leica is loosing money on film body sales, because there selling bodies at less than cost or not selling enough bodies (the more you sell the less it costs to produce). If the latter, then an argument can made that by reducing prices, they can stimulate sales, move closer toward profitability. O'kay, my economic understanding may be faulty here, so take what I just said with a grain of salt.

Volker -- Leica is actually loosing money when it sells a new M for $2900 US? I didn't know that. If that is the case, then I feel less aggreived with the price increase; I even agree w/ the price increase in such a situation. And yes, if you cannot sell a product at cost plus a bit of profit, then its time to get a new product.

 

Marc -- I must be getting old. That all sounds terribly expensive to me. Maybe its time for me to go for that 0.58 I've been thinking about for years. It dosen't sound like it will ever get any less expensive. Does anyone know where I could find a new Black M7 0.58?

If Leica prices here in the states are "artificially low", then Leica has a serious problem from which I doubt it will ever recover. This is so, because most people, here and everywhere, would consider $2900 US for a camera body exceedingly high, not to even mention the cost of new lenses.

 

I find it curious that Leica users have been so accustomed into paying high prices for new equipment that they view $2900 US, or even HK prices of $2400 US, as inexpensive or a bargain.

 

I think it is evident that Leica's pricing structure -- in recent history -- has not been an economic success. It's just not working.

How much does a new Leica M7 in US dollars cost in Europe? Why not buy Leica products overseas? Why can someone still buy an M7 or MP for under $2400 US from dealers in HK, and they seem to be very much more expensive elsewhere? Maybe the grey market is the way to go for now on.

 

I still believe that in order to stimulate sales Leica needs to drop prices on their bodies about 15% both here and everywhere. The sale of new bodies would also encourgage the sale of new lenses. It seems to me that the window of opportunity to do so is before the Zeiss Ikon is avialable.

 

What dealers have told myself and others concerns a policy by Leica USA -- that retailers can only sell bodies and lenses at MSP, an effective price increase from to the end user. I don't know if Leica in Germany is raising prices.

 

It seems to me that Leica, historically, has enjoyed strong customer loyalty, based on the quality of their product and to a certain extent the lack of competition. These price increases will go a long way in exstinguishing that loyalty.

I believe Florida may only have two Leica M dealers. The one closest to me, where I purchased my first M6 and 50mm summicron in 1997, advised me several years ago that, although he can obtain anything I wanted from Leica, he stopped carrying Leica goods because they were too expensive to have as inventory. I don't think competition with the mail order places had much to do with it, because he was matching the Tamarkin and B&H type prices when I purchased from him. Small M&P type camera stores just cannot carry the expensive stuff in inventory. And if don't have it on your shelves, you're not likely to sell it.

You may be right, but I can only use myself as an example. Aside from one item, my M outfit is approaching 20 years old. If Leica prices were about 20% less, then I would probably replace all those old pieces to the current models. But at there ever increasing prices, I'm hesitant to replace anything. I believe there are alot of folks in a similar situation.

 

So yes, I believe that if Leica lowered prices to around where the R9 is priced, then they would generate alot of sales. I'm not sure Leica would even have to lower prices on their lenses much, because it seems that the sale of new bodies would also stimulate the sale of new lenses.

 

I'm not sure why (or even if it is rational), but I almost find these prices by Leica insulting to the consumer, because I'm not sure it's based on the cost of production, but more on what the market will bear -- how much can we squeeze from the consumer. But the market has already proved that it will not bear these types of prices.

But even if Leica dropped their prices, even significantly, they would still be, for the majority of users, very expensive. So I don't think the "raise price to maintain perceived quality" theory applies here, although I understand and appreciate the theory well enough.

 

I believe there is a market out there of people, like myself, who are largely using older Leica products who may be inclined to upgrade if prices were somewhat lower.

But the advertising limitation would also probably run afoul of legality absence a contractual agreement with the retailer.

Yes, I wondered if it was illegal. It may be that Leica USA will prohibit "advertising" below MSP, which I know is a practise used by many manufacturers.

 

Sorry, did not know there was already a thread on this issue.

I've heard through the grape vine that starting July 1 Leica USA

products, at least, bodies and lenses, but I suspect everything, will

only be sold at MSP. That means the bodies which are now advertised

at anywhere from $2650 to $2900 will cost $3300.

 

I can't understand the purpose behind this move. The effective

higher prices will further kill sales. It will not stimulate sales

with local dealers, because users will more likely buy out of state

to avoid sales tax. And it will further promote the transactions in

grey market goods.

 

I know one of you out there knows the answer to why Leica USA is

doing this.

This post was a joke, right?

Frank -- I prdered a G2 as my first rangefinder. I hated the viewfinder -- it was so small and hard to see through w/ eyeglasses. And the one I got from B&H didn't work; something was wrong w/ the electronics. Ater this expereince, I followed my brother's advice and got an M6.

 

I must admit, however, that I've always liked the Contax lenses for the G when it comes to color film. I liked the corresponding Leica lenses at that time (second half of 90's) for B&W.

Panos -- Good point. I always thought that Leica's biggest competition was used Leicas.

Has there been any review on these new Zeiss lenses? If so, would

someone be so kind to direct me to the same. Thanks.

Not to state the obvious, but to promote sales Leica needs to get its price down on it's lenses and film bodies. Here in the states, many of these items are just getting too expensive. It takes a brave individual to invest so much money into a film based system at this time. I've been thinking about upgrading my lenses to the current models and obtaining another body for years now, but at these prices I never get quite beyond the thinking stage.

 

Leica needs to get a digital M on the market. Not I, but many M users would purchase such an item. Just look how readily that Epson camera sold.

 

I actually think the DMR -- from Leica's point of view -- is priced o'kay. It's really going to appeal to people now who already have an R system. If you have an R system, then $6k US to convert that system to digital for the forseeable future seems pretty good to me. Leica would be wise to incorporate some type of discount for the DMR for those folks who want to buy into the R system.

I can't believe he would recommend any non-Leica product.

Well, I haven't gotten a reply to my email, so I don't know if this is going to be an option for folks here in the states.

$375 US from Tony Rose at www.popflash.com. He always seems to have some of the best prices around.

Tony Rose = www.popflash.com

Tony Rose lists the viewfinder for $375 US, and his prices are usually the lowest around. I used an external viewfinder on an old 28mm lens. Not only did it look stupid, but it was the biggest pain the the #$^ to use. I guess its an acquired taste.

Call me cynical, but w/ the latest delay announcement I really expected a longer delay. Now, if it was only a software issue holding things up, shouldn't Leica be able to fill orders relatively quickly? Well, I hope it is a good seller for Leica, and if I had an R outfit I guess I would consider biting the bullit.

 

By the way, I had the opportunity to play around w/ an R9 last fall and the ergonomics and eye relief is phenomenal. It looks like a clunky camera, but it does not handle like one. And nothing can beat that high eyepoint viewfinder for eyeglass wearers.

Thanks everybody for posting. I can see why people collect lenses from different generations. I'm far from an expert, but my impression w/ these ASPH lenses is that they are very incisive. I have no doubt that these new lenses are much better, but I almost prefer my circa late 80's lenses for B&W. Maybe it is something that you just need to get used to. Thanks again.

Has anyone shot some B&W film w/ this lens, and if so, what were the

results? I only shoot B&W, but I've only seen pictures of this lens

w/ color film. I guess the question is does anyone feel that this

lens was not good for B&W for whatever reason.

 

As a practical matter, is someone going to see any difference between

this lens and the old summilux or the 50mm summicron? I shoot my

summicron wide open often, and have been considering for ages getting

a faster lens, but it is hard to justify given that I'm such a hack.

I've noticed that one can still get the old summilux new at a

favorable price, but if this one is sustantialy better outside the

lab maybe its worth it.

 

Thanks in advance.

Thanks Peter. I just may order one of those from Mr. Nemoto. I have been considering a 0.58 for a long time now.

I hear your blues Wayne.

 

For months last fall I was ready to get a 50mm Summilux ASPH, but their continued unavailability really cooled my purchase impulse. I may still get one, because it is my prime lens, but their marketing really stinks.