[LRflex] Re: why leicas are expensive

sub mani <kpsubramani@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I checked many cameras for price. I found leica
> cameras are very expensive than Nikon or canon.
> Could anyone tell me what could be the reason. Is it
> because of sheer brand image 

There are numerous detractors of the brand who claim it's all because of the 
brand image.

Consider the cost of small-volume, hand manufacture vs. high-volume automated 
manufacture; also consider the cost of planned non-obsolescence: Leica 
maintains stocks of repair parts for many decades beyond a product's 
discontinuation, which few other manufacturers do.

The lenses are in a class by themselves.  Other manufacturers make selected 
lenses that may equal Leica lenses at moderate apertures while the vast 
majority of Leica lenses outperform other brands at full aperture.  In order to 
take full advantage of Leica lenses, it's best to use a Leica body.

Also consider ergonomic design; it's not something you can put into numbers to 
compare with competing brands.

I was a detractor until I tried the Leicaflex SL and 400mm f/6.8 Telyt.  The 
ergonomic design is a delight, the results on film were clearly better than I 
had been getting with Nikon equipment, and now 30+ years later Leica still 
services and re-warrantees the SL.  Each of us must decide individually whether 
the higher initial cost of Leica equipment is worthwhile.  It has been for me.


Doug Herr
Birdman of Sacramento
http://www.wildlightphoto.com
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
    http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
    www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/

Other related posts: