Re: [Leica] Re: Leica R Vario Elmarit 35-70/2.8 ASPH.

["Ted Grant" <tedgrant@home.com>]

Jim Brick wrote:

> These things have a market. Albeit very specialized. I suspect that the
> money that they would have to charge for the 35-70/2.8 in order to just
> break over the life of the lens, would be astronomical, hence, no
lens.<<<<<

Hi Jim,
I'm sure you've hit it on the nail, cost.

The cost of production and selling any lens can become astronomical  and no
one other than a few who are well endowed at the bank or a big company
buying the gear can afford them. But the general Leica user can't afford
them other than seeing pictures of the lens and dreaming.

Basically they can produce any lens they wish, however, at what cost to
purchase compared to the development cost?

Right here on the LUG I'd venture to say there aren't too many who can pop
right out of their pocket $5000 without blinking an eye for a 70 - 180 or a
280mm - 400mm combination at $8 to $10 grand, if not higher.

I know the 35mm - 70mm  2.8 is a fine lens, bulky, a bit heavy, but with a
Leica lens a little bulk and weight isn't a bother after you become
accustomed to it through practice.

But it's just plain economic sense to produce a lens that people can afford,
it's all well and good to turnout the finest lens in the world but heck if
only a few can afford them, what's the point of building them? Isn't profit
supposed to be in selling many?

Apropos my report to Leica in 1988 after using the 400mm 2.8 prototype lens.
I had nothing but praise for it other than a couple of physical changes for
ease of handling. But my main question was the cost, at that time to be sold
for approximately $20,000 or higher, oh yeah that included a case! ;-)

The response I received regarding the cost? Just because I couldn't afford
one did this mean they shouldn't build it when others could afford it?
Along with, "Well should Mercedes not build $40,000 cars because you can't
afford one?"

Maybe this analogy might shed some light on the logic of Leica economics at
that time.

I realize the finest bits and pieces in the world cost a bundle and if a
shooter wants the best, then he or she must be prepared to pay the bundle
and not complain. However, it still comes down to common sense affordability
for those goodies to be  produced & purchased.  And some where along the
line these two must work in unison.

Otherwise you have the 35mm - 70mm  2.8 dilemma !
ted













Ted Grant Photography Limited
www.islandnet.com/~tedgrant
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Brick" <jim@brick.org>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2001 9:06 AM
Subject: [Leica] Re: Leica R Vario Elmarit 35-70/2.8 ASPH.


> I played with the prototype in 1998. As with all Leica special R lenses,
it
> was very large. It dawned on me that I could carry a 35/1.4, 50/1.4,
60/2.8
> and 80/1.4 in the same space and have f/1.4 available and macro
capability.
> So for me, even if it were available and cheap, it was not something that
I
> was interested in.
>
> I bought the 70-180 APO zoom and it indeed was a stellar performer. But
way
> way too big and heavy for what it was.
>
>
> Jim