Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/08/31

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] MM - first impressions
From: john at mcmaster.co.nz (John McMaster)
Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2012 02:17:04 +0000
References: <2078764140.195015.1346385963762.JavaMail.root@mail12.pantherlink.uwm.edu> <CC66E6F2.22FFE%mark@rabinergroup.com>

Exactly what I was getting at, not that the MM cost was relatively 
insignificant in absolute terms but in relation to lens value - or another 
way of putting it is how much are those things worth!! Any two modern Leica 
lenses are coming close to if not higher than the value of an MM.

It is only one notoriously fiddly lens first released 37 years ago that is 
not behaving as wanted, it came back from Solms not fully corrected!

john

-----Original Message-----

So if you were into Leica on a walking the walk and not just talking the 
talk basis the glass you would most likely have would easily justify a 7 or
8 grand body.

The new .9 Noct cost 11 grand usd
The APO-Summicron-M 50mm ASPH  cost 7
The 21mm f/1.4 Summilux-M Aspherical cost 7 Tri-Elmar-M 16-18-21mm f/4 
Aspherical  cost 6.2 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M Aspherical Lens cost 5 Zeiss CZ 
15mm f/2.8 Distagon T* ZM  cost 4.6 Summicron-M 28mm f/2.0 Lens 4.2

Mark Rabiner

> 
> $7,900 is insignificant?  And it doesn't even deliver quality right 
> out of the box without extra adjustments and expense?
> 
> I live in another world.
> 
> Alan



In reply to: Message from amr3 at uwm.edu (Alan Magayne-Roshak) ([Leica] MM - first impressions)
Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] MM - first impressions)