Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/05/05

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

To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: Summicron 35 hood question
From: fortunko@boulder.nist.gov (C.M. Fortunko)
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 1996 01:35:30 -0700

Curt,

Actually, inflation has not been that much. I believe that a Leica today
costs as much as it did in 1963. What worries me more is that a Leica of
today should be more innovative than it actually is. I am not too impressed
by many of the features being tried by the likes of Nikon, Cannon, and
Yashica (Contax), but they are at least trying. Leica makes advances, but
they are not of the caliber of the M3, SL2, and Summicron. This is what
worries me. We should be getting more for our money than just the
satisfaction of owning a  red logo, which I, incidentally, think should be
put in less visible place.

Leica makes small advances, like putting built-in hoods and updating M
lenses. We should be expecting more from a company with their pedigree -
leadership.

Best regards,

Chris Fortunko

>
>>What upsets us all is that in the 60s I bought a few of the hoods
>>for about $15 each. Now, they cost as much as my 1950 Chevy in
>>1957. Ed Meyers
>>
>Don't let that bother you.  Remember that a candy bar cost 5 cents and now
>costs 50 cents, a tenfold increase since 1963.  So, if a Summicron hood cost
>$15 then it should cost $150 now...but they don't, they're less and,
>actually, quite a bargain at that - so are all those other things behind the
>lenshood we love so much.
>
>Curt
>
>
>


Replies: Reply from Tom Hodge <thodge@charweb.org> (Re: Leica technology and keeping up with inflation)
Reply from Wolfgang Sachse <sachse@msc.cornell.edu> (Re: Leica Laurels....was `Summicron 35 hood')