Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/11/07

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

Subject: Re: Leica Cost Cutting
From: Marc James Small <>
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 12:00:26 -0500

At 07:54 AM 11/7/96 -0800, Stephen Gandy wrote:

>This is a VERY  important point which is generally by passed >over  by new
buyers gushing over the Leica "glow" and >"mystique".  For the price, new
buyers have a right to expect >better construction quality than Leica is
>Leica has made a point to cut production costs and therefore >quality of
construction every way it thought it could get away >with it and still
maintain astronomically high prices.  
>	1) switching from metal to plastic 21 and 28 finders
>	2) hoods poorly executed
>	3) switching from engravings to stampings.

Well, in defense of Leica, there were beau coup complaints about the old
metal 21 & 28 finders slipping out of the accessory shoe, so the plastic one
was developed to counter this.  The optics ARE the same.

The newer hoods WERE junk, which is probably why Leica went over to the
inbuilt (slip) hoods on the current-production lenses.  I FAXed a note to
Solms when I owned my last new 2/50 and, of course, heard nothing back from
them, not even the courtesy of a 'thanks for the input'.

The engraving/stamping controversy doesn't do a lot for me either way.
Engraving costs a lot of money, stamping doesn't, so I'm in favour of
keeping costs down so long as mechanical and optical quality stay high.

Marc  FAX:  +540/343-7315
Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!