Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/04/09
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]LRZeitlin@aol.com wrote: > If Nikon and > Canon can sell high quality 50mm F1.8 or F2.0 lenses for approximately $100 > then the ten times greater price of a similar Leica lens represents a > marketing decision rather than the actual cost basis. Larry, If so, why is it so hard for Leica Camera AG to be profitable ? Why is it possible to sell second hand a Summicron 50/2 for 6 times more than its Nikkor counterpart new. And don't say it's because of the collectors, they don't collect the latest version of that lens. When I compare a Nikon 50/1,8 with a Leica R or M 50/2 I can understand immediately why the price is not the same. The only thing similar is the focal length. Now, when I had the new Konica 50/2 in my hands for the first time last week, it was a little bit more difficult. ;-) More seriously, we don't know the price of that lens because for the moment Konica is selling it only together with the camera. A marketing policy that I don't understand by the way. The day I will buy a Konica RF, it will be camera alone, or I will never do it. They can also keep that electronic flash they want us to buy with it. Lucien