Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/07/03

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

Subject: [Leica] Why not black paint (was: a 28 Summicron-M at photokina)
From: Martin Howard <howard.390@osu.edu>
Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2000 15:37:36 -0400

Steve Unsworth jotted down the following:

> Seriously though, since the black paint models are so popular, why doesn't
> Leica have this as a standard finish in addition to the existing ones?

Black paint/enamel wears much easier than black chrome.  Worn black paint
only looks good over brass.  Brass dents and deforms easier than the alloy
that Leica currently uses for the top plate of the M6.  I don't know for
sure, but it's possible that brass is more expensive too.

So, while worn black paint/enamel over brass looks better to many eyes,
Leica is probably justified in thinking that its wear-characteristics are
not good enough, given the overall quality and longevity of the camera.

Given that cosmetic condition affects secondhand value of camera equipment
(at least with Leicas), it is reasonable to expect that sales of black
paint/enamel models would drop rather rapidly once people realize that they
will depreciate more quickly (eh, make that appreciate more slowly ;) than
the black or silver chrome models.

Thus, from this we can deduce that Leica doesn't introduce black paint or
black enamel as a standard option, either for manufacturing reasons (two
different sets of top plates) or, more likely, for economic reasons (low
long-term projected sales).

M.

- -- 
Martin Howard                     |
Visiting Scholar, CSEL, OSU       | It's not who you are, it's who
email: howard.390@osu.edu         | you know that counts.
www: http://mvhoward.i.am/        +---------------------------------------

Replies: Reply from "Tom Schofield" <tdschofield@email.msn.com> (Re: [Leica] Why not black paint (was: a 28 Summicron-M at photokina))