Why Are Lecia 6MP cameras so damn Expensive?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Justin, Mar 27, 2008.

  1. Justin

    Justin Guest

    Is Lecia the Lamboghini of everything photographic? I understand they
    make the best of the best when it comes to film based equipment but
    $300+ for a 6MP camera while a Sony Cybershot comes in around $100?
    What am I missing?
    What does Leica have that nobody else does? Name?
    Justin, Mar 27, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  2. Justin

    Gerrit Guest

    What sort of lens does the Sony Cybershit have?
    Gerrit, Mar 27, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  3. Justin

    Gerrit Guest

    oops Freudian slip. :)

    But, many years ago, in a dim dark analogue age Leica made lenses and
    cameras with those lenses and they were acknowledged as among the best. At
    the same time Kodak made the Instamatic camera range. Both manufacturers
    used film in their cameras which were (most likely) made by the same
    manufacturer of film. Leica was much better. Now in the digital age Leica
    makes a camera with their lenses and uses a digital medium (sensor) to
    record the image. Sony make cameras and use a digital medium (sensor) to
    record the images. Both sensors are probably made by the same manufacturer.

    I suggest you go away and but a cheap Sony just like the likes of you did in
    the dim dark analogue age.
    Gerrit, Mar 27, 2008
  4. Justin

    C J Campbell Guest

    So get the Panasonic version and save a few bucks.
    C J Campbell, Mar 27, 2008
  5. Justin

    Jufi Guest

    All the Leica digitals, save for one, the M8, and rebadged panasonics. The
    only diffeence that I can see is the warranty. So yes, you're paying for a
    name and an extended warranty. Same lens, same sensor, same body.
    Jufi, Mar 28, 2008
  6. Justin

    Chris Savage Guest

    I hear tell that the Leicas have slightly different firmware, or default
    'processing' settings. The murmur is never loud enough to distinguish
    any real signal, and I've never used either.

    Myself, without hands-on experience, I am convinced that you are right.
    The only thing to distinguish a Leica from a Panasonic is the red dot.
    That has always been a ridiculously expensive bit of paint.
    Chris Savage, Mar 28, 2008
  7. Justin

    Justin Guest

    What is the differences between the Panasonic and Leica models? Does
    Panasonic rebadge their cameras, or does Leica rebadge?
    Or does Panasonic supply the bodies and use Leica lenses?
    Does Leica have more features? I don't understand. I'm looking at
    compact point and shoot cameras - the size of the Sony DSC-W70.
    Justin, Mar 29, 2008
  8. Justin

    C J Campbell Guest

    Panasonic owns Leica. The Panasonic and Leica cameras are functionally
    identical. Typically the only differences are little things. A
    Panasonic might have a molded plastic hand grip, have a black finish,
    and some plastic controls, while the Leica will have a silver finish,
    no handgrip, metal controls and cost $300 more.

    See DPReview's comments here, for example:


    The Sony DSC-W70 and other cameras of that class are all almost
    identical in function and performance. You can spend a lot more and get
    no better picture quality. Unless some particular camera has a feature
    you really need, shop on price.
    C J Campbell, Mar 29, 2008
  9. Justin

    Chris Savage Guest

    Really? When did that happen?

    I know Matsushita/Panasonic has licences to the Leica brand, and Leica
    Camera AG are permanently on the verge of liquidation, but I don't remember
    any announcement of a Matsushita takeover.
    Chris Savage, Mar 29, 2008
  10. Justin

    Gary Edstrom Guest

    The Name
    Gary Edstrom, Mar 29, 2008
  11. Justin

    Justin Guest

    That last bit I have to disagree. I have a W70 and I bought an Olympus
    FE-290 - the Sony kicked its ass. I took the Olympus back to the store.
    I don't want to start a Sony vs. ** argument but that was my result.
    I has a Canon SD400 - perfect performence but I gave it to a friend in
    in Iraq (with a 2G card). Hope he brings a few interesting pictures home.
    So right now to update my Cameras, I'm looking at the Canon A650is, the
    smaller Sony's and now the Panasonic Lumix.
    But I want something decent because nothing was worse than having lousy
    pictures of an event that only happens once. These are my memories.

    Regarding the Sony Vs. Olympus - the difference was night and day. I
    actually went back home, grabbed the Some, and carried both around the
    rest of the event taking a pic with each to compare.
    So we'll see. I dunno, I probably opened a can of worms here.
    Justin, Mar 29, 2008
  12. Justin

    er Guest

    What is the differences between the Panasonic and Leica models? Does

    Leica may have had some hand in the design of the lenses, but absolutely no
    part whatsoever in the design or manufacture of the cameras. It is said
    that the software and firmware are a bit different, but except for the M8, a
    Leica is a Panasonic in every regard.

    er, Mar 29, 2008
  13. Justin

    C J Campbell Guest

    You are correct. The largest shareholder of Leica is an investment
    group run by an Austrian family.

    It is a licensing arrangement.
    C J Campbell, Mar 30, 2008
  14. Leica earned that name starting as early as 1913 when Leitz produced the
    first practical 35 mm camera, the Leica. Leitz created the 24mm x 36mm
    size for 35 mm cameras using 35mm cinema film.

    The compact size and excellent lenses on Leica's made them unique and
    also made Leitz change its name to Leica in 1986.

    By the early 1930's Leica had interchangeable lenses in rangefinder
    cameras. They had shutter speeds from 1/1000 to 1 second. Nothing else
    came close to a Leica.

    In the 1950's Leica had combined the rangefinder and lens into one unit
    with a bayonet mount. This basic design survived up through the 2003

    In 2006 Leica released a digital successor to its popular and highly
    successful film cameras. However, it is so sensitive to infrared light
    that it needs an infrared filter under certain circumstances.

    Leica also mass produced SLRs starting in the 1960s. In the 1970s
    electronic SLRs were introduced in conjunction with Minolta. By the
    1990s Leica was designing and producing their own SLRs. But they never
    occupied the unique position of the highly successful Leica rangefinder
    cameras though they shared the same excellent lenses. The Leica SLRs
    were just as big and clumsy as the popular Japanese models.

    In the 1970s, Leica briefly joined with Minolta to also produce a more
    compact rangefinder camera. It used some Minolta made lenses, but could
    also use most all of the M-series Leitz lenses.

    The Leica rangefinder cameras occupy a unique position in the history of
    cameras with unique quality and performance. This reputation is so
    strong that the new MP camera is designed to resemble the original the
    earliest M-series Leicas.

    Leica innovations include:

    The present 35 mm film standard
    Range finder camera with interchangeable lenses
    Aspheric lenses
    Multicoated lenses
    Rare earth lenses
    One of the first SLR's (1935)
    Excellent performance at large apertures for low light photography
    The first combination film & digital SLRs

    Several companies tried to imitate Leica but were never successful.

    The original Leica digital cameras were rebranded Fujifilm models.
    Today they are rebranded Panasonic Lumix models. Panasonic has
    reciprocated by using many Leica lenses on their top of the line
    cameras. This collaboration has improved both companies products.
    Stephen Henning, Mar 30, 2008
  15. Justin

    Jufi Guest

    Agreed that Leica has a rich history, but that doesn't change the fact that
    you're paying for almost nothing on their digitals that are rebadged Pannys
    save for an extended warranty. Doubtful it's worth the money.
    Jufi, Mar 31, 2008
  16. Justin

    dj_nme Guest

    Stephen Henning wrote:

    Not quite true, there was at least one comercially available still
    camera which used 35mm film and used the 24x36mm format before the Leiz
    Leica camera.
    The first patent for one was issued to Leo, Audobard and Baradat in
    England in 1908.
    In 1923.
    Developed similtaniously by Zeiss Ikon and realeased as the Contax camera.
    Pentax, with the Asahi SMC Takumar 15 mm f/3.5, in 1975.
    That would be Pentax again with SMC 1971.
    The Soviets beat Leica to the punch with that, several of the Zavod
    Arsnel cameras came with rare-earth lenses during WWII.
    You meant the Visoflex I, didn't you?
    A clunky attachment to a Leica II which turns it into a primitive SLR
    So what?
    Zeiss Ikon also had the Flekstopp attachment for their Contax II for use
    with an 18cm lens.

    The first comercially avaivable SLR camera was made by Ihagee, the
    Kine-Exakta in 1936.
    The first "modern" SLR camera with pentaprism eye-level viewfinder was
    the Contax S, in 1949.
    Canon f1:0.95 5cm lens for their RF camera the "Canon 7" in 1961.
    No, that would be Kodak with their DCS line of digital backs for Nikon
    starting with the Kodak DCS-100 in 1991, for the Nikon FM3.
    Several companies have overtaken Leica.
    Ihagee - with the Kine-Exakta (the first comercially available SLR
    camera) in 1936
    Pentax - with SMC lens coatings in 1971
    Pentax (again) - Aspheric lenses in 1975
    Kodak - the Kodak DCS (or DCS-100) in 1991, the first digital back to
    fit an SLR camera (the Nikon FM3).
    Canon - the first true Digital SLR, the D30 in 2000.
    There are many, many more which I really can't be bothered digging up to
    throw at you.
    dj_nme, Mar 31, 2008
  17. Justin

    Allen Guest

    Ihagee - with the Kine-Exakta (the first comercially available SLR
    You need to change that to first commercially available _35mm_ SLR
    camera. Don't forget that the Graflex and other cut-film SLRs had been
    around a few decades before the Kine-Exakta.
    Allen, Mar 31, 2008
  18. Justin

    dj_nme Guest

    Yes, that's 100 percent true.
    Graflex SLR cameras were using 120 rollfilm in the 1920's, I have two of
    the early ones with a matching rollfilm holders.

    The "Adoration of the Leica" which Gary wrote was all about 35mm film
    camera developments, and so were my responses with firsts which weren't
    by Leiz Optical.
    dj_nme, Apr 1, 2008
  19. Justin

    Justin Guest

    dj_nme wrote:


    Cry havoc! and unleash the dogs of war!
    Justin, Apr 1, 2008
  20. Justin

    van dark Guest

    I own a Exakta - Warex from Ihagee. With the lens. I want to sell it.
    Like new camera. All is technically and optically okay.

    Allen napsal(a):
    van dark, Apr 1, 2008
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.