Why are Leica M8 and M9 cameras so expensive, and do they offer any performance advantages over pro DSLRs?
Asked 8/3/2011
3 views
2 answers
0
I noticed the Leica M9 and M8 are priced similarly to flagship cameras like the Nikon D3X and Canon 1D Mark IV. As a beginner, I’m trying to understand what justifies that price.
From a performance perspective, what would make someone choose a Leica M8 or M9 over a pro DSLR? I’m not asking about brand prestige, toughness, or compact size unless those affect actual shooting. Are there real image-quality, lens, or shooting advantages, or is the value mainly in the Leica rangefinder system and exclusivity?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
15y ago
2 Answers
30
Leica is a luxury brand with much smaller production runs than the big players in the camera industry.
Low volumes lead to high prices, especially since research and development costs have to be covered. In addition, there's more manual labor involved in manufacturing Leica cameras and lenses. This labor is German, which means higher wages and thus higher prices.
The luxury part translates into exclusivity. A large part of the draw of Leica is that not everyone can afford one. So even if Leica could lower their prices, it would not necessarily translate to lower prices.
Why would you prefer a Leica? The lenses are unique, in for far as no other manufacturer makes a rangefinder camera system. There's no DSLR equivalent to the Summilux-M 21mm f/1.4, for example, or the Noctilux-M 50mm f/0.95. However, you will have to pay many times more than the body to get one of these lenses.
Some people prefer the rangefinder for focusing and composing. The camera can be more unobtrusive, but this is less true now when it costs as much as a used car.
For a more detailed look at the differences between rangefinders and (D)SLRs, see this question and answer.
I would say that if you're a long-time Leica shooter, you'd prefer a digital M over a DSLR simply because you can use your existing lenses. If you're starting out, it's a lot of money to pay for some pretty intangible benefits.
Originally by user3114. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user3114
15y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
Mostly, Leica M prices are not driven by better overall performance than pro DSLRs. The main reasons are small production volumes, high R&D cost per unit, more hand assembly, and premium positioning as a luxury brand.
In practical shooting, Leica M digital bodies generally offer fewer automation and convenience features than DSLRs or mirrorless cameras. Rangefinders are a niche system: excellent for photographers who prefer a manual, direct style of shooting, especially documentary/street work, but not ideal for everything. If you want macro, long telephoto, fast action, or lots of camera assistance, a DSLR is usually more capable.
The strongest technical argument for Leica is the M-mount lens ecosystem. Because it’s a rangefinder system, Leica can make certain compact, very fast wide and normal primes that don’t have direct DSLR equivalents. Many photographers also value Leica lens rendering very highly.
That said, digital rangefinder design also brings compromises. Sensor/light-angle issues made digital adaptation harder than with DSLRs, so there are tradeoffs rather than clear performance wins.
So: you choose a Leica M mainly for its unique lenses and rangefinder shooting experience, not because it outperforms a top DSLR across the board.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI15y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Why choose a Nikon D5/D4/D3 over a higher-resolution body like the D810?
Why is the Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III more expensive than the EOS-1D Mark IV?
Are there any affordable digital rangefinder or rangefinder-style cameras?
What are the practical differences between Nikon PB-4 and PB-6 bellows for macro work?
Which compact digital cameras offer a retro, manual-focus-friendly experience with interchangeable lenses?