>>>>>>>Posted by Benjamin Wang on Monday, May 26, 2003 - 4:10 am: > > I think the reason Leica is expensive is a marketing positioning > issue. Personnelly, will go for Contax, a comparable quility with a > completly different price!
Ben, there's more than how much profit a company wants to make, what you call a "marketing issue". Every company wants to show a nice profit, including Zeiss, Toyota, et al. Consider. 1) Quality. Not just "good enough", but nice choice of materials for the job, not just to cheapen it out. Some call this overengineered or overbuilt. 2) Labor. High in Germany 3) It costs more to build a mechanical camera (I'm talking about construction, not function only, hence I include the M7), than a camera operated by cheaper to make electronic modules. Look at the current prices of a Nikon F3A vs the latest electronic cameras. Or compare an Olympus OM-4T with an OM-3. How about the high cost of the Leica R6.2 OR the Contax S2? By the way, you could point the finger at Contax's "market positioning issue with the S-2!
It's your choice if you like the Contax G. The exterior appearance and lens quality are nice. But they are 2 different philosphies in design. A variety of opinions makes this forum interesting, but why assume that Zeiss's advantage is their "market positioning" alone? I use an M6 not because I begrudge Leica making a profit, nor do I wish I had the $$$$ in my bank instead of taking pictures with it. I use the Leica M because I like it and, in my type of photography, find I get many more usable shots. By the way, my wife has, and I use a Contax SLR, and I appreciate what it does, too. Best wishes, Ben, and I'm glad you are enjoying your Contax G.