Leica Price Increases Jan 1st 2012 – Buy your lenses now! Lol…

LEICA PRICE INCREASES 2101 – Buy your lenses NOW!


Better buy those 35 an 50 Summilux’s now people because as of Jan 1st 2012 prices are going up on all Leica lenses! Of course, you would be buying them NOW if you could get them…I know, I know. I find it odd that Leica shipped like 50 50 Luxs last year yet raise the price again so those who have been trying to get one all year have to pay more. Well, I am sure they shipped more than 50 of them, I was just being a smart ass but honestly, the price increase every year is starting to get annoying. The one good thing is those who bought lenses a few years ago and held on to them have quite the nice investment now 🙂

The new price for the 50 Lux ASPH is about $4,000, or about what they sell for used these days. The rest can be seen below. There is always THIS new and pretty sweet and affordable (for M glass) alternative for your 35mm needs. 

18mm f3.8 ASPH. $3,195.00

21mm f1.4 ASPH – $6,995.00

21mm f3.4 ASPH – $2,995.00

24mm f1.4 ASPH – $6,995.00

24mm f3.8 ASPH – $2,595.00

28mm f2.0 ASPH – $4,295.00

28mm f2.8 ASPH. M-Elmarit  $2,195.00

35mm f1.4 ASPH $4,995.00

35mm f2.0 ASPH $3,195.00

35mm f2.0 ASPH. Silver (E39) $3,195.00

35mm f2.5 Black $1,895.00

50mm f0.95 ASPH $10,995.00

50mm f1.4 ASPH. Black $3,995.00

50mm f1.4 ASPH. Silver $3,995.00

50mm f2.0 $2,295.00

50mm f2.5 Black $1,495.00

75mm f2 ASPH $3,795.00

75mm f2.5 Black $1,895.00

90mm f2.0 APO ASPH $3,995.00

90mm f2.5 Black $1,895.00

90mm f4 Macro-Elmar set $3,995.00

16-18-21mm f4.0 M-Tri-Elmar+finder $6,295.00

135mm f3.4 APO  $3,495.00


  1. Leica is creating high demand by manipulating ? I dont think so. The simple truth is, that they are a small company and all things they do is made by hand. I am happy with that, as this is something unique. I would be sad to see Leica extinct. But i doubt they will. They have found their niche by doing things different. Nothing wrong with that. If you want low prices you have lots of choices.

  2. Twenty years ago, Leica items were premium professional tools, expensive
    but reasonable for what they were.

    That time is gone. Now they are “Veblen goods”. Price is irrelevant.

    Imagine that someone who has the money goes shopping for a $600 scarf, a $1500 purse, and a $10,000 watch. When she gets to the store, she finds that the prices have gone up. The scarf is $700, the purse is $1750, and the watch is $11,500. She buys them anyway, because for her, the price doesn’t matter. In fact, the higher price makes them more desirable.

    The manufacturers can sell their entire production at whatever price they wish.

    People who can’t afford a $1750 purse don’t complain. They just buy knockoffs from Shanghai.

    It’s not fun, or “fair”. It’s just the way the world works.

  3. Who cares, you can’t buy them any way. I have been keeping my eye out for a 50mm, 1.4 for over a year. B&H has had nothing and still, one month from christmas, has nothing. If I found one I would but it, no price increase motivation required.

  4. I am surprised that nobody here understands what a luxury brand is or how to manage it. Leica are using text book techniques on managing their brand. People keep making the mistake that Leica is competing with Nikon/Canon etc. It isn’t. Do some research into luxury brands.

    On a related point. Stop complaining about the price of Leica lenses and be thankful they are not auctioning them off. Winning bids would be probably 3 times the current price at least.

    • Exactly.

      Luxury brand companies are managed differently from mass prodcution companies. Luxury companies issue limited edition products, and increase price and limit production to inflate demand/supply ratio. This only works when the product itself is also superior to other products in the same industry. It is a great position to be in for a company but it is also very hard to manage and differentiate.

  5. I have a feeling it might be to make buying something like the NEX7 and getting a M lens adaptor more financially difficult?

  6. They need to open a production plant in China. A lot of my clients there are German – they run production lines with 24/7 German engineers and they make the same quality. The engineers told me that the Chinese usually make better products with more quality consistency as they make more of them (more productive) get better practised and have a stronger work ethic with better ability to reproduce a process 100% down to boring minute detail – over and over again.

    And the same QA validation process is used. So why on earth are Leica struggling with a bunch of geriatric and over paid white people in Sohms when they could make the same thing in China and increase output and revenue and profit?

    I just don’t get it….

    • I totally concur Richard … I don’t get Leica’s ” … let’s try to go out of business (again) in this latest credit crunch by overcharging customers ….” rather than increasing production.

      As I’ve stated in a couple of replies in this thread, Leica seemingly believe that there is a market ONLY in high priced, hand-made, hand fettled, slowly assembled, exclusivity.

      The rest of the manufacturing world discovered high quality, mass volume production nearly 100 years ago – computer designed/manufactured goods have existed for 40 years or so.

      Leica must think CAD stands for Can’t Accept Development.

      Hand-made production is for ‘organic’ flexible materials/products – photography has always benefitted from greater machine controlled techniques – period.

    • A Mercedes made in China doesn’t sound as great here in the US as a Mercedes made in Germany. While China has some amazing manufacturing facilities (see Apple), the label ‘Made In China’ has not been associated with Luxury goods yet. Yet! Leica glass from Canada sells for less than glass from Germany. Not sure if the quality is any different. D!RK

  7. The price increases will help lens availability. Any company can decrease supply, but that is a dangerous game, zeiss makes some stellar glass.

  8. I didn’t mind the price increases in the past when most lenses were available. The 50 Summilux has always been tough to find at times for as long as I was interested in Leica the last 3 years. Raising the stakes on unobtanium though seems a little… I don’t know… unethical in a sense. Especially if we see a huge flood of lenses available right after the price hike.

    Now before people go and defend Leica trying to make money anyone who takes business classes or has a degree in it knows that ethics is a huge part of good business practices. Yes you want to make money but negative backlash can be damaging to a company on the turn around. Just my opinion. I’m sure they will sell most of what they can produce and the lens I want (35 Summilux FLE) isn’t getting raised in price.

  9. Supply can’t keep up with demand, this is true for many camera manufacturers in 2011. Why wouldn’t Leica want to sell more and have higher profits? Why would a company purposely make less money? We should be thanking Leica for making quality a priority over quick profits. That is what great companies do and it benefits everyone long term. Just look at Kodak for a company that takes a profit first approach. Leica has been raising prices whether demand is high or low for as long as I can remember, and that’s many many years.

  10. …..but do leica owners or potential owners really care? i would say no,would you buy a high end car and then not be able to insure and service the vehicle?

    • BMW and Mercedes, not to mention Rolls Royce, Bentley, Lamborghini, Ferrari, etc. would go bust if they – or their parent groups – did not sell basic cheaper models to the plebs or proles of this world.

      Where, or what, is Leica’s mass-market VW/Audi group, or it’s equivalent Fiat operation?

      Even it’s more consumer orientated models are badge-engineered Panasonics (on which I suspect they DO NOT make the lions-share of profit).

      Ferrari – despite it’s Fiat ‘daddy’ – makes more money from merchandising, than selling cars. Sadly, Ferrari is a far more famous name than Leica – can’t see millions of Leica jackets, baseball hats and key-rings making much of an impact on the balance sheet.

      • i agree with you, but my point was more like if you buy that ferrari, you are going to have a fair idea what your running costs are, if you buy a M9, you definitely know what the lenses are going to cost you………now, having said that, do i agree with how Leica run their business model, probably not, if they dont shock us with a major turn-around in what they deliver to the market, the other companies will take a major slice of their business away from them…..already there are rumours that sony and fuji will have a FF sensor in their smaller units…..add the fact you can add leica glass to these units, and you can say goodbye to the M9.

        • I totally agree Vinny – my point is that Leica will ultimately disappear up it’s own fundament if it continues on it’s ‘exclusivity’ business plan.

          There will eventually be a point where potential owners will migrate to rival systems – upping prices just before a potential rival (Fuji) comes on the scene is not the kind of strategy I’d recommend.

          I doubt the Fuji will be full-frame – or that it will allow use of Leica glass – recent sneak peek images indicate smaller lens throat/wider body register. The Nex line, ditto on FF – some Leica compatibility but most users will ask, why bother, when cheaper Zeiss options hit the shelves.

          Until Leica accept change and follow the current compact system trend I see further trouble ahead in pursuing their ‘we are the only camera in the market’ scenario.

  11. Hi guys,

    there is hope: my Nikon 5 100 plus kit lens went down by 4 % here in Thailand.

    Remember, you can buy ap. 14 Nikons for one M 9 plus 2 lenses. But how can you compare apples with oranges, Ford with Benz?

    Answer: in a traffic jam we arrive at the same time!

    Tulio is cool, occupy Leica!

    Seriouesly, I am not jelous or have sleeples nights not owning a Leica. If I see that the pictures I shoot would be better with a Leica, I would have one within a year.

    For now on I carry my bulky Nikon, shoot photos that are many times better than what I see from Leica shooters, save my money or give it to people who have other problems than an increas of lense prices.

    Best regards

  12. Hahahahahahahahahahahahahah. Nikon’s inventory had issues but Leica is completely broken. I really hope fuji comes out with something that blows the M9 away. Leica really needs to get their act together. They’ve had a good time because they’ve had no compentation but as soon as someone goes after their market they’re in trouble. Fuji’s already going after the lower end market so I wouldn’t be surprised if the M9 was next! I hope so, anyone read dp interview with the head of Leica? When asked about how students could get a Leica and if that was a concerned of Leica his response was that they should buy a used M8. Yeah, drop 2.6k on a camera with known defects with no warranty? I’m sure students would love to do that. Leica made great products but their hurbris is insane right now. Oh well….

  13. The market for these lenses is so small and so specialized that Leica could probably double the price and still sell the tiny number they sell today.

    Their pricing is really helpful to their competitors, Zeiss and Voigtlander, who likely sell 100 lenses for every one Leica sells.

  14. I can understand peoples frustration, probably more in regards to not being able to buy a lens they want more so than a price increase. Really though with rising global cost, in addition to supply and demand it seems the wisest business decision would be to raise prices.

    I mean in my own business I’ve had to rise prices some and if I were so in demand that people had to book my 6 months to a year in advance just for me to provide my services, I think I would certainly start raising my rates, wouldn’t you ?

    Is anyone would would of bought a 50 Lux last year at the current price really going to walk away now that the price is raised ? Probably not. Likewise, even if they did, given the huge backorder, its not as if Leica is going to have issue finding buyers, probably regardless of price.

    Bottom line is that if you can have demand exceed supply even at a far higher price point, and you can increase your profits while still being able to sell everything you produce, why wouldn’t you as a company ???

    • Yes, but as I have said above, demand doesn’t necessarily exceed supply. I firmly believe that Leica is making just enough lenses to support a 6-8 months shortage and therefore keep prices stable, justify increases, and portray this aura of elite and exclusivity. Smart but manipulative. But, it’s their product so they can manage as they wish.

      • Its possible, yet at the same time, most any well run business will always look into trying to meet demand. Now in Leica’s cost, how much cost would be involved with upping production in terms of machines, training labour and more ?

        They could invest a lot of capital into being able to have a marked increase in production and sell a lot more lenses, but…. what if the demand then wanes ?

        Obviously Leica is very hot right now, probably more in demand than they have ever been as the enthusiast market really has a ton of new photographers all taking the leap so to speak. I remember just a year or two ago even how much easier and cheaper it was to find glass, both new and used, but now with so much demand, not just from M owners, but also those with Sony NEX’s and other systems also “drinking the koolaid” as they say, Leica just couldn’t be in a better position.

        For how long will that last though ? What if they seriously tool up production and next year interest starts to wane again ? What if countless new products such as the NEX7 and more native glass, or a new Fuji system really represent a true alternative for many previous potential customers and demand falls back to previous levels ?

        Then what do you do after you’ve invested all that capital and resources ? You need to ensure that you have good long range growth and can we really know that Leica has that, or are they merely riding a wave of popularity right now which may not last ?

        • Leica is in a good place now because of the M9. The M line has always been about simplicity and craftsmanship but it is a dead end system. The demise of Leica will be certain as soon as they depart from that concept and turn the M into something it is not. They should be keen on taking a cue from Steve Jobs and Apple to keep the magic going. Yes, you have to innovate (which you really can’t in photography) and have to keep things easy to use. The M9 is small, it’s well built, it’s full frame and it is SIMPLE. With Leica glass (and yes, Zeiss or even Voigtlander) it is a superb system that can keep them growing for a while. As long as they don’t listen to all the idiots who want their M to do 1080P video, and cram every silly and useless feature in complex menus, they will be ok.
          As far as the lenses, yes, you’d think that a company would love to meet demand and get more sales but, as you’ve said, that usually comes at a cost. That cost in not simply to get more machinery or man power (which is hard enough to do) but usually it reflects on quality. Leica’s lenses are hand made and with the highest grades of materials. Not exactly something that is conducive to being produced quickly and in large amount, with the same degree of attention to details and quality. Considering how bad things are in Europe and world economy in general, I’d think Leica should happy to be in the place they are at now and feel no reason to think bigger.

        • Seems you missed out the ” …. what if we don’t invest in ANY tooling, production and training …. then go bust because we are not selling anything …. ” argument.

          I don’t think Leica has had a handle on demand-v-market pricing for nearly two decades now. Leica is not ‘hot’ … it’s fast becoming a footnote in history for many new to the photographic world.

          To many, Leica means ” …. let’s keep making rangefinders whilst the world wants SLRs, let’s keep selling rebadged Minoltas whilst the world develops new SLR technologies, let’s start rebadging Panasonics, now everyone wants digital, let’s add our ancient rangefinder mechanism to second-tier digital electronics …. ” and so on.

          There is a limit to just how much mystique and rarity a red dot can sell – ask Franke & Heidecke just how many beautiful (but technologically advanced) Rolleiflex models they sell nowadays.

          Whoops, sorry – my mistake – they recently went out of business (sadly) after scraping along the bottom for far too long, continually raising prices to meet falling demand, rather than promoting or diversifying their product ranges to meet new markets.

          Something is wrong when a photographic company’s outside investors are a cash-rich fashion house and a speculative private equity group – rather than say wooing a famous Eastern electronics giant (who might, or might not, use your lens designs for example) to buy out a 50% equity share.

          This ‘restricted market’ approach is great news if you like buying expensive jewellery rather than quality photo-gear ….

          • Leica would have been dead as you say if they didn’t come out with the M9. The question is now how to keep ADD consumer interested. The Franke & Heidecke comparison doesn’t stand because they didn’t have an M 35mm that they could be successful in turning digital and capturing a market. Can’t compare apples with oranges.
            Leica is marketing itself as a maker of fine instruments and they are (lenses at least). The question is where do they go from here. Demand for their lenses is high because of the M9 but that will eventually plateau. The S2? Forget it. If you ask me, I still believe that they are walking toward a dead end. The M line is a dead end street, the S2 is a joke, and they are not going to re-invent the wheel. They can stay in their niche but there is no growth. Who’s going to eat everyone’s lunch? Apple of course. You wait and see.

          • You miss the point entirely – not talking about Rollei as an ‘apples-v-oranges’ Leica competitor, simply highlighting the identical ‘ …. we are a one-trick pony, let’s keep selling essentially the same old thing ….’ tactic and it’s eventual outcome.

            Rollei died because it followed the approach now adopted by Leica.

            Leica has nowhere to go – you yourself say so. As you state, both the M9 concept and the S2 are dead-ends. Continually pushing up retail prices, rather than pursuing innovation & investment, will be the death knell.

            Quite why Leica fans accept – indeed, welcome – the exclusivity of pricing everyone out of the market for your products, is beyond me.

            Perhaps it is because many are collectors, rather than users. The sooner Leica is a footnote in history, the greater the rise in their ‘stock’ of mint, unused, equipment.

            No-one in photography thought Franke & Heidecke would truly fold – they had bumped along for nearly 40 years, trading on memories, but fold they did – despite the regular, desperate price hikes.

          • “This ‘restricted market’ approach is great news if you like buying expensive jewellery rather than quality photo-gear ….”

            And I thought my M9 was a necklace!

            Seriously though, Leica isn’t looking to become a Canon or a Nikon. Leica’s business model is not about mass production. It is about adressing the 1% (If you want to call it that). Sure, it’s a very small market share, but as we all appreciate the workmanship of Leica equipment, those who can afford them buy them at least partially for that exclusivity.

  15. You can’t get the f ing things anyways so what does it matter if you were a Leica dealer you would be bankrupt they should start a lottery draw to get the dam things lol my rant done

  16. I have only one Leica lens, the new Summilux 35mm, and NOT happy since its price is NOT raised:)

    On eBay somebody in Hong Kong is selling the lens for over $8000, and he (she) got 5 of them! Absolutely incredible! I wonder if Leica and Hong Kong know each other?:)

  17. I’ve been using the Voigtlander 35 F1.2 (new second generation lens) for about two months now and it compares very favorably with any of my Leica lenses (all current generation models). This lens delivers very crisp in-focus shots at F5.6 and when used wide open (F1.2) it is nearly as good as the Leica glass wide open; nearly but not exactly however at 1/4 the price of the mythical Lux 35 (more rare than a unicorn sighting) this lens is a very good substitute and IN STOCK.

    • Not quite correct. That would preclude simple market economics at work but, when in fact you have a PRODUCER able to manipulate supply to create shortages and an illusion of high demand, prices can be kept stable and increased. It happens all the time.
      Leica is making a conscious choice of not meeting demand for their lenses to create an aura of elite and exclusivity, and therefore justify their high prices and steady increases.

      • That is basically the economics of supply and demand.

        Companies have, to certain extent, the ability to control this curve… much similar to the diamond industry.

        Let’s hope that Zeiss and Voigtlander are able to increase their market share so that Leica is forced to increase supply and decrease price.. but I’m afraid Leica’s business model isn’t about mass production at lower margins.

  18. Will prices also increase in the Euro zone?

    BTW, according to your price list, the 35 Summilux is not going up in price.

  19. Well, I’m glad I bought my Noctilux Asph in early 2010! Seriously, Its sad that a company can raise prices on these lenses as much as %10 when they are barely obtainable. Occasionally “in stock” 75mm Summicron up $400. Never “in stock” 90mm Cron up $300. WOW………..thats insane. Period.
    The Law of Supply and Demand at its finest.

  20. Well, I’m glad I bought my Noctilux Asph in early 2010! Seriously, Its sad that a company can raise prices on these lenses as much as %10 when they are barely obtainable. Occasionally “in stock” 75mm Summicron up $400. Never “in stock” 90mm Cron up $300. WOW………..thats insane. Period.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.