<< you can buy 1937 Leicas for this sort of price too - perhaps a little more, but not a huge amount >>
Sorry, I don't see that happening. Plus - 1937 Leicas a bit less usefull than a 1937 Rolleiflex, but that's not the point of this disscussion. << Of course, part of the price of a Leica is in the name, and that's a great pity, but they really are very, very good cameras >> I don't argue with that. I'm not a Leica-hater :) << It's difficult to answer the question 'why are Leicas so much more expensive?' because it raises the question 'more expensive than what?'. What can you compare them with to get a fair idea? >> I wasn't aiming at a direct comparison. I was refering to the discrepancy between the price for a usable Leica and a usable Rolleiflex. Both would be quite old, very well built, reliable machines. The only reason I can think of would be that there were a lot of developments in the world of medium format, and as a result Rolleiflex has lost its prominence, while untill quite recently there were no real longterm competitors in the world of 35mm rangefinders. regards, Łukasz - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
