Why is the 42.5 F/1.2 $1600 when the Fuji 56mm F/1.2 is only $1000?

Started Mar 2, 2014 | Discussions thread
(unknown member) Veteran Member • Posts: 4,734
Not at all hard to understand

BeaverTerror wrote:

I'm contemplating keeping the 100-300mm and one M43 body, selling all my other M43 gear, and moving to Fuji. Can anyone offer a compelling reason for why I shouldn't switch?

I believe the simple answer as to why the 42.5 is $1600 and the 56 is $1000 comes down to the wonders of free and competitive markets.  And, having looked at the designs carefully, no doubt in my mind that cost of manufacturing is a factor.

Marketing first:

There are a lot more m4/3 bodies out there to drive demand.

One system has a LOT of people using the cameras to produce commercially viable videos, and those people will pay up for quality lenses.

The name on the $1600 lens belongs to a company that successfully sells black and white only rangefinder cameras for MORE than color rangefinder cameras.

Now the clearly rational part.

One lens has 14 elements in 11 groups with two aspherical elements (very costly to make), and two elements of very sophisticated formula glass, extra-low dispersion and ultra-high refractive index. Nine diaphragm blades.  And is image stabilized.

The other lens has 11 elements in 8 groups, one aspherical element, and two ED elements.  Seven diaphragm blades.

My guess is that the cost to manufacture the first lens - just the cost of the pieces-parts - is significantly higher than the second.

I own both systems and both lenses, along with a DSLR system where the equivalent lens costs approximately what the combined cost of BOTH of the lenses you mention. Maybe that's why I'm not so emotional about this.  You get what you pay for, and prices tend to correlate with complexity (unless you're Leica.)

Pricing doesn't relate much to the quality of the image produced, otherwise there'd be much less of a gap between the price of a kit lens and the price of the specialty lenses.  With images that call for let's say f5.6, printed at 20x30 inches, you'd never be able to tell which was shot with a kit lens and which with the specialty lens.

However, if you feel this is a totally unjust situation, you SHOULD switch.  Emotion should be in the images, and if you're feeling cheated this strongly you'll never get good shots.  Good luck to you!

BTW, the 100-300 is probably one of the worst lenses in the m4/3 lineup in terms of sharpness once you get past 200mm.  You'd do better to slap a Nikon 300mm f4 on an adapter.  Why would you pick THAT as your keeper?

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow