Originally posted by DanielT74 I am still puzzled about the prices of Leica M stuff. I guess it is largely the aura of being "the best" and the law of diminishing returns. I am quite sure most of the M stuff is top notch but it's certainly not as much better as its price tag seems to imply.
You're paying for the production cost as well, which is higher because each lens is individually tested for sharpness. I've also seen claims that Leica lenses are designed to be sharp wide open - not sure how much that is the case without seeing reviews with MTF curves, but it would provide an additional justification for higher prices.
Are these things worth the additional cost? Given that Leicas have a niche market, the answer of the majority is clearly no. But given that Leicas do have a niche market, it seems that there are enough people for which the answer is yes.
The following article may help put things in perspective - it shows how well a Leica M9 does next to medium format cameras:
2010 Mini Medium Format Shoot-out. It doesn't even look that expensive in such comparison.
Originally posted by DanielT74 In any case I've seen people produce absolutely stunning images with fairly standard equipment. In the the end it comes down to talent and dedication rather than gadgetry, I think.
Of course, you can take great images with cameras you built yourself like
Miroslav Tichy did, but this does not mean that making higher end equipment becomes irrelevant.