Why are lenses so expensive?

Messages
573
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
No
Surely the calculations have been done, the machinery is already set up, and it's just a case of grinding the glass and inserting it into a pre-assembled tube?

And then repeating the process

Or do lens manufacturers have a HUGE mark-up? :shrug:
 
Surely the calculations have been done, the machinery is already set up, and it's just a case of grinding the glass and inserting it into a pre-assembled tube?

And then repeating the process

Or do lens manufacturers have a HUGE mark-up? :shrug:

Expensive materials, a laborious number of steps to producing good glass, and extremely low manufacturing tolerances to name three factors. Also, a relatively small market compared to other high-precision consumables (such as TFT screens).

Disclaimer: these are guesses :D
 
http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/tech/l_plant/

Have a look at the videos on here from the Canon factory(ies).

Very impressive stuff. And with it being such a precise process, you can see why it ends up costing so much.
Plus part of the cost isn't just in the materials, it's the manufacturing, transport, admin, etc. Also R&D into new products etc etc etc.
 
Expensive materials, a laborious number of steps to producing good glass, and extremely low manufacturing tolerances to name three factors. Also, a relatively small market compared to other high-precision consumables (such as TFT screens).

Disclaimer: these are guesses :D

factor in research and development as well



:agree:

I think that's it. Seems to be very likely.
 
If I put a load of money into research, development and production of a lens (which is a highly precise operation even on crappy glass)... I'd like a bit of reward for my efforts.
 
If I put a load of money into research, development and production of a lens (which is a highly precise operation even on crappy glass)... I'd like a bit of reward for my efforts.

But they seem to be perpetually expensive

I used to video weddings etc. in the early 1990s (for a bit of extra cash, I might add) and the video camera I used cost me over a thousand quid. A lot of money in those days! These days the equivalent camcorder would cost around £200 or so

I suspect photographers are being well and truly ripped off
 
They are expensive because fools like us pay the prices.......:D
 
But they seem to be perpetually expensive

I used to video weddings etc. in the early 1990s (for a bit of extra cash, I might add) and the video camera I used cost me over a thousand quid. A lot of money in those days! These days the equivalent camcorder would cost around £200 or so

I suspect photographers are being well and truly ripped off

Yeah but the lenses and camera i was using in the 1990s aren't the same as they are now, which is why lenses and bodies get discontinued and depreciate in price (dependant on advances) each manufacturing process has a lifespan which will determine the given price expensive --> cheap based on age

i'll admit they're probably over priced to a certain extent but you've always got optika or something to fall back on if you're not happy with the quality vs price :)
 
Yeah but the lenses and camera i was using in the 1990s aren't the same as they are now, which is why lenses and bodies get discontinued and depreciate in price (dependant on advances) each manufacturing process has a lifespan which will determine the given price expensive --> cheap based on age

i'll admit they're probably over priced to a certain extent but you've always got optech or something to fall back on if you're not happy with the quality vs price :)

Good point

That's why I bought a Sigma 70-300 as opposed to the Sony (Minolta) alternative - they're more within my budget

And I have to say that the Sigma is really quite a decent lens. My Dad, who's been into photography for donkey's years (and is a Canon nut), gives his seal of approval to the Sigma, too :)
 
The Sigma 70-300 (APO) is a good lens I had it up until recently. Price per Performance I'd say it's probably the best zoom lens on the market. That said for £150 it's affordable to most - should that be cheaper, is it perpetually expensive? :)

Everytime I scan through the photography forums there will be loooads of thread by people asking 'is my xxxxxx soft?' or 'I have a bad copy'. There seems to be fair amount of bad copies and this I think probably relates to the precision required to fabricate an acceptable lens - If there are these duff copies coming on to the market, think how many are being rejected at the factory :LOL: I think a lot of the waste involved in the manufacture will have a fairly significant effect on the final price.

Although I would love love love it if they were cheaper too :LOL:
 
Whilst there is no doubt reward for all involved in the sale of one, optical quality glass is not easy to make and the bigger the diameter the harder it gets. I would suggest photo quality glass is going to be much higher quality than even HD Video lens on a consumer camcorder.
 
The Sigma 70-300 (APO) is a good lens I had it up until recently. Price per Performance I'd say it's probably the best zoom lens on the market. That said for £150 it's affordable to most - should that be cheaper, is it perpetually expensive? :)

Although the 70-300 APO is a great lens, I have to say the new 55-250 IS has far more bang for buck :D Better IQ (especially beyong 200mm) and with 4 stop IS, its a beast for £180! But anyway yeah the sigma is good! :D

Btw - Hi ad :p
 
I try to compare the cost of lenses to things I might buy for my other interests. I bought a fishing pole for 2K where the word precision doesn't come into it, just carbon wrapped around a mandrel. I paid a grand for my golf clubs and these are probably glued together in a few minutes. I have bought various rifles and shotguns that cost roughly the same as my 100-400 and I believe this offers similar value/return for my money.

You have to take into account not just what it costs but what you get in return.
 
I wouldn't mind betting the retailer mark up is quite substantial...

Actually the retailer mark up is minimal from what my local camera shop owner has told me. Canon are pushing their prices up if they're not big bulk buyers and the local shops can't compete with the likes of warehouseexpress. It's gone so far he no longer gets pro Canon kit unless on request and even then he has to buy it at a higher price than the big retailers sell it for.

The other thing is the manufacturers are primarily there to make money for the shareholders. If they can charge a price for their product which gives them a good profit and still maintain high sales then they will. It's the way the world and any profitable business works.
 
I'm sure the same could be said for many other things (e.g. executive cars, branded clothing, mobile phones by certain manufacturers). A big factor to consider is branding. Some things will be more expensive regardless of whether or not the technology/product is cheap.
 
Lenses - and cameras - are more expensive in the UK than probably anywhere else in the world. Not all the money goes to the manufacturer - greedy governments also take a whack.
 
Most mid-range quality lenses from Canon or Nikon cost no more than a handbag from someone like Balenciaga - do you honestly think that a bit of leather is harder to assemble into a handbag than it is is to construct a multi-element photographic optic?

Compared to a lot of hobby-related purchases quality lenses are a bit of a bargain.....
 
The costs have to reflect R&D, manufacturing plants and tooling, materials and labour, transport, and of course profit for the manufacturer, distributor, and retailer.

The biggest factor in price, however, is the volume produced. The very high fixed costs of R&D and Manufacturing (in prooportion to the rest) have to be spread across the volume produced and sold. The fewer made the higher the cost.

The second biggest factor in price is probably competition, and once you have bought your camera, you are largely tied to that brand's lenses or about 2 other makes and you can rarely buy indentical or near identical lenses from more than one company. With less competition, there is less pressure on prices - conversely witness how computer prices have come down as the number of makers increased. and component producers consolidated

The third biggest factor is desirability i.e. how much does the buyer want the goods. The more desirable the product, the higher the price and lesser the competiton. Apple iPhones are good examples of this factor. Short supply can also increase this.

The final factor is brand which often goes together with desirablity. The stronger the brand, the higher the premium. For example a BMW 3 Series and Skoda Superb may cost similar to build, but the BMW costs much more to buy, particularly when specification is taken into account.
 
I actually think that lenses are cheaper now than they have ever been. If you look at the proportion of your weekly wage/monthly salary it costs to buy a particular lens now - then compare that in weekly wage/monthly salary fraction terms of 10 years ago...lenses are much cheaper today.
 
relating to raw materials but the cost of fuel plays a huge part in the price of lens's!

the gas they use to heat the glass is ever increasing in price and petrol/diesel is always expensive which means the cost of moving the products have to be covered i.e. the price goes up further.
 
http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/tech/l_plant/

Have a look at the videos on here from the Canon factory(ies).

Very impressive stuff. And with it being such a precise process, you can see why it ends up costing so much.

Very interesting stuff there, thanks for that link. Some of the facts and figures are amazing, using tolerances down to 1000ths of a mm is mind blowing. Theres certainly a hell of a lot of work that goes into each lens, they are far from 'just bits of glass'

C.
 
Back
Top