It's not too late for Leica to enter the prosumer DSLR market

[earleygallery]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I was pretty critical of the T when it was launched, and although I'm sure it's a capable enough camera within its limitations I do still think it was the wrong product for Leica to introduce.

 

What should they have developed instead? An APS-C DSLR. They could still do this.

 

Here's my reasoning if you're interested;

 

https://jamesearleyp...cas-wrong-turn/

[dkCambridgeshire]

 

dunk

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[wildlightphoto]

The way to make money selling an APS-C DSLR is to take an old, fully-amortized design with a large user base, drop last year's (discounted) sensor and electronics into it and add some bling.

[JonPB]

...take an old, fully-amortized design...

 

R9.

 

...drop last year's (discounted) sensor and electronics into it...

 

 

 

From the M240.

 

...add some bling...

 

Larger roundel?

 

 

 

...with a large user base...

  

Phooey.

 

In response to the article, though, Leica has succeeded in areas where they offer something categorically different. The M has the rangefinder. The S was designed for digital 33x44. The X and T strike me as experimental ways to broaden its customer base, and the compacts are even moreso, though with a lower spread between risk and reward; some have been revamped and some have been forgotten. The only thing a mini-S would offer is a more compact size, as all existing APS-C DSLRs are based on mirrorboxes for 24x36 format, but I doubt it would be small enough to be distinctive or be high volume enough to make prices competitive. That said, a crop S system (same mount and mirror box but based around a 22x33 sensor) might offer interesting economies of scale for future interchangeable AF products. I do wish I could play around with Leica's production costs and sales volume data to see what the numbers would support...

 

Cheers,

Jon

[stevelap]

I was pretty critical of the T when it was launched.......

https://jamesearleyp...cas-wrong-turn/

No, surely not James   

 

Joking aside, I don't think Leica have any intention or desire to enter the prosumer dslr market at all.  PanaLeicas excepted, they operate in an upmarket niche with premium priced products that are different (even if only in design in some cases) from the mainstream.  S, M, X,T, and now Q, all show how Leica's thinking is developing and I just don't see them ever doing a 'normal' me too product.

[pico]

 

dunk

 

flush

[pierovitch]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

HDMI Visoflex with pentaprism shape?

Full frame Pentax and Leitax lens

Rebadged hasselblad badged Sony

Optical adapter for R on S

Re chip R digital back

Any Canon DSLR

Or just buy the company

300+ million plus development and manufacturing costs.

And full editorial control of the forum

[ph.]

Rather than tooling up for an uncertain mass market, an enterprising and skilled craftsman-scientist might offer to refurbish old DMRs with a new sensor.  Conurus makes aliving from rescuing N-optics, Contax can be rebuilt for M-mount. It cost a packet, but there are customers.

 

p.

[jaapv]

HDMI Visoflex with pentaprism shape?

Full frame Pentax and Leitax lens

Rebadged hasselblad badged Sony

Optical adapter for R on S

Re chip R digital back

Any Canon DSLR

Or just buy the company

300+ million plus development and manufacturing costs.

And full editorial control of the forum

I don't think so; this forum is independent from Leica.

[jaapv]

For one thing, all tooling and production facilities  for the Leica R have long gone. They'd have to set up a new production line both in Portugal and Wetzlar, probably have to train new staff too.

All this without any prospect of projected sales that would cover R&D...

 

The R chapter is closed forever, I fear.

 

Having said that, a T with a built-in EVF of the quality of the Q one might well work.

[bocaburger]

If Leica made a body which coupled to the automatic diaphragm of R lenses and accessed ROM info, then they might have something worthy of being called an R solution.  Right now there are a multitude of FF bodies, mirrorless and dslr, which can be easily and economically adapted for R lenses and produce excellent results. 

[John McMaster]

The S was designed for digital 33x44.

 

Cheers,

Jon

 

The S is 30x45

 

john

[thrid]

A few days ago I was looking at my original Nikon F. Beautiful camera and one of my all-time favorite shooters.

 

As I was looking her over I was reminded that the F was essentially a Nikon rangefinder with a mirror box added.

 

Then I started to think of all the R glass I have sitting around and thought to myself that I would be perfectly content if Leica took a M240 and grafted a mirror box to it.

 

They could share the same sensor and electronics. Just change the viewing system. Most of the engineering would be mechanical and they could reuse the mirror box from the R6.2. The metering system etc could come from the S type and the 240 electronics are already developed. Basically Leica would be getting two cameras for the R&D cost of one. 

 

Would anyone else buy one of these? I would.

 

 

PS: I'm pretty sure the M sensor with it's offset lenses over the receptors would work with the R glass.

Edited June 22, 2015 by thrid

[wildlightphoto]

A few days ago I was looking at my original Nikon F. Beautiful camera and one of my all-time favorite shooters.

 

As I was looking her over I was reminded that the F was essentially a Nikon rangefinder with a mirror box added.

 

Then I started to think of all the R glass I have sitting around and thought to myself that I would be perfectly content if Leica took a M240 and grafted a mirror box to it.

 

They could share the same sensor and electronics. Just change the viewing system. Most of the engineering would be mechanical and they could reuse the mirror box from the R6.2. The metering system etc could come from the S type and the 240 electronics are already developed. Basically Leica would be getting two cameras for the R&D cost of one. 

 

Would anyone else buy one of these? I would.

 

 

PS: I'm pretty sure the M sensor with it's offset lenses over the receptors would work with the R glass.

 

The M sensor already works fine with R lenses.

 

I'd be fine with that, but I doubt it will happen.  Unlike when the Nikon F was developed, mirror boxes now are on the trailing edge of technology and unlike the un-metered Nikon F this hypothetical camera would also need a different metering system which adds to the development cost.  From the camera maker's POV developing a reflex camera now would require a very high profit margin to recover the development cost plus return on the investment in the very few years before the camera is obsolete; an investment in a leading-edge technology EVF applicable to a broader range of products would provide a much better ROI over a longer term.

[gyoung]

I enjoyed using the film Nikons a lot, but the modern dslrs seem to have abandoned most of the advantages of the slr in the viewfinder, ok for af but a pain for manual focus. Almost reduced to point and shoot af levels

 

I find the A7 is much easier to use for manual focus, and the evfs will undoubtedly get better.

 

Gerry

[TomB_tx]

I enjoyed using the film Nikons a lot, but the modern dslrs seem to have abandoned most of the advantages of the slr in the viewfinder, ok for af but a pain for manual focus. Almost reduced to point and shoot af levels

 

I find the A7 is much easier to use for manual focus, and the evfs will undoubtedly get better.

 

Gerry

I fully agree. dSLR viewfinders are designed for composing, not judging sharpness, and are not as good as the A7 for manual focus. The limited dynamic range of the EVF is the main negative, which is only in some lighting conditions.

[hoppyman]

Hi James, I read your reasoning but I don't think that you have made a sound case.
It seems likely that dedicated R lens owners might buy one (at nearly any cost?)
However I don't think that Leica Camera's analysis and reasoning has changed since Forum members were first told of the R10 cancellation back in 2009 and that was to be full frame of course.
Here's a scenario. Can you imagine the forum posts were Leica Camera to market an APSc format dSLR that would certainly cost a lot more than those of the large manufacturers? There would be outrage, pitchforks and lynchings in the streets.
"it's not even full frame!" "Fujifilm/Sony make a... and it only costs...." "Leica has abandoned S/T/X users" "only fanboys could possibly...." 
 

Independently from that hypothetical, I'm surprised at your statement that mirrorless sales are less than a third of dSLR sales. I'm sure that the numbers vary from market to market and with price points/market segments, but I understood that the trend was sharply in the other direction?

I have the M and use mostly my S2 now but I would probably still buy one of your new Z's (Z for Zuper) systems if it had some great lenses too.....Now Leica Camera should just............ 

Edited June 22, 2015 by hoppyman

[hamey]

Hello James.

 

I still use my R cameras and Lenses with Fuji slide film and I must say I'am very happy with film after all thats the way it was meant to be.

As for a Leica Digital R I am no longer interested.

 

Spent a lot of money on Leica's R solution called  an M240 to use with my R Lenses, frankly it was terrible, poor EVF, locking up several times whenever I used it with my R lenses, however no problems when used with M lenses, so for me It didn't perform to my liking and my Daughter didn't want it so thank goodness I SOLD THE M240.

 

I have a Canon DSLR for use with my R lenses if need be, I have had NO PROBLEMS with Canon this combination works very well for me.

As an alternative to the M240 I have bought another Fuji X-T1 silver edition for my M lenses. I must say I love this set up.

 

Frankly I am sick and tired of spending big money on the Leica name, reading about their special editions and so on, I will always love my Leica R Cameras after all I have been using them for 40 years, if they break I won't bother to fix them, just hold them to the wonderful memories they have given me.

 

So I am moving on, I have joined the Fuji X forum and hopefully enjoy my stay with this forum.

 

Good Luck on your idea.

 

Ken.

Edited June 24, 2015 by hamey

[earleygallery]

Here's a scenario. Can you imagine the forum posts were Leica Camera to market an APSc format dSLR that would certainly cost a lot more than those of the large manufacturers? There would be outrage, pitchforks and lynchings in the streets.

"it's not even full frame!" "Fujifilm/Sony make a... and it only costs...." "Leica has abandoned S/T/X users" "only fanboys could possibly...." 

 

Independently from that hypothetical, I'm surprised at your statement that mirrorless sales are less than a third of dSLR sales. I'm sure that the numbers vary from market to market and with price points/market segments, but I understood that the trend was sharply in the other direction?

 

 

 

Hi Geoff, 

 

Don't those price point arguments apply to the T? It's just another APS-C mirrorless after all. 

 

I have posted stats on camera sales in another thread on the T forum. In short, worldwide sales last year were approx 10M DSLR, 3M ILC. Sales of all cameras have been falling year on year in the last few years. My point being that Leica would have had more potential customers with a dSLR. 

 

Of course Leica targeted a different type of customer with the T, and the styling and hand polished body seem to be the main USP's. Those types of buyers probably wouldn't buy a DSLR. The trouble with going for the 'fashion' market is that it is fast moving and products can have a short life cycle. 

 

I may be completely wrong, but I can't imagine how a DSLR would have been worse than the T for Leica. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[wildlightphoto]

... worldwide sales last year were approx 10M DSLR, 3M ILC. Sales of all cameras have been falling year on year in the last few years. My point being that Leica would have had more potential customers with a dSLR. 

 

Assuming the statistics you've quoted accurately represent the market, by this reasoning Leica ought to abandon the CRF market because its market share is negligible.

Edited June 25, 2015 by wildlightphoto