Olsen Posted December 9, 2011 Share #421 Posted December 9, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) You are quoting someone else, I never said the above. -Marc Marc, Sorry! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 9, 2011 Posted December 9, 2011 Hi Olsen, Take a look here Video mode on future M. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Olsen Posted December 9, 2011 Share #422 Posted December 9, 2011 The folks shooting with iPhones today are Leica's future? Sony's future maybe, but Leica's? Well, that's the point: Leica must make them to be Leica's future. 'Just sitting down' will not create any business. I wonder why Leica is building ultra swanky stores and boutiques in elite locations of major markets worldwide? Seems to be much more of a super upper-crust premium positioning with a heritage base, than a mass market product you can get from Best Buy. All that is just fine. The most important part is cutting out the retailers. Just wait and see: Nikon and Canon will soon do the same. Canon already got this 'Canon Senter' in Singapore, one of the places where people from all over the world buy photo gear to avoid VAT/sales tax. It would seem that this makes it clear that Canon, Nikon, and Sony are not Leica's competition. Barriers to price are ... and premium Brand exclusivity is how that barrier is overcome. -Marc Leica's position has not been better. Just take the currency crisis unfolding before our eyes. What I see, all the way, far out into the horizon, is a weak Euro and a strong Yen. And a broke Japanese government that no longer can subsidise ground research of sensor technology. Because the money have to go other places. The camera market has not been such a level football field since, - the 30'? Com'on Leica! Go for it! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sp12 Posted December 10, 2011 Share #423 Posted December 10, 2011 Here's a hint; I just noticed the Leica M-system overview page has been rewritten the last weeks, and now focuses more on the mechanical rangefinder as far as I can see I think Leica is outside all product life cycle theory - they have been selling Summicron 50 for thirty years I thought this was peculiar as well. Also, many manufacturers have been selling lenses for years. There's this old adage about glass before body. I think the assumption "shutters will no longer be made"is a rather rash assumption. Over 80% of cameras sold today have no shutter. M9 is closer to the 'features' of both top of the line Canon and Nikon then most know of. That' why they sell. Definitely not true and certainly not why they sell. There won't be a 36 million pixel Full Frame (24 x 36 mm) camera - ever. Max is somewhere around 23 million. to the price of drastically reduced low ISO properties etc. Sony already makes a sensor of equivalent 55MP FF densities. They also have a FF 24MP one. More pixels are always better assuming you have the storage and electronics to handle the increased data sizes. They will make the M-cameras lighter and cheaper to produce. The changes I suggest will have to come. to keep the cost down and to keep up with competition. Leicas sell because they are exotic and expensive and have a niche. Stacking them with all the features from other brands and reducing prices will decrease their market size to nothing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilliamsphotography Posted December 10, 2011 Share #424 Posted December 10, 2011 I think there is a fundamental lack of understanding of how a premium brand positioning is achieved and maintained. It isn't accomplished by being like everyone else. Leica must exploit its elite differences, not strive for plebeian similarities. A good indication of this is the Summarit line ... a $1,400 M50/2.5 is available right now, a $4,000 50 Summilux hasn't been available for over a year. FYI, the Leica stores ARE retail outlets ... Leica does not own all of them. They are part of the premium brand strategy, and I suspect a lot more of them will be built to Leica's specifications. There is little reason for a practical consumer to purchase a $100 airline roller bag from Louis Vuitton for $3,500 ... and if LV made their bags to meet that regular consumer demand they would cease to exist overnight. Premium Brands have a heritage, and ones like Leica are based on precision, consistency, avoidance of fads, and protecting their established image at all costs. I seriously doubt we will ever see an inexpensive Leica M ... if anything I suspect nothing but price increases as Leica further penetrates the top income strata ... which we may choke on, but the folks with money actually prefer. So take care of those M9s and M lenses folks 'cause we may be priced out of the market, if we haven't already. -Marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted December 10, 2011 Share #425 Posted December 10, 2011 The most important part is cutting out the retailers. Just wait and see: Nikon and Canon will soon do the same They won't, I think you've failed to understand the difference between a commodity and an added value item. Nikon and Canon rely on high volume, low margin sales. That's the exact opposite of the market a company like Leica i aiming at. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sp12 Posted December 10, 2011 Share #426 Posted December 10, 2011 The word we're looking for. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted December 10, 2011 Share #427 Posted December 10, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) I think there is a fundamental lack of understanding of how a premium brand positioning is achieved and maintained. It isn't accomplished by being like everyone else. Leica must exploit its elite differences, not strive for plebeian similarities. A good indication of this is the Summarit line ... a $1,400 M50/2.5 is available right now, a $4,000 50 Summilux hasn't been available for over a year. FYI, the Leica stores ARE retail outlets ... Leica does not own all of them. They are part of the premium brand strategy, and I suspect a lot more of them will be built to Leica's specifications. There is little reason for a practical consumer to purchase a $100 airline roller bag from Louis Vuitton for $3,500 ... and if LV made their bags to meet that regular consumer demand they would cease to exist overnight. Premium Brands have a heritage, and ones like Leica are based on precision, consistency, avoidance of fads, and protecting their established image at all costs. I seriously doubt we will ever see an inexpensive Leica M ... if anything I suspect nothing but price increases as Leica further penetrates the top income strata ... which we may choke on, but the folks with money actually prefer. So take care of those M9s and M lenses folks 'cause we may be priced out of the market, if we haven't already. -Marc I don't disagree with this view of why and where Leica is now but how do you reconcile it with Leica's plans to grow sales significantly? And it seems to me that if Leica goes through with what Stefan Daniels postulates about adding cmos, live view, video, to the M (leaving out what he said about AF) it will be sort of a full frame version of a Nex 7 with a precision rangefinder. (Or maybe hybrid, a clip on EVF or ???) Because of what he said, I think they are tipping their hand and I'd be pretty surprised if the M10 did not have most of these things. (Maybe not AF.) So I think they might feel they understand how to bring along their potential customers to an M that includes these features without antagonizing them. Do keep in mind that Nikon sells $6000 bodies along with $80 p&s cameras. Whereas a few decades ago, only one top of the line model had the name Nikon. (Others were Nikkorex, or Nikkormat.) And I bet Nikon is selling way more pro level cameras today than they did 30-40 years ago. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilliamsphotography Posted December 10, 2011 Share #428 Posted December 10, 2011 I don't disagree with this view of why and where Leica is now but how do you reconcile it with Leica's plans to grow sales significantly? And it seems to me that if Leica goes through with what Stefan Daniels postulates about adding cmos, live view, video, to the M (leaving out what he said about AF) it will be sort of a full frame version of a Nex 7 with a precision rangefinder. (Or maybe hybrid, a clip on EVF or ???) Because of what he said, I think they are tipping their hand and I'd be pretty surprised if the M10 did not have most of these things. (Maybe not AF.) So I think they might feel they understand how to bring along their potential customers to an M that includes these features without antagonizing them. Do keep in mind that Nikon sells $6000 bodies along with $80 p&s cameras. Whereas a few decades ago, only one top of the line model had the name Nikon. (Others were Nikkorex, or Nikkormat.) And I bet Nikon is selling way more pro level cameras today than they did 30-40 years ago. Frankly, I can't reconcile it Alan ... and you may be 100% correct that Leica may feel they can introduce these type of features in a way that doesn't antagonize potential buyers. The buying frenzy over the very expensive M9 Titanium may be a "toe in the water" hint of that type of premium implementation of alternative technology. We'll have to wait and see. As I said, I believe CMOS is inevitable for the next M, so adding the other features would seem to naturally come along with it. I also would not rule out an additional camera added to the M line. The question would be why not? Who is to say they can't do that? What is also not clear is exactly what "grow sales significantly" actually means. Most folks on this thread have taken it to mean higher volume of sales to a broader audience, where it can also mean a finer targeting of premium buyers who buy a broader line of high ticket products ...and greater turnover of sales with-in this much smaller group. Their current actions seem to argue the latter not the former. For example, I think there are something close to 15 or 20 dedicated Leica stores in tony locations, and nearly 20 Leica Boutiques with-in high end retailers already in existence. This growing retail segregation is a clear directional indication that a very small percentage of buyers are being targeted. And guess who will get preferential allocations of product as more and more of these "hands on," experiential places are built? I believe the S2 is a poster child for this type of premium positioning and segregation from the general photographic market to target premium buyers. I didn't just buy a S2P ... I bought the whole works at one time, four lenses and accessories ... and am just waiting for the S24mm. I didn't even claim this as a business expense ... it was for me personally. I know those who went even further and bought two S2s and all the lenses, every accessory, and have ordered the $7,500 S-30mm. Leica need not discount the S2 nor make a stripped down version of it ... they are exceeding sales projections as it is, and selling almost every S lens they can make. Leica products are very expensive, so it seems they are going where the money is. No matter how you slice it, the future looks expensive to me ... LOL! -Marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olsen Posted December 10, 2011 Share #429 Posted December 10, 2011 Sony already makes a sensor of equivalent 55MP FF densities. They also have a FF 24MP one. More pixels are always better assuming you have the storage and electronics to handle the increased data sizes. Leicas sell because they are exotic and expensive and have a niche. Stacking them with all the features from other brands and reducing prices will decrease their market size to nothing. A 55 MP FF will never hit the market (I don't have the time explaining why). A FF 24 MP is the sure limit. Such a sensor could well be launched. Sure, Leica will always be expensive and represent a niche. Still Leica has to move with the times. Otherwise they will die. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olsen Posted December 10, 2011 Share #430 Posted December 10, 2011 They won't, I think you've failed to understand the difference between a commodity and an added value item. Nikon and Canon rely on high volume, low margin sales. That's the exact opposite of the market a company like Leica i aiming at. Neither Nikon nor Canon sells anything near a commodity. You must be joking. Into their products goes billions of dollars (trillions of Yen) of research. Much of it government subsidized. By this they are the technological leaders within the camera business, I know for sure that Canon is worried that their wide range of photo gear, from cameras to printers, don't get the optimal attention with the (lazy) retailers around. They have already started to establish Canon Senters at several locations. By this they can keep the retailer gross profit for themselves. This will increase. They might sell cheaper PS and SLRs through dealers while they will give attention to the whole package at their dedicated Canon Senters. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted December 10, 2011 Share #431 Posted December 10, 2011 Neither Nikon nor Canon sells anything near a commodity. You must be joking I'm serious. I suspect many people put no more thought into choosing a camera than they do a washing machine or toaster. They look at the price, pick the one that looks 'pretteist' and buy on the basis of that. Don't assume that everyone is a photography enthusiast. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double Negative Posted December 10, 2011 Share #432 Posted December 10, 2011 ^ Agreed. Canon and Nikon (among others) are indeed commodity cameras. They sell in high volume, low margin though any and every channel. And most people I know aren't photographers. Or know very much about what exactly a camera is. They go by, "hey, what camera should I get?" And listen to any answer they get, be it from a magazine, friends on Facebook or what the salesperson tells them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilliamsphotography Posted December 10, 2011 Share #433 Posted December 10, 2011 A 55 MP FF will never hit the market (I don't have the time explaining why). A FF 24 MP is the sure limit. Such a sensor could well be launched. Sure, Leica will always be expensive and represent a niche. Still Leica has to move with the times. Otherwise they will die. Let me repeat myself just in case you didn't read clearly ... The Nikon D800 while not "officially announced quite yet" is widely and credibly reported to be 36 meg full frame ... well beyond your FF 24 MP limit. Sony probably makes that sensor ... which means it'll show up in Sony products also, just like the D3X's FF 24 meg sensor ended up in the Sony A900 and A850. Leica will move with the times, but at their own speed and in their own way ... which most likely won't be like everyone else, based on what we know everyone else is doing. If they become a "me too" brand in any way, that is when they will die. Canon and Nikon do not survive on their top dog cameras ... the zillions of no-brainer cameras is what makes them their money. You don't see the D3X being advertised on national TV in the USA, you see mass produced commodity cameras like the Nikon-1 in the hands of goofy celebrities like Ashton Kutcher. That kind of advertising is EXTRAORDINARILY expensive, and massive sales numbers have to be generated to justify it. In fact, I'd guess the cost of that multiple-spot celebrity campaign, and the media cost to run it, is greater than the profits from D3/D3X sales. -Marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olsen Posted December 10, 2011 Share #434 Posted December 10, 2011 Let me repeat myself just in case you didn't read clearly ... The Nikon D800 while not "officially announced quite yet" is widely and credibly reported to be 36 meg full frame ... well beyond your FF 24 MP limit. Sony probably makes that sensor ... which means it'll show up in Sony products also, just like the D3X's FF 24 meg sensor ended up in the Sony A900 and A850. Leica will move with the times, but at their own speed and in their own way ... which most likely won't be like everyone else, based on what we know everyone else is doing. If they become a "me too" brand in any way, that is when they will die. Canon and Nikon do not survive on their top dog cameras ... the zillions of no-brainer cameras is what makes them their money. You don't see the D3X being advertised on national TV in the USA, you see mass produced commodity cameras like the Nikon-1 in the hands of goofy celebrities like Ashton Kutcher. That kind of advertising is EXTRAORDINARILY expensive, and massive sales numbers have to be generated to justify it. In fact, I'd guess the cost of that multiple-spot celebrity campaign, and the media cost to run it, is greater than the profits from D3/D3X sales. -Marc A lot of speculation with dream figures of 36 MP etc went around the Net before 1Dx was announced. It turned out to be a camera with less MPs than the previous model. Sorry, bu we will not see any 24 x 36 mm sensor with more than (max) 24 million pixels. Have you read any of the annual reports of Nikon and Canon? They show (and tell) that it is the expensive SLR models w/lenses that makes their profit. Not any PS. - Just imagine how many PS cameras you have to sell to make a similar gross profit as on only one 1Ds III. Canon's camera division has been the economical winner of the digital race. So far. While they launched the 1Ds/1DsII/1DsIII their profit was about 80% - of the total camera business! Nikon, however, came late to the FF-market. Their camera division makes about 1/3 of Canon's - after their first FF-DSLR was launched. The other producers far less. So, for Nikon and Canon, it is the large pro models,- and the accessories, lenses etc. that makes their profit. Sure, both 1DsIII and D3x have been made in larger number than M9. Still, M9 is a mass produced item in the same sense. Otherwise, I agree with you that 'Leica will move with the times'. But. The pace of this movement has to correspond with a different world than the old film days. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilliamsphotography Posted December 10, 2011 Share #435 Posted December 10, 2011 Actually, I HOPE you are right Olsen ... I couldn't care less about 36 meg in a FF 35mm DSLR. I'm still suspicious about 24 meg APSC sensor ... which already does exist. We'll see soon enough. -Marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sp12 Posted December 10, 2011 Share #436 Posted December 10, 2011 A lot of speculation with dream figures of 36 MP etc went around the Net before 1Dx was announced. It turned out to be a camera with less MPs than the previous model. Sorry, bu we will not see any 24 x 36 mm sensor with more than (max) 24 million pixels. I'm really confused by this. Nikon has a 36MP sensor in their D800. The 1Dx has reduced MP counts because it's first and foremost a camera for the Olympics where high framerates (and hence, lower resolution) are needed. Sony has had 24.3MP sensors since 2007. Sony makes sensors with 55MP FF equivalent densities. I'm not sure if you're trolling or what, but please tell me one reason why we won't see ever higher MP counts? We see cellphone sensors with 16MP -- that's like 250MP full frame densities. Have you read any of the annual reports of Nikon and Canon?Almost all of them. They show (and tell) that it is the expensive SLR models w/lenses that makes their profit. Not any PS. - Just imagine how many PS cameras you have to sell to make a similar gross profit as on only one 1Ds III.That's not even public domain information. Unless you work for Canon I don't think you're qualified to make that statement. Canon's camera division has been the economical winner of the digital race. So far. While they launched the 1Ds/1DsII/1DsIII their profit was about 80% - of the total camera business! Nikon, however, came late to the FF-market. Their camera division makes about 1/3 of Canon's - after their first FF-DSLR was launched. The other producers far less.Source? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted December 10, 2011 Share #437 Posted December 10, 2011 36-55MP is nowhere close to where the upper limit of 24x36 sensors will get to. 200-300MP for higher resolution light field seems logical to me and I have no idea how to decide an upper limit. Consider that around 12 years ago CF cards topped out at about 32MBs and now have 1000 times the capacity. So the ability to process and store large files has been more than keeping pace with the sensors. The early Kodak DSLRs were only 2-6MPs and in a relatively short period of time we have multiples of that. So doubling the current number does not seem like a stretch to me at all now that there is more competition among manufacturers of cameras and sensors. Unless the current sensors can get the most of today's lenses, which they don't, I certainly would want higher resolution. 50MP is only about a 50% increase of resolution over 24MP so while that is a lot of megapixels it is not that big a jump in resolution. 36MP is only a 25% increase in potential overall resolution that represents a small incremental improvement, not any kind of leap. And because of the Bayer pattern, there is some interpolation going on that can benefit from higher pixel counts. Reducing moire and edge aliasing is another benefit. I don't think you should read too much into the 1Dx as that is a step up in sensor size and pixel count from the 1DIV and is intended as a camera for photojournalists and sport shooters. The 1Dx has 50% more pixels than a Nikon D3s has. It does not mean that another camera intended for higher resolution will not be introduced as that will help justify new higher performance lenses that will come out periodically too. I'd suspect that people who use their Leica's for landscapes will gladly upgrade to cameras that have more megapixels. The same kind of people who spend several thousand for each very high quality lens will easily be persuaded to see the need to buy a new body if that gives any quantifiable improvement. Leica won't leave this money on the table and they need to keep giving its base reasons to upgrade. Just like having the highest resolution lenses, having the highest resolution sensors fits in with their philosophy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmradman Posted December 10, 2011 Share #438 Posted December 10, 2011 I'm really confused by this. Nikon has a 36MP sensor in their D800. The 1Dx has reduced MP counts because it's first and foremost a camera for the Olympics where high framerates (and hence, lower resolution) are needed. Sony has had 24.3MP sensors since 2007. Sony makes sensors with 55MP FF equivalent densities. I'm not sure if you're trolling or what, but please tell me one reason why we won't see ever higher MP counts? We see cellphone sensors with 16MP -- that's like 250MP full frame densities. Almost all of them. That's not even public domain information. Unless you work for Canon I don't think you're qualified to make that statement. Source? If you google a bit you will find fairly indicative answer to any of the points raised regarding Nikon & Canon sales and technology way forward. I have no intention to convert you to Nikon or Canon, but in case you are interested there are very reputable bloggers who publish all sorts of information regularly. For Nikon try Thom Hogan's Nikon Field Guide and Nikon Flash Guide equivalent of Leica's own Erwin Puts. Here are some figures on Nikon sales Financially Speaking Nov 4 (news and commentary)--As expected, Nikon's first half year results announced today showed strong gains in sales (22%) and income (375%) over the first half of last year. The Imaging division sold 2.73 million DSLRs (1.9m a year ago), 3.93 million lenses (2.95m a year ago), and 7.86m Coolpix (6.7m a year ago). Sales were up 15% and income 76% in the group. The big news was that Nikon expects to restart DSLR production in December at alternative facilities and hopes to gradually begin restoring the flooded Thailand facility to operation in January (full scale production in March). The net negative impact on sales of the Thailand flooding is expected to be US$833 million. Given this and other factors, Nikon has revised downward their full fiscal year estimates. Instead of 5.4m DSLRs/ILCs, they predict they'll sell 4.7m for the full year (that's still up from last year by almost 10%, and represents 31% of the market). Lenses also take a hit, with the new estimate 6.7m instead of 7.6m, probably because a lot of those are DX lenses made in Thailand. Meanwhile, Coolpix production, which wasn't impacted by the flooding is expected to hit 16m for the year, an 8% increase in a market that shrinks 7% during the year. Overall, Nikon said they did not expect to get back to "full" DSLR production until April 2012. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olsen Posted December 10, 2011 Share #439 Posted December 10, 2011 I'm really confused by this. Nikon has a 36MP sensor in their D800. The 1Dx has reduced MP counts because it's first and foremost a camera for the Olympics where high framerates (and hence, lower resolution) are needed. Sony has had 24.3MP sensors since 2007. Sony makes sensors with 55MP FF equivalent densities. I'm not sure if you're trolling or what, but please tell me one reason why we won't see ever higher MP counts? We see cellphone sensors with 16MP -- that's like 250MP full frame densities. Almost all of them. That's not even public domain information. Unless you work for Canon I don't think you're qualified to make that statement. Source? That Nikon will have 36MP in their future D800 is pure speculation. Before Canon's D1x was launched similar speculations went about the new 1Ds IV. That the pixel count would increase from 21MP (1Ds III) to 36MP - even higher numbers were dreamt of.. What Canon launched was 1Dx with 18MP - down from 21 MP but the fastest camera in the business.... If you really have read the Canon and Nikon annual reports you will see that, say, in 2006 the camera division of Canon had a turnover twice that of Nikon's camera division and a result three times as high. - Just to pick one year. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olsen Posted December 10, 2011 Share #440 Posted December 10, 2011 If you google a bit you will find fairly indicative answer to any of the points raised regarding Nikon & Canon sales and technology way forward. I have no intention to convert you to Nikon or Canon, but in case you are interested there are very reputable bloggers who publish all sorts of information regularly. For Nikon try Thom Hogan's Nikon Field Guide and Nikon Flash Guide equivalent of Leica's own Erwin Puts. Here are some figures on Nikon sales Financially Speaking Nov 4 (news and commentary)--As expected, Nikon's first half year results announced today showed strong gains in sales (22%) and income (375%) over the first half of last year. The Imaging division sold 2.73 million DSLRs (1.9m a year ago), 3.93 million lenses (2.95m a year ago), and 7.86m Coolpix (6.7m a year ago). Sales were up 15% and income 76% in the group. The big news was that Nikon expects to restart DSLR production in December at alternative facilities and hopes to gradually begin restoring the flooded Thailand facility to operation in January (full scale production in March). The net negative impact on sales of the Thailand flooding is expected to be US$833 million. Given this and other factors, Nikon has revised downward their full fiscal year estimates. Instead of 5.4m DSLRs/ILCs, they predict they'll sell 4.7m for the full year (that's still up from last year by almost 10%, and represents 31% of the market). Lenses also take a hit, with the new estimate 6.7m instead of 7.6m, probably because a lot of those are DX lenses made in Thailand. Meanwhile, Coolpix production, which wasn't impacted by the flooding is expected to hit 16m for the year, an 8% increase in a market that shrinks 7% during the year. Overall, Nikon said they did not expect to get back to "full" DSLR production until April 2012. Why not go directy to the sources and read for yourself? Nikon: Nikon | Investor Relations Canon: Canon : Investor Relations | Financial Announcements Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.