Making a M10 Macro & Telphoto friendly - a modern Viso or whatever

[Guest BigSplash]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I bought the 28, 60 and 90 so that I would have something to use on my R8. A body with no lens is useless. I agree the principle that you need lenses if you have a body. The issue is why buy an R8 if you have a Leica M ?

Everything one reads suggests that a Leica M is smaller, more accurate in focussing etc than any SLR up to 90mm.

 

You see, I have an open mind when it comes to cameras. I enjoy using a variety of cameras for different things and different days. Have you even considered that not everyone wants to try to make an M do everything? That there are other tools in the box? Open your eyes, and your mind.

 

And show me a 60 Macro lens that fits an M camera. The 65mm Elmar on a Viso which fits both the Viso and bellows and was purpose built for macro.

 

The 28 Elmarit-R is one of the best lenses that Leica have ever made (as is the 60, btw) and the 90 Summicron is almost too sharp and it isn't even the ASPH version. It was cheap.

 

The 90 Summarit was bought years after the 90 Summicron-R and is used when I am using my M equipment.

 

I use the 250 when I want to shoot photographs that need a 250 lens to take them with.Thanks it helps me why not buy the 800mm and you can say the same![/quote]

 

I think you can see the point I am trying to make . I believe that if a high tech viso was available and new telephoto Leica lenses were available with AF and auto aperture you may well have bought a 250 in that range.

 

I think the other point is that you are clearly someone who appreciates a system camera approach and are not a single zoom lens fan. I envy you with your new Hasselblad as I have always fancied one also....I guess you have worked out how many Zeiss lenses you will need and the cost to run the film through the kit.

[Advertisement]

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

[stunsworth]

Frank, this is very confusing. You appear to have quotes from Andy in black type, and then text from yourself also in plain black type. To someone who hadn't read Andy's previous message it all looks the same - and appears as if you are arguing against yourself.

[andybarton]

I bought the 28, 60 and 90 so that I would have something to use on my R8. A body with no lens is useless. I agree the principle that you need lenses if you have a body. The issue is why buy an R8 if you have a Leica M ?

Everything one reads suggests that a Leica M is smaller, more accurate in focussing etc than any SLR up to 90mm.

 

You see, I have an open mind when it comes to cameras. I enjoy using a variety of cameras for different things and different days. Have you even considered that not everyone wants to try to make an M do everything? That there are other tools in the box? Open your eyes, and your mind.

 

And show me a 60 Macro lens that fits an M camera. The 65mm Elmar on a Viso which fits both the Viso and bellows and was purpose built for macro.

 

The 28 Elmarit-R is one of the best lenses that Leica have ever made (as is the 60, btw) and the 90 Summicron is almost too sharp and it isn't even the ASPH version. It was cheap.

 

The 90 Summarit was bought years after the 90 Summicron-R and is used when I am using my M equipment.

 

I use the 250 when I want to shoot photographs that need a 250 lens to take them with.Thanks it helps me why not buy the 800mm and you can say the same![/quote]

 

 

Because I wanted to buy an R8. I like SLRs and I like Ms. And don't believe everything "you read" about focusing Ms against SLRs. You make it sound as if you've never used an SLR. If you haven't, then maybe you should try one sometime so that you can know what you are talking about.

 

So, a 65 Elmar on a Viso is as convenient to use as a 60 on an R8? Please.... any credibility that you might have had is just drifting off into the sunset.

 

I think you can see the point I am trying to make . I believe that if a high tech viso was available and new telephoto Leica lenses were available with AF and auto aperture you may well have bought a 250 in that range.

 

NO, I can't. The point you are trying to make is just ridiculous. Nothing, but nothing would get be to buy something that converted an M camera into something it isn't when an SLR is better in every instance for doing the job that a Viso kludges to do. Why can't you understand that?

 

I envy you with your new Hasselblad as I have always fancied one also....I guess you have worked out how many Zeiss lenses you will need and the cost to run the film through the kit.

 

You wouldn't like it. It's an SLR

 

As far as the Hasselblad is concerned, you could, with your means, go out and buy a Hasselblad system this afternoon I'm sure. I have one lens for it, as I have bought it with a particluar purpose in mind. Maybe later I might buy another, I don't know. And no, I didn't even think about the cost of the film or the processing that goes with a film camera...

 

So, where are the 20,000 Viso customers coming from then?

[SJP]

<snip> arguing against yourself.

Indeed:D

[Guest BigSplash]

Because I wanted to buy an R8. I like SLRs and I like Ms. And don't believe everything "you read" about focusing Ms against SLRs. You make it sound as if you've never used an SLR. If you haven't, then maybe you should try one sometime so that you can know what you are talking about.I have used an SLR and I do not like them at all except for macro or telephoto where there is no other way. Specifically:

• They are not well balanced like a M
  
• They are large, heavy beasts usually equipped with a zoom and I dont like them either.
  
• Wide aperture lenses that I am used to with Leica are not available today. There are a few fast Canon ones but these I am told do not have the image quality, nor are hand tuned as Leica does at full aperture.
  
• They are not as precise at focussing at lenses up to 90mm.
  

So, a 65 Elmar on a Viso is as convenient to use as a 60 on an R8? Please.... any credibility that you might have had is just drifting off into the sunset. You said you had a 60mm Macro I said a 65mm that was purpose built for macro and is usable in the Viso and with the bellows. Sho me where I mentioned anywhere "convenience". If you want closeups ...then I would say a 65mm on a Viso plus bellows is going to be more versatile as the range of magnification will be larger.....do you have a bellows?

If you are not interested in macro then why not select the 75mm ASPH on a M?

 

 

 

NO, I can't. The point you are trying to make is just ridiculous. Nothing, but nothing would get be to buy something that converted an M camera into something it isn't when an SLR is better in every instance for doing the job that a Viso kludges to do. Why can't you understand that? Why can't you understand I am NOT taking about a 40 year old designed Viso. You have no problem using an adapter to fit R lenses to a Nikon....think adapter rather than old Viso.

 

 

 

You wouldn't like it. It's an SLR

 

As far as the Hasselblad is concerned, you could, with your means, go out and buy a Hasselblad system this afternoon I'm sure. I have one lens for it, as I have bought it with a particluar purpose in mind. Maybe later I might buy another, I don't know. And no, I didn't even think about the cost of the film or the processing that goes with a film camera... I guess that I could and one day may do so but I'd prefer to concentrate on Leica M

So, where are the 20,000 Viso customers coming from then?

 

Easy 0.17% penetration into the 11.2Million DSLR high end system camera market for an adapter that costs £1000 plus £5000 for the M9 and offers the user AF, auto aperture neither of which is available on a R lens with its adapter..

[jaapv]

I have to agree with Bill, any sense of reality seems to have departed:rolleyes: 1000 GBP for an adapter that is virtually impossible to build? You would be lucky if it cost five times that amount. And if the R&D has to be written off on the five they would manage to sell, the losses would run into the millions per adapter. I understand you used to be an expert at liquidating firms? It shows....

[andybarton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

• They are not well balanced like a M
  
• They are large, heavy beasts usually equipped with a zoom and I dont like them either.
  
• Wide aperture lenses that I am used to with Leica are not available today. There are a few fast Canon ones but these I am told do not have the image quality, nor are hand tuned as Leica does at full aperture.
  
• They are not as precise at focussing at lenses up to 90mm
  

.

 

• Balanced like an M is with a Visoflex, bellows and a lens...
   
  
• You don't have to put a zoom on them... Mr Canon doesn't come round and steal your first born if you put a prime on it...
   
  
• So, you wouldn't want a 35 Summilux or a 50 Summilux on your SLR then?
   
  
• Your last point is debatable - I have never had a problem focusing any of my lenses and seeing as how you haven't ever used one, repeating here-say isn't helpful to the debate, really.
  

 

 

 

Sorry, Frank.

 

I am not entering Frank-World any more.

 

I will leave you to it.

[jaapv]

I must amend a previous post. I would buy one. I would shrink-wrap it and sell it at Westlicht a few years later at a vast profit, it being the last product Leica ever made...

[40mm f/2]

There was a reason I got rid of my R with the Macro Apo-Elmarit 100mm: Bulk and weight. Same reason I did not get any C or N SLR. I am using a M9 with a 90mm Macro Elmar and a Viso II (less weight with straight finder).

The mirror was developed for film, but well implemented life view (i.e. more than a lousy LCD on the back) will make it obsolete. Wondering what the next Photokina will bring: a new viso or a new EVIL!

[stunsworth]

Easy 0.17% penetration into the 11.2Million DSLR high end system camera market for an adapter that costs £1000 plus £5000 for the M9

 

So you would expect to sell around 20,000 of the new Visios during the lifetime of the M10. Given annual sales of say 10,000 M10s, and a lifespan of say three to four years, that's total lifetime sales of 30-40,000 M10s.

 

That means you are expecting that around 50-65% of all M10 owners would buy your new Visio. Hand on heart Frank, do you really believe that over 50% of people who bought an M10 would buy a Visio?

 

Remember you also have to factor in those M10 users who have no interest in long lenses - which is one of the reasons many people buy into the M system to start with. So let's say out of those 30-40,000 M10 users only 20,000 are interested in long lenses or macro. That means you are expecting every single person who bought an M10 to also buy a Visio.

 

Sorry Frank, I just don't see it. Do you?

 

<edit>

 

I've just realised that you said that Visios would claim/replace 0.17% of the total sales of dSLRS. Is the 11,2 million dSLR figure you mention annual sales? If that's the case it's even worse since you'd be selling 20,000 of these Visios a year - or around 2 for every M10s sold.

[Guest BigSplash]

Steve all of the numbers are annual sales. I am saying the following:

1. Annual sales for the M8 was about 25000 in the first year, then 12000 then in year two then 8000 in year three (although roughly 2000 was sold the next year). This suggests a fast ramp a fast decay and an average of 12000 annually.
   
2. The M9 looks like again it will ramp up quickly and may I guess sustain volume sales due to it being FF but for how long.?
   
3. The 11.2MUnits is the quoted number of system DSLR's (which I take to mean high end and it includes the M). If you take the bumper firts year number of 25000 M9 sales it represents 0.2%
   
4. I do not see how Leica can survive if its cash cow M camera has a market driven life of 3 years and a market share that is not growing. My view is that they must gradually increase sales to 50,000 annually (which is still only 0.4% market penetration)
   
5. My belief is that of 50,000 M10 cameras 20,000 could enjoy a mirror housing adapter. However I agree certain things have to happen:
   1. 
      
   2. The M10 price needs to be reduced to a more affordable level (£3K) by making it more production worthy, and volume discounts from suppliers. This does NOT mean any reduction in quality I actually think it would improve.
      
   3. The Mirror adapter would need to be sold at about £1000...possibly at minimal profit, although complete DSLR's cost less than that.
      

[*]A strategy of this type allows the photographer the best of both the DSLR and RF world and it would be unique and differentiated, while capitalising on Leica's technical strength in RF. This will help lever more M10 sales, and that means more lens sales. Leica would be able to introduce Telephotos, macro lenses and even zoom which today is a segment that is NOT open to them.

[andybarton]

So, 40% of all the people who buy M10s are going to buy something to make it into a pseudo-SLR?

 

Unbelievable.

 

Where are Leica going to get the money to develop this? Where are they going to get the cashflow to make 50,000 units per year? They haven't got the cashflow to make the numbers they are making now! How many Leica Ms were sold in their heyday, in the early 60s, before the SLR came on stream?

 

Where are the 50,000 customers per year going to come from? Are there 40,000 individual customers on the waiting list for an M9 now?

 

We have been down this road so often that there are ruts in it. Your plans would ruin Leica within a year. But, do a business plan and send it to Herr Spiller and see what he thinks.

 

There really isn't anything more to say.

[stunsworth]

The M10 price needs to be reduced to a more affordable level (£3K) by making it more production worthy, and volume discounts from suppliers

 

Frank, you are assuming that there is no discounting at the moment. Personally I don't know whether there is or there isn't do you? If you don't then it seems odd to base your strategy on a guess.

 

Even if there are currently no discounts, do you thing that component discounts for someone producing a product in the very low tens of thousands per annum would allow Leica to reduce the cost of the camera by 50%?

[giordano]

A strategy of this type allows the photographer the best of both the DSLR and RF world

 

Bollocks. That strategy would offer the best of the RF world with a kludge to handle some - but by no means all - of the situations that the M itself cannot.

 

The best of the DSLR world includes autofocus; wide-angle zooms; wide-range zooms (e.g. 18-200mm); fast primes that are only surpassed by the best M lenses); tilt-shift lenses from 24mm up; and lots more that cannot be delivered via a reflex housing on the front of an M body. The only way to get the best of both worlds is to do what very many of us here have done: get both outfits.

[giordano]

Another fact worth dropping into your market analysis, Frank, is that all the Telyts that were sold in Visoflex mounts are now far behind the state of the art. Their optics and handling simply aren't in the same class as recent long lenses from Leica (the APO-Telyt-R series), Nikon and Canon, let alone recent Leica M lenses.

 

I know you're postulating a whole new line of autofocus auto-aperture Visoflex Telyts. But if my aunt had four wheels and a pole she'd be a tram.

[redbaron]

Frank, Darwin was right. Natural selection has wiped out the viso for good reasons. M users do NOT want autofocus, long tele or macro lenses. Putting those things on an M would be defying the laws of nature.

 

This is my final word on the matter for two reasons; what you suggest is utterly ridiculous. I have shot pro sports. Remember your tennis thread? No financial controller of any paper in the world would authorise the purchase of this Frankenstein, nor would any individual photographer.

 

The other reason is that I fear Bill is right. If you were serious about this you wouldn't be telling us, you would be talking to engineers, etc. and Leica.

 

Nature always wins, Frank.

[Guest BigSplash]

I have read Red Baron, Giordano, Stunsworth and Andy inputs ...and frankly I am shocked! You guys seem to be of the opinion that what is sold today or last year is a recipe for success tomorrow. Believe me technology can change things dramatically and I hope Leica management see that as both a threat and an opportunity to secure the Leica future.

 

Let me comment the various inputs that you have given:

Red Baron

• Nature always wins...I agree
  
• No financial controller would authorise the purchase of a frankenstein...really we are talking for a pro 2 off M10 and one Hi tech Viso plus some zoom and "APO Telyt R modified lenses" compared to the Canon or Nikon equivalent but without the superior Leica optics. Price should be cheaper as the designs at Leica basically exist, and the cost of making a M10 should be cheaper as volumes increase compared to today. Let's avoid comparing price and somehow believing that this is driven by cost...it is not, or should not be!
  

Giordano (John)

• I do not know who makes a 18mm to 200mm zoom lens that can deliver any reasonable level of quality (Please advise)
  
• Best DSLR's will offer tilt shift 24mm upwards as you suggest. I guess you are referring to lenses such as the PA- Curtagon -R f/4 35mm of old ....
  
  • Personally I see that as something architectural photographers may want, and they would probaly want it on a Linhoff! or Hasselblad
    
  • Basically I do not see the absence of such a lens within a Leica M10 / Next Gen Viso adapter being an issue at all.
    
  • It would lose virtually zero sales I think. ..if anyone sees this as a huge market please advise, I am intrigued.
    

Stunsworth (Steve)

• Am I aware of discounting currently..NO!.
  
  • The dealers still have a delinquent backlog, with clearly double ordering and frustrated clients.
    
  • Rumours suggest the backlog will clear (last I heard!) August / September..if that happens and that depends on Leica ability to ship the delinquency and new orders that come in...then I guess we may see some discounting, but my guess is not until after Christmas, as the festive season may drive new sales.
    

  [*]You suggest that I am proposing a 50% price reduction based on supplier cost reduction...I am NOT suggesting this at all! I am saying:

  • 
    
    • The £5K price for M9 should move towards a £3k retail price that is about where M8 was historically when it was introduced, and presumably was profitable for Leica and their retailers.
      
    • There is scope since 1977 to assume that Leica have learned how to produce the MDigital so actual production costs have dropped.
      
    • There clearly is an opportunity for further huge cost reductions for leica ( I have a list!) that would also improve quality.
      
    • If they achieve the cost reductions and lower price normally that drives extra volumes of demand that will progressively grow the annual shipments to 50KU annually ...here my asumption is that the Leica M is not just something for fanatical M users like us. I actually believe that correctly marketed many people beyond 0.2% market share would want and pay for a Leica M digital
      

Andy

You like to zero in that I say 40% of all people that buy M10. will buy a next gen Viso and that looks ridiculous you say.

I would counter that means:

• 20,000 Visos and 50,000 M10 sales and huge pull thru lens sales for the M
  
• The above is within a market where Leica offers a differentiated product
  
• The market size is 11,200, 000 units annually. so we are discussing 0.2% penetration increase for Leica.
  

In the businesses I have been involved with 0.2% improvement in the business penetration is not seen as impossible ...I wish my board would have seen it that way!

 

Andy I am moving towards pulling out of this debate as I think too many people have inflexible and highly biassed views.

[farnz]

Does anyone else see this as a 'slow-motion car crash thread' where you know you should look away and never turn back but for some unfathomable reason you just can't and you keep on looking and looking?

 

Pete.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[andybarton]

Pete

 

I have lost the will to live, which for someone in my position is not helpful. But, it's not for the first time.

 

It's inevitable given the blinkered intransigence of some parties, who refuse to listen to reason and logic.

[stunsworth]

Does anyone else see this as a 'slow-motion car crash thread' where you know you should look away and never turn back but for some unfathomable reason you just can't and you keep on looking and looking?

 

It's the main reason I've found myself contributing. The main proponent of the infamous piece of kit plucks figures out of thin air, has no attention to detail, and is obsessed to an unhealthy degree. All in all it's great fun - naughty but nice.