No DSLR solution below S2 line

[LVSBB6]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

[Advertisement]

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

[lct]

No question has been asked or answered about the 'R solution' in that interview IINW.

[adan]

2:30

 

Interviewer: Do you have any intention of releasing a reflex camera...maybe something to compete with the 5DMk2 or D700 or something of that sort?

 

Daniel: We don't have plans in that direction currently. Because Leica is maybe a big name but a small company. And so we have our M line, our S line, and the compact cameras, and we will concentrate on these systems.

 

Interviewer: What can you tell us about the mirrorless revolution? Is this something that interests you in any way?

 

Daniels: I think the mirrorless technology will, over a few years, will take over - eat away - from the DSLR market. Coming from the lower end of the product lines. But keep in mind that this (holding up M9) is a mirrorless camera as well.

[lct]

So nothing about the 'R solution' right?

[adan]

Depends on what one sees as an "R solution" - and how well one can read between the lines.

 

"We don't have any plans in (the direction of a DSLR like a D700/5D)."

 

"We have the M, the S, and the compact cameras and we will concentrate on these systems"

 

"Our 'mirrorless camera' is the M9."

 

Is there any "R solution" that is compatable with those statements?

[LVSBB6]

If R solution doesn't necessary be a DSLR, maybe a modified variation from M or S series?

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

...Is there any "R solution" that is compatable with those statements?

1- R to Pana adapter to be used on the next Panasonic EVIL

2- R mount on this EVIL plus a red dot eventually

[mooky]

Here, this is from Andreas' post #332 on page 17 in the Customer Forum under 'Photokina, your questions to Leica'. This is part of the Q&A session that occurred on Sept. 25. I think it's clear enough. But Leica needs someone to handle PR questions, and understand that when someone asks them (as in the mega-pixel video) about a DSLR from Leica, you say 'no', but then take the opportunity in hand to say that you are working on a solution for R lens users...LEICA!!!!,,,,IT'S NOT THAT COMPLICATED!!!!!!

 

We talked about the R-solution (it was the first topic as I know about the importance).

Stefan Daniel said "We are working on a solution" - so I hope I'm able to answer your questions with this.

 

The Leica management didn't say anything regarding time lines, Mr. Schopf several times pointed out that quality and keeping promises they give is most important for Leica.

 

I personally was impressed by several facts:

- That the new CEO and the owner of Leica as well as the whole product management took two hours of their time during the most important fair for the company

- That they several detailed explanations of how some of the past problems are caused

- The deep knowledge of Mr Schopf regarding technical details and the Leica products - give that he is CEO for four week

- How open they talked to us - and listened.

 

Regards

Andreas

[Wiggi]

Not to serve the still growing Full frame DSLR market will be a big strategic mistake in the future. That will be expensive for Leica.

[mooky]

Not to serve the still growing Full frame DSLR market will be a big strategic mistake in the future. That will be expensive for Leica.

 

After Leicas comment that they've received twice the orders/sales for M9's in a year that they thought they would - kind of makes one wonder what the market would be for a FF DSLR.

 

After all, they chose to put all the R eggs into the S2 basket which they knew wouldn't be a big seller. I still say they will need something other than a FF M camera to carry them into a consistent profit zone into the future. It's absolutely impossible now to follow any time-line until they get caught up with the M9 sales and all the lens orders - that would mean an unknown time-line for the R solution. It just seems that any expectations they had are completely out the window now - no matter what type of solution/hybrid/ camera time-line they may have had in mind.

 

It's so easy to see how the big M9ti design show raised more than a few Leica customer eyebrows, even if it didn't take away from the outstanding M production orders or R solution - the show production said "Look everyone! this is what we've been doing!"

[sfage]

Not to serve the still growing Full frame DSLR market will be a big strategic mistake in the future. That will be expensive for Leica.

 

I think that's why it's so confusing, for so many of us.

[giordano]

Not to serve the still growing Full frame DSLR market will be a big strategic mistake in the future. That will be expensive for Leica.

 

Not nearly as expensive as launching a camera that bombs in the full frame DSLR market.

[bill]

I think that's why it's so confusing, for so many of us.

 

No confusion here. They can't make money at it. The DSLR market is both saturated and declining; why jump into a leaky boat? There is absolutely no point in bringing to market a tick-box, me-too product; that has never been the Leica ethos.

 

Find a niche

Exploit it

Fill it

Repeat

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[andybarton]

 

After all, they chose to put all the R eggs into the S2 basket

 

They put exactly zero R eggs into the S2 basket. The S2 has nothing in common at all with the R, apart from the fact that it has a mirror. It's a completely different camera.

[chris_tribble]

I still feel that there'll be a solution to using R lenses which uses either live view or a EVF add on to the M10 . Imagine a full frame CMOS sensor camera which you could use with M lenses as a regular RF for wide through to 90 and (via an adaptor) with R lenses (or Canon / Nikon etc - why not?) where image viewing would be via the live-view or the EVF.. Manual focus + focus confirmation would be fine with this configuration...

 

This I'd consider... I'd keep the M9 but would consider getting rid of my Canon system to be able to use high quality telephoto on an M size / style body. When you think about it it would be an electronic equivalent (but so much less clunky) to the Visoflex...

 

No need to develop a (dead in the water?) DSLR that way... Win, win?

[pgk]

I use a Canon 5D2 and have used, amongst other none Canon lenses, several R series lenses on it. Out of these some showed their age - the designs were old and whilst by on means poor lenses, distortions and aberrations showed up on the 22MPixel FF sensor. And some of the wide-angle designs cannot easily be fitted to the 5D2 due to mirror clearance issues. Some remain excellent lenses though but by no means all are really worth adapting on optical quality alone.

 

Which brings me to my point. Just how many R series lenses are REALLY worth using on an expensive full frame dSLR? That is to say, just how many are there out there which are not only as good as other manufacturer's lenses, but are actually significantly better and are thus worth putting on a high MPixel dSLR. I suspect that the answer is that there is a 'relatively' small number. Of these, far from all would be put on an R solution should it become available, so the numbers for whom Leica might cater are not high.

 

So to back up Bill's post, I agree with him that its highly unlikely that Leica can make money with an R solution. If the DMR was so good AND profitable surely it was a potentially updatable and adaptable solution which could be modified and re-used? The fact that this hasn't happened should indicate the viability of an R solution.

 

No doubt there will be many who will be horrified and angered at my posting such outrageous comments but surely, being absolutely OBJECTIVE about it, why is a solution still demanded when inevitably, as time goes on, there are less and less potential purchasers of a solution, and it becomes less and less economically viable?

[dickgrafixstop]

What's the big deal? So Leica can't make (or doesn't want to) a DSLR solution and appears to be leaving R glass users hanging in the wind. With a perfectly acceptable solution for most of those users - a Nikon or a Canon full frame with appropriate adapters - what are they going to do? Those precious R lenses are not going to provide autofocus so Leica is going to build an in-body autofocus DSLR? How's that working for Pentax or Sony? Take the "S" to

a computer drafting program and duplicate at 80% size? Ooops, no autofocus. Maybe an

adapter s-r and only use the sweet spot of the sensor? Maybe a pricing problem but more of a problem to find a target audience. Mirrorless? Yea, right, but still no autofocus. You'd be better off with a panasonic m4/3 - all the "modern" features plus "leica" quality ( as proven by the c-lux, d-lux, v-lux, digilux and whatever) - at half the price and all the features of those cameras.

Other than providing an opportunity to piss and moan about being "abandoned", those loyal Leica R fans ought to be stockpiling film while it's still available, using the R as it was designed, and recognize that regardless of "image quality", "durability", or anything else, the R is a photographic version of the Edsel and is a dead horse.

Leica would be better off spending money on developing a line of lenses for Canon and/or Nikon - a trick out of the Zeiss playbook - either of which make more bodies in a week than Leica can make in a year. Talk about a market.........

[andybarton]

Leica cannot make lenses for Canon or Nikon for licencing reasons, as discussed on this forum only this week.

 

Further, a m4/3 is, in no way, of "Leica" quality.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[andybarton]

If the DMR was so good AND profitable surely it was a potentially updatable and adaptable solution which could be modified and re-used? The fact that this hasn't happened should indicate the viability of an R solution.

 

 

The DMR was not made by Leica, but by Imacon. As soon as they were bought by Hasselblad, that was the end of the DMR as a product.

 

With Leica's knowledge learned since the DMR was developed, they _could_ develop a DMRII in house, but the costs of doing so would in no way justify the return. And it couldn't be full frame.

 

Your question about the R lenses is a good one. I would suggest that the 28 Elmarit, 50 Summicron, 80 Summilux, 90 Summicron ASPH and anything longer than 135 (obviously) are as near as good as their M equivalents (if there is one) as to make no difference. The 60 and 100 Macro-Elmarits are outstanding lenses, especially when you consider their age.

 

YMMV, of course

[rosuna]

Depends on what one sees as an "R solution" - and how well one can read between the lines.

 

"We don't have any plans in (the direction of a DSLR like a D700/5D)."

 

"We have the M, the S, and the compact cameras and we will concentrate on these systems"

 

"Our 'mirrorless camera' is the M9."

 

Is there any "R solution" that is compatable with those statements?

 

 

1. The M camera will evolve incorporating a CMOS sensor and live view capabilities. It is a matter of time, even if Leica is not pursuing it actively at this moment (and I assume they are).

 

2. The M system plus R adapter will be the "R solution".

 

3. The points 1 and 2 are compatible with a classic line of M cameras, with optical viewfinder and rangefinder (and CMOS and Livew View) and a different line with some kind of electronic viewfinder (sharing the M mount).

 

That is compatible, consistent with the trends in the market, efficient in the use of resources, etc.

 

I also believe the mirrorless concept will take over - eat away - from the DSLR market, but it will be really fast. Olympus, Panasonic and Samsung are abandoning the reflex systems. Sony is trying to figure out how the preserve their APS-C reflex cameras bringing something different. Canon and Nikon will do something soon (maybe next year). The Panasonic GH2 has a superfast contrast-based AF system (even faster than many phase detection system of reflex cameras), and Fuji has developed a sensor with phase-detection "pixels"... 1,4 MP electronic viewfinders are spreading out. The trend is clear and this is starting to accelerate.

 

Leica already has a mirrorless platform, the M system. They don't need another one, or another reflex system (they have the S). I agree with Mr. Daniel: Leica has a perfect collection of systems (M, S, X) for further developments, evolution and competition. They don't need to complicate the portfolio adding new mounts, etc. They just need improvements and development of those already existing lines. They have time because Leica don't need a revolution. Those changes can be implemented step by step, when the technologies are mature.

 

I think the central problem regarding any R solution is not a new "system" but a 24x36 CMOS based technology developed by Leica or a partner.