Should Leica introduce a M8.3?

[Guest BigSplash]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My belief is that it is likely that the M9 is as costly to produce as an M8.2 or M8 despite the larger sensor. I say that as the older sensor is likely to be older technology and therefore more expensive plus there are several cost reduction elements to a M9 compared to the M8. I would point to No frame counter / battery window, No plated chrome ..just high tech paint, No saphire protective glass (M8.2), slower shutter speed on M8.2 and M9. The added functionality such as manual lens recognition is firmware and once R&D have implemented this there is no cost impact. I would add that M9 has presumably benefited from product enginnering knowledge gained during the 3 years of M8 production.

 

If the above is true I wonder why Leica do not introduce a M8.3 that cuts the cost to produce in a similar way that M9 was realised (ie as per above). They could use a smaller sensor with latest technology. Finally they could position the M8.3 as a low entry model with crop factor (like Canon do with 50DII) and then upgrade M9 towards a M10 as a FFrame improved product.

 

I hope I am not the only person who sees the opportunity and indeed need for a low cost item that uses M lenses and is based on M8. ..say at a price of £3000 .

[ishkra]

I hope I am not the only person who sees the opportunity and indeed need for a low cost item that uses M lenses and is based on M8...

 

it would be great....but i think in Solms they don't know the meaning of the word "low cost"

[Advertisement]

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

[WestMichigan]

Ishra,

I think there is incredible truth behind your statement "They don't know the meaning of "low cost". My own take is the complete reason they 'Don't Know' is that Solms 'Can't Afford' to know how to be 'Low Cost'. As I recall, Leica attempted to play the 'Low-er Cost' card with the C series Rangefinders & Lenses and it literally Killed the M series. The only reason there was an M Series Film Camera for Leica to Take to the Digital Frontier was due to the Management at Leica Canada successfully arguing to revive the M and ship the production line equipment to Canada.

As for a 'down market' Digital M, I don't know whether there even exists the economies of scale to achieve any signifigant savings by reviving or reusing previous generations of sensor designs, let alone if a big enough scale of market to sell the camera to exists to recoup engineering costs, production line building costs, and to 'afford' the incremental decrease in M9 sales it would cause.

 

I'd definitely buy one!

100% Lock on that and zero hyperbole, but I'm not exactly Leica's core market segment!

Richard in Michigan

 

 

it would be great....but i think in Solms they don't know the meaning of the word "low cost"

[Guest BigSplash]

Ishra,

I think there is incredible truth behind your statement "They don't know the meaning of "low cost". My own take is the complete reason they 'Don't Know' is that Solms 'Can't Afford' to know how to be 'Low Cost'. As I recall, Leica attempted to play the 'Low-er Cost' card with the C series Rangefinders & Lenses and it literally Killed the M series. The only reason there was an M Series Film Camera for Leica to Take to the Digital Frontier was due to the Management at Leica Canada successfully arguing to revive the M and ship the production line equipment to Canada.

As for a 'down market' Digital M, I don't know whether there even exists the economies of scale to achieve any signifigant savings by reviving or reusing previous generations of sensor designs, let alone if a big enough scale of market to sell the camera to exists to recoup engineering costs, production line building costs, and to 'afford' the incremental decrease in M9 sales it would cause.

 

I'd definitely buy one!

100% Lock on that and zero hyperbole, but I'm not exactly Leica's core market segment!

Richard in Michigan

 

There has been on this forum a variety of inputs from ex Leica executives that on one hand have suggested that the Leica CL (Film) low cost camera produced by Minolta was a huge much needed revenue / cash generator...on the other hand others have suggested that it was a P&L killer as M camera sales suffered. It seems to be a consistent message that Leica Canada was a savior for the P&L at that time.

 

My view is that times have changed and we are now in a digital era, with a company that makes a bunch of money from the very special Leica M lenses. We have been told that

1. They expected to make one lens sale per camera body but they got the forecast wrong and the number is actually THREE per body. A body at £5000 plus a single lens at say £2500 average is a £7500 sale....if the reality is actually £5000 + 3 X £2500 then we are talking £12500 that is enjoyed by Solms!!
   
2. The Summarit lens line up is NOT selling at the rate of the more expensive lenses. Here I think it comes down to pricing and market positioning compared to the competition for lenses that amateurs will want at an affordable price point. What I see is Leica selling fabulous Summarit lenses at Leica high end prices albeit at a level that is cheaper than its ASPH / APO equivalent. Surely the question is how does that become competitive against the consumer end of Nikon & Canon offering.
   

IMHO When I look at Canon or Nikon I see a huge range of lenses and bodies to fit all price ranges. Let's be honest the Pro cameras and the Pro lenses from these companies are actually more expensive than Leica M yet they have successfully captured an image as being low cost etc due to their low end offering......I would hope that Leica see this as an opportunity!

[pico]

(A) My belief is that it is likely that the M9 is as costly to produce as an M8.2 or M8 despite the larger sensor.

[...]

(Z) I hope I am not the only person who sees the opportunity and indeed need for a low cost item that uses M lenses and is based on M8. ..say at a price of £3000 .

 

How did you get from A to Z?

 

There are Leica camera wannabes, and Leica Company wannabes. Thank goodness the later are impossible. It makes for fun fiction.

Edited December 12, 2010 by pico

[andybarton]

I hope I am not the only person who sees the opportunity and indeed need for a low cost item that uses M lenses and is based on M8. ..say at a price of £3000 .

 

The M8 is dead. Long live the M9.

 

Let's get real here for a moment. They can't make enough lenses to satisfy demand now. The M8.x is now available, mint, at "affordable" prices. Together with M9 sales, this means that used lens prices have gone way up, as demand for any M lens goes up. The used M8 IS your entry level digital M. For one who professes to understand Leica, you really have no understanding at all.

 

How would the introduction of an M8.3 help Leica? By cannibalising M9 sales? Leica have no competition. Any "cheap" Leica sale is one that stops the sale of a real Leica. And, why would anyone consider that trying to compete with Canon and Nikon is a good idea?

 

We have been here so often with these flights of fancy...

Edited December 12, 2010 by andybarton

[redbaron]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The M8 is dead. Just like the R9, Visoflex and M6.

[earleygallery]

We often see people calling for 'budget' Leica stuff, lenses and cameras.

 

Leica have tried it with the Summarits and D3 (a relatively cheap DSLR). The D3 bombed, and whilst Summarits are easy to come by you can't buy find a new Summilux for love nor money.

 

Doesn't that tell you something?

 

Cheaper Leica's are available, secondhand.

[hoppyman]

Frank I don't follow your reasoning at all but in any case this is entirely academic of course.

 

Personally I'm not convinced by your arguments, numbers and assumptions but that is simply personal opinion. No-one outside of Leica Camera has all of the facts in any event.

 

However if a company with some backing and expertise assesses the situation differently, the M mount is available for use. Neither Leica Camera nor any other manufacturer is yet to agree with you

 

Entirely speculative; I expect that a used M9 will be the low cost entry point when the M10 becomes available (maybe in two years based on product cycles????)

[bill]

For one who professes to understand Leica, you really have no understanding at all...

 

Amen.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[farnz]

Frank, my dear, I don't give a damn.

 

Pete.

(Apologies to Rhett Butler)

Edited December 13, 2010 by farnz

[jaapv]

I think it is a brilliant idea - only you haven't thought it through to its logical consequence - to get a real el- cheapo M camera to the market Leica should use an el-cheapo sensor,like 8 mm?

[eleskin]

Last time I checked My M8 was alive with over 70,000 exposures taken!

 

Just being funny!

[richam]

They could use a smaller sensor with latest technology.

 

The major cost of the M8 or M9 is the custom sensor. The economics of sensors dictates that prices are very heavily dependent on the size of the production run. If you're proposing a new custom sensor, it would likely be more expensive than the current M8 and M9 sensors due to a small production run, making your proposed M8.3 more expensive than the M9. Even a new, small production run of the original M8 sensor would likely drive the costs past the M9. You can't use a garden variety DSLR sensor in the M because of the lens to sensor plane distance. If you want a lower priced Leica with a relatively common DLSR type sensor, get the X1.

[tbarker13]

It really is a pity that a cheaper camera isn't doable. And I'm still not convinced that something won't be possible down the road. (I mean, once upon a time they said it wasn't even possible to make a digital rangefinder. But someone figured out a way).

 

The steep price of entry to the Leica digital camera world is a significant barrier for many potential shooters. Relying on second-hand cameras is a rough way for a company to attract new users. But I guess that's just one of the hazards of being a niche player.

[andybarton]

Leica have relied on the used market for entry level cameras for most of their long life.

[earleygallery]

However if a company with some backing and expertise assesses the situation differently, the M mount is available for use. Neither Leica Camera nor any other manufacturer is yet to agree with you

 

This is an excellent point. There's nothing to stop one of the massive Japanese companies from making a cheaper digital M, so - apart from Epson - why haven't they?

 

On that point, why hasn't Frank mentioned the Epson as a cheaper alternative? It's not sold by the bucketload has it.

[andybarton]

If the market were there, Cosina (through the Zeiss brand) would have filled it.

 

Let's face it, very few people want a manual focus camera any more and a tiny percentage of them want a rangefinder. People want gizmos. They want <£500 dSLRs that make them think that they're pros. They want bridge cameras, with fast autofocus. They want point and shoots that take a reasonable photograph - there are hundreds of cheap cameras that fill these real needs.

 

It's worth remembering that rangefinder users are an odd breed - and a miniscule market. If you hang around with likeminded people on forums such as this one, it's easy to think that everyone uses one. Then, take a walk outside, and see the truth.

 

How many other manual focus cameras are there on the market now? I can't think of any - certainly not in the "35mm" sector.

 

<blue in the face> Leica know what they are doing </blue in the face>

Edited December 13, 2010 by andybarton

[AbbeyFoto]

...The added functionality such as manual lens recognition is firmware...

 

This seems to me to be a possibility and should not greatly upset sales of the M9. The full sized sensor and inbuilt IR filtering still make the M9 worth the premium over second hand M8s.

 

Chris

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jaapv]

Is seems that the M8 electronics are too limited to add this piece of software..