Should Leica introduce a M8.3?

[tbarker13]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I wonder what would happen if I started a thread about Nikon's new digital rangefinder. It will have a 30 mb sensor and autofocus.

 

What does that mean? Are you suggesting that this thread is just an attack on Leica? Or that we should be grateful that Leica, at least, is making a digital rangefinder?

 

If it is the former, I don't get where you are coming from. I've probably been the most critical of Leica in this thread. But if you think I am anti-Leica, you are are just being a bit overly protective. If I had to pick one of my cameras to keep, it would be a Leica. I LOVE LEICA.

 

But I do believe that it is every consumer's right and responsibility to say what they think about the things they buy. If a company is willing to take my money for its product, they should be willing to hear what I have to say about that product. Of course they don't have to agree with me. They can think I'm crazy. I'm sure some do.

 

Here is a fun little story about the company known as Twitter. I wrote a profile last year about its creator, who happens to be from the city I live in. While I was researching the story, he talked about how the company hated the term "tweet" being used to describe posts on the social networking site. At one point, internal company policy actually forbid the use of the term by employees.

But rank and file users loved it. Wouldn't let go of it. Eventually, the execs at Twitter relented and adopted the term, which has become synonymous with the site.

Sometimes the average user does have better instincts than the CEO or, in this case, the founder.

[redbaron]

What does that mean? Are you suggesting that this thread is just an attack on Leica? Or that we should be grateful that Leica, at least, is making a digital rangefinder?

 

It doesn't mean either. Is it true, or not?

 

What will happen to Leica's share price in the short term. If it drops even half a percent on the strength of this rumour, I could make a fortune.

 

I don't actually disagree with you about voicing your opinion, but remember that Leica will probably give our musings the credit they are due.

[Advertisement]

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

[hoppyman]

Tim I just provided facts (as with the original subject) since you mentioned this. It has arisen previously and there have been plenty of these discussions on the original subject too, of course.

Speaking entirely for myself, I learn the most from examples and whatever verifiable information that becomes available in these discussions.

[tbarker13]

The thing is, this is one of the topics (a cheaper M) that's always going to come up. And we ought to be happy that it does - as it suggests there's still an unsatisfied appetite out there for digital rangefinders.

 

I guess I really only got involved in this thread because I don't understand why we get so annoyed when people offer an opinion about what they'd like to see the company do. I would wager that there is not a single member of this forum who hasn't done the same thing, at one time or another, with some product they've purchased.

 

I routinely field calls from newspaper readers who have opinions about the way we've played stories. I don't think I've run across one of them who thinks they're qualified to be the publisher.

 

And I would never dismiss a reader with such a statement, despite the fact that my paper has been operating successfully for more than 130 years. I'd also never suggest to a reader that we only care about the opinions of shareholders. While I don't always agree with what these customers say, I still listen. And sometimes I learn.

[lct]

The thing is, this is one of the topics (a cheaper M) that's always going to come up. And we ought to be happy that it does - as it suggests there's still an unsatisfied appetite out there for digital rangefinders...

Agree but the question is to know whether the niche of cheaper digital Ms is not occupied by second hand M8s already.

Even Epson don't look sure if this market is "commercially viable".

http://imgur.com/HhPNp.png

[bill]

Couple of points... My reference to ''the Colonies" - with a capital C - was to the original ones in the Americas only.

 

Secondly, Leica is well aware of the value and usefulness of social media; I and others associated with the Charity Book worked closely with Leica on a Twitter campaign. Google "Leica for AICR" or follow the link to my presentation on the subject and you will see what I mean.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[NZDavid]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hmm, at first I thought what a totally daft suggestion. Not to offend M8 owners -- the M8 was Leica's first foray into serious digital cameras. That in itself was a formidable achievement. But it had its flaws. The M9 is what the M8 should have been to begin with: a "full-frame" digital rangefinder.

 

But does everyone actually want full frame? Perhaps not. But the market must be tiny. And making two side-by-side models with different sensors would surely add unnecessary complexity -- and expense -- to the production process.

 

OTOH, perhaps borrowing a few features from the M8 models -- sapphire screen, top-plate LCD -- for the next model M would win some support?

[tbarker13]

....

Secondly, Leica is well aware of the value and usefulness of social media...;

 

 

That's fantastic to hear. And what I would expect to hear. I guess I rest assured in my belief that the company is, indeed, listening to the things we are saying here and elsewhere. (what they do with that information is, of course, another matter.)

[Guest BigSplash]

Thanks for this it is well reasoned and while I do not agree with you I understand the points that you are making.

Let me comment.

First I think that the idea of building a Audemar Piaget type product that is hand built, and in their case using hand matched components is what Leica is doing. They then adjust by hand and then calibrate by hand. Rolex do things differently ..they have a modern high volume production line which means low cost, high consistent quality yet they have manged to maintain their image and price. In the case of Rolex they have the Tudor brand also that is basically the same watch but with a less prestigious name.

 

My suggestion to Leica is to go the Rolex route...Specifically redesign the guts of a Leica to make it easier to produce in volume and in the process improve the quality, produceability and make it more rugged in the field. ...oh and much cheaper to produce. This has NOTHING to do with the price of an improved M9 (M10?)

 

My other suggestion is to use the same production line for a cheaper variant of the top model M10. This does NOT have to be a bad camera with a RF that is degraded as per the Leica CL. My proposal is to use the M8 specification as a basis. People have repeatedly suggested here that the super large sensor of the M9 is the most expensive part of the camera so use a modern M8 sized sensor (smaller chip size and smaller Micro prism screen).

 

Such a strategy would achieve a none competing product to the M10, would drive higher volumes down a single production line and therefore reduce costs, would provide an entry level vehicle for new comers to Leica. It would not give the impression of an El Cheapo M10 any more than the Rolex Oyster Datejust in S/S degrades the more expensive Rolex gold Yachtmaster.

 

We talk a lot about the history of Leica here and yes we can learn from history, but we should do so with caution.

First I disagree with Jaapv that Leica management always know best......They missed the SLR takeoff, then they missed TTL light measurement revolution, they patented AF but did not use it and sold their patent, they went through a phase of believeing differentiation could be achieved via gold plating their cameras and covering these with luxury leather,. Leica management until recently dismissed digital photography as not for serious images and consequently were very late into the market..Today's Leica management seem to be much better but they misjudged the forecast for the M9 and its lenses by 3X.

 

Second we are in a new era dominated by a clear desire from those that buy cameras for a quality, small system camera that is digital. Some people will pay £5000 but others will I suspect want something between the X1 (£1400+£250) which is selling well and the £5000 top of the line model. Think gold yachtmaster (£15000) and S/Steel Datejust (£3000).

 

Third in an era of digital cameras significant production volumes are needed to drive down the costs via the learning curve, volume pricing from suppliers etc. The fact is that a mechanical camera is less dependant on yileds, learning curve, supplier pricing.

 

I don't necessarily agree with anything Frank is saying, but neither do I go along with much of what his (usual) detractors are uttering, or at least the way they put it down. It does not necessarily follow that Leica do actually know what they're doing, and questioning their policies is a perfectly reasonable thing to in a forum like this.

 

Anyway . . . the M9 is, for many people, simply too expensive to buy, and its successor is likely to be even more costly if it incorporates any significant technological advantages. The idea of a lower-priced entry level model is appealing on paper, but -sadly for Frank - I think it's not viable because those members of the public who are interested in having a Leica associate the brand with the highest quality which inevitably means the highest price levels. In this sector of marketing, who tries to sell the best at a reduced price? Is Mr Paiget ever going to say "Hey, folks, look at our new budget range of inheritable watches!", or is Mr Breitling likely to announce that the new Economy-Navitimer is nearly as good as the original but now 35% cheaper? I think not.

 

To reduce the Leica's price drastically means either curtailing the specification (and it's actually pretty basic already) or reducing the quality (which from anecdotal evidence seems less than totally consistant right now). A new Leica will continue to be beyond the reach of most people, which is partly how the brand acquired and now retains much of its mystique.

 

The marketing history of Leica (and other very-top-of-the-market products) demonstrates clearly that those who wish to own but can't afford a new one are unlikely to buy "economy" versions in large numbers, even if they do exist. Consider the relationship between sales of - say - the models IIf and IIIf, both identical in quality and the former able to be brought up to the specification of its "big brother" at a later date. As for the Leica CL, I recall that we sold very few of them either to existing Leica owners or to those who wanted to own an M series model. The buyers were usually people who liked the idea of an upmarket compact 35mm camera and to whom the brand actually meant very little. And whatever the maker's orginal intent, the M2 was never actually sold as an economy version of the M3; its viewfinder set-up inevitably identified it as having a different target market and the price differential was relatively small.

 

So, with regrets to Frank, I don't think Leica should bring out an "M8.3". But that doesn't mean I'm opposed to his idea, just convinced that on the basis of historical precedent it simply wouldn't work out for them.

[jaapv]

One problem - nobody with a vestige of good taste would be caught dead wearing a Rolex....

[redbaron]

Two more problems; there is no such thing as an Audemars Piaget. It is Audemars Piguet. And a Tudor is not a Rolex.

[Guest BigSplash]

Only if they are run by brain-dead monkeys. In today's world of social networking and social media, smart companies have employees and services paid to monitor Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, blogs, message forums, etc. to keep a finger on the pulse of customers.

 

I think some of you guys don't realize how valuable your opinions really are on this stuff. Never before in our history have companies been able to learn so much (without having to pay for expensive focus groups, etc.) about what their customers think.

And if enough customers are thinking something, companies tend to look for ways to do address it.

 

Tim this is so correct......When you buy many quality products such as a Mercedes tehy send you a questionnaire after a month and phone you after a year to see what you like and do not like. They have focus groups etc.

[redbaron]

They're pissing in your pocket, Frank. It's part of the sales plan. Their cars are designed by experts.

[jaapv]

Two more problems; there is no such thing as an Audemars Piaget. It is Audemars Piguet. And a Tudor is not a Rolex.

And a gentleman would carry a Blancpain. On a slim golden chain. Wristwatches are so plebeian. The chauffeur may wear a Rolex though

[pgk]

Whilst I can clearly see that Leica may well find comments and suggestions regarding their products on fora like this one to be very useful, there is a massive difference between suggestions regarding the products that they produce or may consider modifying and their entire product strategy/business philosophy.

 

Given that only Leica actually KNOW their production costs, speculation about what they should produce in order to remain competitive may be interesting/irritating (delete according to viewpoint) but remains just that - pure speculation. Personally I can't see how Leica could produce a smaller sensor M camera at a significant saving over the M9 - essentially the only real difference would be the sensor cost and I'd doubt that would be substantial enough to drop the price by 40%. Just my opinion of course (and not worth a lot to Leica I'm afraid).

[Guest BigSplash]

Whilst I can clearly see that Leica may well find comments and suggestions regarding their products on fora like this one to be very useful, there is a massive difference between suggestions regarding the products that they produce or may consider modifying and their entire product strategy/business philosophy.

 

Given that only Leica actually KNOW their production costs, speculation about what they should produce in order to remain competitive may be interesting/irritating (delete according to viewpoint) but remains just that - pure speculation. Personally I can't see how Leica could produce a smaller sensor M camera at a significant saving over the M9 - essentially the only real difference would be the sensor cost and I'd doubt that would be substantial enough to drop the price by 40%. Just my opinion of course (and not worth a lot to Leica I'm afraid).

 

I would hope that Leica price to value. The Canon 1DS MKIII is £5000 so the top of the line M model is able to withstand a similar price.

 

I agree that we do not know the actual production cost of a Leica M9....however we can see from the recently reported financial half year report selling M9's and 3X the lenses that they forecast has allowed the company to drive up inventory levels, splash out on R&D etc which suggests that they are doing currently very well.

 

Elsewhere on this thread someone suggested that the sensor alone costs Leica £2500 each...if that is correct then it must be the world's most expensive chip in small to medium scale production! Frankly I would be amazed that Leica management would accept that level of cost.

 

On the other hand if the M9 chip was £150 and a cost reduced M8 chip was £60 then that would alter the financial model totally, and these numbers it seems to me would be more in line with reality !!! I speak as someone who spent 14 years in the chip business. I also know that if the M9 annual production volumes drop then chip prices will go through the roof, and be accompanied by demands for minimum batch orders etc. It makes sense for Leica to use every trick in the book to achieve two goals:

1) Drive up volumes to achieve high yields and low costs of the chips

2) Maintain the momentum that they have enjyed throughout 2010 for the M9 that has had a knock on effect in lens sales. ..If that can be helped with a low cost model great.

 

Perhaps this is venturing into the area of business strategy of leica, however there is a relationship at the product level, or do people see no relationship at all?

[richam]

On the other hand if the M9 chip was £150 and a cost reduced M8 chip was £60 then that would alter the financial model totally, and these numbers it seems to me would be more in line with reality !!! I speak as someone who spent 14 years in the chip business.

Did your experience include sensor chips with micro-lenses that would accommodate M lenses? And in very small production runs? If not, your very low cost estimates are way off and not at all close to reality.

[AbbeyFoto]

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

 

Jaap

 

Thanks for this information. This helps me understand the absence of manual lens selection on the M8.

 

I can add the more I use the M8 the happier I am with it; tis a pity this feature cannot be added but I am learning to work around it.

 

Chris

[scsambrook]

One problem - nobody with a vestige of good taste would be caught dead wearing a Rolex....

 

Well . . . maybe you'd like to say that when standing in front of me

 

But seriously, I think the Rolex Oyster Perpetual has quite a bit in common with the classic 35mm Leica M cameras. It's rugged and reliable (usually), it meets the need (as opposed to the fantasy-dreams) of most people, it's long-lived, it's pleasing to look at (mmm at least, the case is) . . . and it's too expensive.

 

I say: Quit knocking Frank and the Rolex Oyster !

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jaapv]

Depends on your size