Should Leica introduce a M8.3?

[Guest BigSplash]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In my opinion there are some interesting comments above but I am not sure they stand scrutiny. My observations:

 

Entry Level Leica should be a used camera

> I know that this is the Leica party line but why should it be the case? Is it really impossible for Leica to make a cost reduced M camera that is retail priced at say £3000. (The X1 is actually selling at £1395 plus £250 for the viewfinder and that camera comes with a lens included!)

 

> We are told that Canon total camera production volumes are not in the ballpark of Leica and I agree. However let us not mix up the presumably very high production volumes of Canon EOS550D (£649), EOS 60D (£849), EOSS 7D (£1199) with other Canon's such as the high end EOS 5D Mk II (£1749) and EOS 1DS (£4999) which are the full frame cameras and are more akin to a M9. The high end represents 11% of the camera market and Leica enjoy only 2.5% by unit volume of that market. The point is that Canon and Nikon are not that far ahead of Leica in terms of unit volumes of high end cameras and do not have an insurmounatble advantage in production costs for this type of camera PROVIDED the camera is built for ease of production, which today it is probaly not!

 

> The demographics of the camera market is changing in a number of ways and is likely to benefit Leica:

> The high end camera market is enjoying the fastest growth

> Leica buyers are apparently increasingly becoming younger, wealthy professional people and are less and less becoming the older generation that have moved from Leica film to digital M's. They like the quality of a Leica, and its small size

> Clearly some professional photographers are also moving away from DSLR and trying out the M8 and M9 as a smaller, less bulky alternative that yields top quality images.

 

Competition appear reluctant to enter the RF market

> Well I think I agree with that reluctance given the fact that Leica dominate the RF market (95% share I believe) and are presumably down the learning curve for DIGITAL RF.

> My view is that Leica would do well to protect and grow the niche that they currently own. To do that they need something beyond a M9 camera that retails at £5000, that offers interchangeable lenses, and addresses the system needs of photographers. They need to be able to achieve sustainable volumes and have a camera build approach that is more Rolex than Patek Philippe, but not Swatch.

 

Buying public want Gimmicks such as Auto Focus, and lots of buttons

Who says that? It is clear that Auto focus, and auto aperture demands that motors are built into the lens and that means that the lens is much bigger. Surely it is not just we die hards on the forum that uniquely like the M camera for the benefit of using Prime lenses within a small size?

 

Introducing a M8.3 would be a M9 / M10 killer

I think that there is room for both to coexist. The argument is made that Leica CL killed Leica M sales (although many suggest that Leica CL saved the company) however both of these cameras used the same leses and same film. The M8.3 could be a 4/3 sensor and M9 is Full Frame ...right there is a major difference that many people would opt for the FF product. The M10 potentially could have Focus Verification and higher ISO ...plus the M9 has various features such as manual lens selection, bracketing etc. On that basis I question that M8.3 would be a threat to the M9 or its eventual successor........anymore than the Canon is ruining EOS 1DS MkIII and now MkIV sales by having a EOS 5D MkII product at £2250 cheaper. Both cameras are even Full frame!

 

Frankly in my view the real challenge that Leica has is how to make their M digital cameras easier to produce in the factory.

[jaapv]

It really is beyond me why anybody should think that Leica employees are boneheaded nitwits that should be educated through a forum.

Do you really think anybody with just the slightest knowledge about cameras cannot come up with these thoughts? Is it not just possible that they were evaluated and found wanting by real experts in the field e.g. Leica management ?

[Advertisement]

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

[scsambrook]

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.

[richam]

I'll emphasize my previous post. It's the SENSOR! The lens to film plane distance of the Leica M is shorter than a DSLR since there's no mirror. This called for a special Kodak sensor using micro-lens technology on the M8 and another for the M9. These are complex sensors that are difficult to build; the price is highly dependent on volume production. Garden variety DSLR sensors do not need the micro-lens and are produced in volume for many DSLRs. You can't use one with Leica M lenses; it won't work.

 

If a potential M8.3 sensor costs Leica £2500 apiece due to short production runs, that rules out Leica selling a whole camera for for £3000. Fiddling around with a few bells and whistles on the current M line would not provide any meaningful cost savings.

 

Leica ventured into common DSLR-type sensors with the Digilux 3. But this required special lenses. It was not a success. If you want to use your M lenses on a digital Leica, you have to pay up!

[lct]

Always dreamed to have a digital CL but Santa Pana will bring an EVIL instead i'm afraid.

[spylaw4]

Frank should read the article in the latest LFI !

Food for thought IMHO.

[redbaron]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This is not an AGM, Frank.

[tbarker13]

I never understand these arguments made by people who seem to believe that Leica knows what's best for Leica. And that we mere mortals should never question it.

I've yet to see any real proof that Leica has figured out exactly what Leica is these days.

 

Let's remember for a moment that we are talking about a company that hasn't exactly been thriving. Leica was far too slow to embrace digital and nearly paid for that hesitancy with its corporate life. Only very recently have its financials given us any reason to hope it might actually survive long enough to make an M10 or whatever might come next.

 

So forgive me if I don't have complete faith in the caretakers of this company that I have grown to love over the past two decades.

[tbarker13]

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

 

Unfortunately, times have changed. And used cameras simply aren't as valuable in this respect as they once were.

I was out shooting this weekend with my M2, a camera made 30-40 years ago. I have no doubt it creates images that will be just as good as anything I could have done with a brand new MP, costing 8 times more than I paid for my user M2.

 

But today's cameras are as much computer as they are camera. And we all know the life expectancy of computers is pretty short.

There's just no guarantee that used M8s will fill the same niche once filled by used M2s, M3s, etc.

I certainly hope they do. While I'll agree that rangefinders represent a niche market, I still like to believe there are potential users out there who just need to be introduced to the brand and concept.

[bill]

Nobody is saying that Leica are perfect... but neither do they need to be treated like simpletons. The equation is simple - ownership of a Leica confers neither talent nor the right to tell Dr. Kaufmann how to run his company.

 

Remember - free advice is worth exactly what you pay for it; I am reminded of the three men who started a company - the first puts up £1m of his own money. ''I shall be Chief Executive'' he declares. The second invests £500k . ''I shall be Managing Director'' says he. The third chips in fifty quid...

 

''What can I be?'' he says.

 

The others think for a moment, then respond.

 

''You can be our Sexual Consultant'' they tell him.

 

''What does that mean?'' he asks.

 

''It means that when we want your f****ing input we'll ask for it...''

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[tbarker13]

I'm not sure I understand how you can take someone's desire for Leica to introduce an entry-level camera and equate that to treating Leica managers as simpletons.

It is a fair question in a world where most manufacturers are offering progressively cheaper cameras, whereas Leica's models keep getting more expensive.

 

People have opinions and these forums are the perfect place to express those opinions. Unless Leica truly is run by a group of morons, they have somebody assigned to keeping up with what's said here and on other popular sites. At least that's what all of the smart, well-run companies do these days.

 

I have another simple equation for you: Companies that ignore their customers tend to go out of business.

Or this one:

Companies who fail to grow their business and replace dying customers tend to go out of business.

Edited December 13, 2010 by tbarker13

[bill]

I have another simple equation for you: Companies that ignore their customers tend to go out of business.

Or this one:

Companies who fail to grow their business and replace dying customers tend to go out of business.

 

...it is evident that they are doing neither...

[tbarker13]

...it is evident that they are doing neither...

 

Really? Because until very recently, this company was at death's door.

Maybe you weren't reading their financial reports these past few years, but they were ugly.

Let's see a few years of solid financial returns before trumpeting the company's financial prowess.

[redbaron]

I have another simple equation for you: Companies that ignore their customers tend to go out of business.

 

Leica management does indeed consult with their customers, widely and often. They ask experienced pros, who they know and trust, what they think. Not beginners, nor armchair CEOs.

[bill]

I'll wager I have been reading longer than many...

 

I am trumpeting nothing - l leave hyperbole to those in the Colonies - I merely observe reality, and have a realistic view of the value of deep-buttoned chintz punditry.

[jaapv]

I never understand these arguments made by people who seem to believe that Leica knows what's best for Leica. And that we mere mortals should never question it.

I've yet to see any real proof that Leica has figured out exactly what Leica is these days.

 

Let's remember for a moment that we are talking about a company that hasn't exactly been thriving. Leica was far too slow to embrace digital and nearly paid for that hesitancy with its corporate life. Only very recently have its financials given us any reason to hope it might actually survive long enough to make an M10 or whatever might come next.

 

So forgive me if I don't have complete faith in the caretakers of this company that I have grown to love over the past two decades.

And it is the only surviving independent German camera manufacturer that is actually pushing forward in the consumer market. They went through difficult times, but all others went under. That does not suggest to me they did not know what they were doing...

[janki]

Tim Barker, ........ Many thanks to you!

 

You seem to be a very wise and sensible person.

 

I agree in your statements.

[dcoombs]

...It's worth remembering that rangefinder users are an odd breed...

 

My wife would second that!

 

Doug

[tbarker13]

And it is the only surviving independent German camera manufacturer that is actually pushing forward in the consumer market. They went through difficult times, but all others went under. That does not suggest to me they did not know what they were doing...

 

Neither does it necessarily suggest that they knew what they were doing. Gaining the support of a deep-pocketed savior hardly proves they knew what they were doing.

There is growing evidence that the Leica is finding its way out of the mess it created for itself, but let's not confuse luck for skill.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[pico]

I never understand these arguments made by people who seem to believe that Leica knows what's best for Leica. And that we mere mortals should never question it.

 

Let us look to the Just In Time element, Sir. Leica introduced the M9, which was probably on the back-burner all the time, so that it was a huge hit. Do you resent that? If you do, then why?

 

Bottom line - Leica is Leica and no number of wannabe corporate Leica owners is going to change that. Continue with your fantasies. They are fun to read.