Future range suggestions for Leica

[colonel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

A major component of the surge in interest for Leica and its awesome lenses have been the wide availability of the excellent M8 second hand. This has dropped entry to "affordable levels" for enthusiasts (and some pros). These enthusiasts are largely wanting something more then the APS-C level and appreciate the extra wide angle and quality of 1.3x and FF sensors.

 

I think Leica should capitalise on this and not take the M digital series too sky high

 

IMHO Leica should bring out three new ranges, keeping the 1.3x factor as a "budget" M series digital (budget in the Leica definition ):

 

i.e.

1. M9.2 (updated M9 with better ISO, more pixels, sapphire screen, etc.) - around £5,200

2. M8.3 (updated M8 with better ISO, higher pixel count, etc.) - around £3,200

3. MC (APS-C size interchangeble lens - new auto-focus lenses but also ability to use M lenses) - around £2,000

 

my 2 cents

[adan]

The smorgasbord approach to cameras (a different flavor for everyone) is not realistic for Leica.

 

In the film days, they mostly built two cameras at any one time. One RF and one SLR. They tried building three different viewfinder RF versions for a while (.58x, .72x. .85x), and even that ended up not being cost-effective except as a pricier "a la carte" option.

 

With digital cameras, every different sensor/electronics package requires its own firmware (which Leica has to pay Jenoptik to write). So trying to maintain simultaneous multiple lines of in-house cameras (not counting the Panasonic line) is expensive and counterproductive for a 10,000-camera-a-year company.

 

What is probable is: One M digital at any one time, plus the S line, plus a third camera (for the moment the X1; perhaps an interchangeable-lens Xx in the future).

 

The M8 line is a "finished" product as far as Leica is concerned, just as the M3 and M2 became "finished products" once the M4 was introduced (and the R4 and R5 became "finished products" once the R6/7 were introduced, and the M6 was "finished" once the MP arrived). There won't be any more cameras based on that sensor.

[pico]

[...] my 2 cents

 

Too much.

[colonel]

The smorgasbord approach to cameras (a different flavor for everyone) is not realistic for Leica.

 

In the film days, they mostly built two cameras at any one time. One RF and one SLR. They tried building three different viewfinder RF versions for a while (.58x, .72x. .85x), and even that ended up not being cost-effective except as a pricier "a la carte" option.

 

With digital cameras, every different sensor/electronics package requires its own firmware (which Leica has to pay Jenoptik to write). So trying to maintain simultaneous multiple lines of in-house cameras (not counting the Panasonic line) is expensive and counterproductive for a 10,000-camera-a-year company.

 

What is probable is: One M digital at any one time, plus the S line, plus a third camera (for the moment the X1; perhaps an interchangeable-lens Xx in the future).

 

The M8 line is a "finished" product as far as Leica is concerned, just as the M3 and M2 became "finished products" once the M4 was introduced (and the R4 and R5 became "finished products" once the R6/7 were introduced, and the M6 was "finished" once the MP arrived). There won't be any more cameras based on that sensor.

 

In the past that was true, but I think Leica is looking to capitalise on its surge in popularity.

Who would have thought 20 years ago that a BMW 3 series would be more popular then a ford mondeo ?

[earleygallery]

Where exactly are the cost savings between your proposed M8 and the M9, how come it's so much cheaper?

 

Don't say it's the smaller sensor, because it won't be significantly less costly to produce, given Leica's requirements/volumes.

 

So, how will they do it again?

[andybarton]

Every "entry level" body they make would mean one less "full cream" body that they can't make. They only have a limited production line that isn't easily scaleable.

 

Where would all the new lenses for these cameras come from? they can't make lenses fast enough to cope with demand now.

 

Further, given that the build cost of an M8 was more or less the same as an M9, I really can't see how they could sell an "M8.3" for two grand less than an M9, unless it was to be a plastic bodied camera, outsourced to the far east.

 

There are any number of threads over the last few years where people have suggested similar strategies, and any number of threads where others have pointed out that it's really not a sustainable route for Leica to adopt.

[colonel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Where exactly are the cost savings between your proposed M8 and the M9, how come it's so much cheaper?

 

Don't say it's the smaller sensor, because it won't be significantly less costly to produce, given Leica's requirements/volumes.

 

So, how will they do it again?

 

the M8 was £3,000 and the M8.2 was £3,950

the only differences we know well.

A more expensive sensor and the harness for it would easily add another £1,000 in Leica terms. And in fact it did for the M9, which is £4,990

 

the questions on capacity are right currently. But I thought that Leica might have a plan to scale up

[andybarton]

The point is that if they were selling M8.x's ~today~, they'd be charging £4,500 for them.

 

Given the more or less complete hand made nature of the M construction, scaling is something that they could only do very slowly, as people need training to do it. Leica are not in the "hire and fire" game, so they don't want a scaled up workforce with nothing to do if demand suddenly slumps.

 

They are making a lot of money with their current strategy and getting back on their feet again financially. Now is not the time to be throwing money at new lines, especially if that means even more demand for unobtainable lenses.

 

There will be an M9.2 - possibly this year, who knows? - but to bring back a camera that they stopped making 2 years ago isn't the way forward.

[timd.]

if they made an m8.3 for a price higher than a used m9.1 - what would you choose?

[colonel]

if they made an m8.3 for a price higher than a used m9.1 - what would you choose?

 

a used m9.1

If you have one for £3,000 - PM me

[farnz]

Frank would know the right road for Leica ...

 

Pete.

[earleygallery]

(hits the snooze button)

[jaapv]

the M8 was £3,000 and the M8.2 was £3,950

the only differences we know well.

A more expensive sensor and the harness for it would easily add another £1,000 in Leica terms. And in fact it did for the M9, which is £4,990

 

the questions on capacity are right currently. But I thought that Leica might have a plan to scale up

Not true - the difference was just 500 € and Leica is priced in Euros, not responsible for the slide of the pound...

[charlesphoto99]

And if they are going to develop a whole new sensor due to the holy grail (for some) of better iso and more pixels - which is at odds with each other as it is (Nikon knows that) - why not then just release it as the M10? There were really only incrementally different changes between the M8 and the M9 except the sensor, and some of the changes were actually a step back from the 8.2.

 

Maybe there will be a 9.2 but I think with the resounding success of the M9 Leica are more on track with waiting until they can go up a full model #.

[Paul Reading]

It seems strange to me that whilst other camera manufacturers are giving you more bang for your buck as prices of sensors reduce, Leica has maintained the price of the M9. Why don't they pass on any savings to increase demand for the M9?

 

More M9's in the market will stimulate lens sales.

[andybarton]

Two things.

 

1. Leica sell all the M9s they can make at full Market price, so why discount?

 

2. Leica cannot make enough lenses for the demand now.

[Karlumix]

While understanding that Leica abandoned the Panasonic-based Four-Thirds format, I continue to regret that decision. My L1 with 25mm f/1.4 and 14-150 f/3.5 Leica-D lenses is a pleasure to use, while the technical quality of the images continues to get compliments at workshops and forums.

 

Leica was really onto something by making their optical wizardry available to people without tens of thousands of dollars to spend on equipment. While I enjoy my DIux-4 a great deal, there are many times and many images where I regret not bringing the L1.

[hoppyman]

It seems strange to me that whilst other camera manufacturers are giving you more bang for your buck as prices of sensors reduce, Leica has maintained the price of the M9. Why don't they pass on any savings to increase demand for the M9?

 

More M9's in the market will stimulate lens sales.

 

Paul in my country (Australia) at least the M9 price has dropped a lot since its initial introduction. Apart for the very first few (which were more expensive again), in my city the selling price here towards the end of 2009 was about AUD 8600 (including tax). Now it is AUD 7300. We have not seen lens prices drop in parallel, sadly

 

Much depends on where you are and how your currency performs against the Euro as well.

 

But I don't think that Leica Camera needs to increase demand for the M9 when it has taken a year or more just to catch up with orders! Leica Camera still considers that the 'cheaper M9" is the used M8.

M lens production is still well behind demand anyway.

[chanyr]

Interchangeable lens Leica X2 with built in EVF

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[phancj]

A major component of the surge in interest for Leica and its awesome lenses have been the wide availability of the excellent M8 second hand. This has dropped entry to "affordable levels" for enthusiasts (and some pros). These enthusiasts are largely wanting something more then the APS-C level and appreciate the extra wide angle and quality of 1.3x and FF sensors.

 

I think Leica should capitalise on this and not take the M digital series too sky high

 

IMHO Leica should bring out three new ranges, keeping the 1.3x factor as a "budget" M series digital (budget in the Leica definition ):

 

i.e.

1. M9.2 (updated M9 with better ISO, more pixels, sapphire screen, etc.) - around £5,200

2. M8.3 (updated M8 with better ISO, higher pixel count, etc.) - around £3,200

3. MC (APS-C size interchangeble lens - new auto-focus lenses but also ability to use M lenses) - around £2,000

 

my 2 cents

 

I do not see how your proposed M8.2 should be so much more expensive than your AF MC. Say if you have the MC you will not need the M8.3 IMO. And your prices are well, realistically too low.

 

My 2 cents.

 

CJ