Why did Leica drop their R-clients so unceremoniously?

[Posto 6]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

How young or old or vibrant is Leica's customer base? Do you have actual figures?

 

What are "their traditional geographic markets"? And why would geography matter? If Leica can double their sales appealing to their non-traditional geographic markets, good for them. I'll bet Leica sales in Brazil in 2010 are a much bigger piece of their market than in 2000 (Cheers for Brazil's growing presence in the world!) - is that bad?

 

I do not have any hard figures, only anecdotal ones from dealers and acquaintances. I agree that Leica's growth in BRICS especially is a very good thing- for them and the new client base (regrettably small so far in Rio- São Paulo does already have a Leica specialist). However, in what I portrayed as "their traditional geographic markets", it appears that most users are, ahem, "legacy owners" of the baby-boomer generation (as am I). Many new sales are to visiting overseas clients looking for cheaper prices, and all too few to the younger generations of locals. In it's way, Leica risks losing it's place among these- I suppose a bit like the Porsche 911, which in many European countries has become an old man's car.It is vital that they manage to engage once more with this segment of the market, and also understand their requirements.

 

Many of us grew up in a rather different age- and are not best qualified to try to force our opinions and prejudices. Anyway, photography should be creative and fun, not curmudgeonly!

[pico]

If I could make a guess, the R solution would be a Panasonic FF, but with mechanics to work an auto-aperture on the R lenses. Live view. But the challenge of making a reliable shutter large enough for FF live-view appears to be daunting. Take a look at the Lumix G line shutters. Whew. They have to work hard and fast. It's action is nothing like our usual FP shutter.

[Advertisement]

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

[otto.f]

I guess the right answer to the question is that if we have a ceremony, it is all settled. It's never too late for a ceremony.

[SteveYork]

I was told by a Nikon representative that Nikon sold its greatest number of cameras ever the year the original Leicaflex came out: It proved that "Leica didn't get it," and freed the fence-sitters to buy the Nikon F.

 

It was the price tag of the Leicaflex and SL and SL2 that more then anything shot them down. They were far more expensive then Leica M rangefinders (hard to believe, but true). Having used both an F/F2 and Sl/SL2, I believe the Leicaflex was a better camera. And generally had better lenses too. But it was far more expensive, and didn't have much of a system behind it.

 

Having said all that, I'm told by dealers that the R line just wasn't selling.

Edited May 6, 2011 by SteveYork

[SteveYork]

For a system that has been dropped, the stock of used stores isn't full of R lenses. It seems R stuff has bounced off a bottom it set a couple of years ago.

[Xmas]

For a system that has been dropped, the stock of used stores isn't full of R lenses. It seems R stuff has bounced off a bottom it set a couple of years ago.

 

Well the M5 did not sell very well when it was in production but now has acquired something of a cult status. The R lenses may start increasing in value. There may be enough collectors to hike low production lenses to silly prices.

 

The M lenses are in considerable demand, even CV and ZM lenses.

 

Noel

[ho_co]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You must have missed post #22, dissing Canon for switching mounts without any retrocompatibility....

Zlatko, okay, if you see it as dissing. No problem if that's your view.

 

To me, it's just a question. Jaap simply asks if anyone remembers the hullabaloo the mount change engendered:

Is anybody else old enough to remember the hullabuloo when Canon switched lns mounts witout any retrocompatibility? There wasn't even Internet back then, but the complaints were loud enough....

 

To me, dissing is attacking or being rude or condescending, such as "...the hullabaloo when the idiots at Canon switched.... [T]he complaints were loud but should have been louder...."

 

I remember the hullaballoo. Nikon was always crowing about the consistency of its mount, Leica about the fact that all their lenses ever made would work on the current camera. And then Canon dumped the breech-lock bayonet, which many of us considered the best mount in the business. Historically, it turns out they made a good choice, but they angered a lot of people at the time.

 

To me, that's not "dissing" Canon, but I see how someone could take it the other way.

 

At the time, BTW, Alpa stood above the fray and pointed out that one could use both sets of Canon lenses on the Alpa bodies. That was the big irony: The company that never changed its mount and was compatible with everyone has become even more a niche operator than it ever was in those days.

Edited May 6, 2011 by ho_co

[jaapv]

You must have missed post #22, dissing Canon for switching mounts without any retrocompatibility. In a thread about the demise of the R system, the ironies abound.

If pointing out that a business decision by Canon upset a lot of their customers is dissing, what do you call the attacks on Leica for dropping the R system? Nuclear warfare?

[NZDavid]

Leica has been talking - if some haven't been listening, that is not Leica's problem.

 

I don't see much doublespeak here, although the "R solution was, is and will be, intentionally vague until they have an actual product to describe (ask Nikon or Canon about their 2014 products and you'll get equal vagueness... ). it is a very direct and blunt appraisal of the situation.

 

"R-System

 

R10 and Alternatives

> There will be no digital SLR aka R10

> But there will be - and we are working on this - a suitable solution how to use R lenses digitally

> It's very important to us, that owners of R lenses can take pictures digitally in the near future

> This solution will have nothing to do to with the S2

> Leica has examined intensively which features and what price tag a R10 had to have

> Price would have been 6000 - 7000 Euro and it would have been far behind the competitors

> This would have been a solution for the existing customer base but not for new customers

> Therefore the R system is discontinued, the existing system runs out

> There is no due date for the new solution

> Indirect notes by Stefan Daniel to 35 mm full format

> Definitely it's not going to be a SLR"

 

-- From the June 2009 meeting between representatives of this forum and Leica

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/customer-forum/89591-summary-q-session-stefan-daniel-during.html

 

There is no substitute for direct quotes. Thank you.

 

 

Leica listened to lots of customer feedback on the R system - in the form of shrinking, unprofitable sales.

 

Just as cash is the sincerest form of flattery, sales and profits are the sincerest form of customer feedback. The R system was not getting them.

 

Most of us here agree Leica's corporate communications - and for that matter, the plans that underlie them - have been confused over the past decade as Leica tried to get a handle on the transition of photography to a primarily digital model.

 

There have been a number of statements that later turned out to be "inoperative."

 

With no background in digital and as a small company, Leica had to look to experts elsewhere, which it has done. Which IMO is good: It should concentrate on what it does best. Digital cameras are still evolving.

 

But assume Leica changed its mind and announced a new digital R10. Who here would actually buy one? Or have most owners now moved on?

[wildlightphoto]

... assume Leica changed its mind and announced a new digital R10. Who here would actually buy one? Or have most owners now moved on?

 

• it's not going to happen
  
• if it were based on the concepts of the S2 scaled down to R size and compatible with R lenses I would.
  

[mjh]

If I could make a guess, the R solution would be a Panasonic FF, but with mechanics to work an auto-aperture on the R lenses. Live view. But the challenge of making a reliable shutter large enough for FF live-view appears to be daunting. Take a look at the Lumix G line shutters. Whew. They have to work hard and fast. It's action is nothing like our usual FP shutter.

For live-view the mechanical shutter just stays open; it doesn’t get any simpler than that. Admittedly the shutter curtains have to open and close twice as many times, compared to a camera without live-view, but the shutters in Canon’s and Nikon’s FF DSLRs supporting live-view manage quite well.

 

But then I don’t see Panasonic developing a FF camera for Leica. They don’t have a FF sensor and it wouldn’t make sense for them to enter the FF market themselves; why should they launch such a project just to become an OEM for Leica? This is not like their compact cameras that Panasonic would develop and manufacture whether or not Leica decides to order a Leica version.

Edited May 7, 2011 by mjh

[Posto 6]

Is there any way that an S2 could be adapted to take R-lenses, while retaining the full functionality of an R-camera? Possibly with a screen which, like that on the DMR, showed the actual area applicable to the 35mm format? Additionally, it is also conceivable that software could help widen the usable performance of the legacy R-lenses as far as vignetting and other imperfections beyond the 35mm frame are concerned, encouraging a migration to this platform.

 

Although it could be argued that it would be silly not to utilize the full performance of the sensor, a 35mm option could possibly be very convincing to legacy customers to start looking at adoption of this range. I myself would have no qualms if it were possible, and would gladly live with the limitations (as well as eventually buying new S-lenses as their range increased)

[giordano]

Is there any way that an S2 could be adapted to take R-lenses, while retaining the full functionality of an R-camera?

 

The flange to sensor distance of the S2 is much greater than that of the R, so R lenses could only be used for close-up work - unless the adapter contained a bundle of optical elements similar to a teleconverter, which would make it impossible to maintain Leica performance except maybe with a few long-focus lenses.

 

Also, the adapter would have to contain electronic/mechanical interfaces to pass aperture information in both directions between lens and camera, and to work the diaphragm, and an electronic interface between the lens ROM and the body.

 

Sounds like a mug's game to me.

[wildlightphoto]

... I don’t see Panasonic developing a FF camera for Leica. They don’t have a FF sensor and it wouldn’t make sense for them to enter the FF market themselves; why should they launch such a project just to become an OEM for Leica?

 

It doesn't have to be just for Leica. It could have a shorter flange-to-sensor distance and R lenses would be used with a smart adapter. Other smart adapters could make this camera compatible with a wide variety of AF and legacy lenses.

[mjh]

It doesn't have to be just for Leica. It could have a shorter flange-to-sensor distance and R lenses would be used with a smart adapter. Other smart adapters could make this camera compatible with a wide variety of AF and legacy lenses.

Yes, but that’s not quite what I had meant. Such a camera wouldn’t really fit in Panasonic’s portfolio so it would have to be marketed under the Leica label exclusively. And frankly I don’t see Panasonic filling a subcontractor role (comparable to Imacon’s role in the case of the DMR).

[wildlightphoto]

Such a camera wouldn’t really fit in Panasonic’s portfolio so it would have to be marketed under the Leica label exclusively..

 

You don't think Panasonic would be interested in extending their product line? As I see it a camera like this would have very broad appeal and would be an ideal way for a camera maker without a presence in the full-frame interchangeable-lens camera market to gain instant market share. They could also market their own line of lenses, no adapter required, while smart adapters for other-brand lenses goes a long way toward making making up for an (initially) incomplete system.

[adan]

The real practical problem is still - getting live-view/EVF to work over long periods of time with a FF sensor.

 

My Canon 5D2 shuts itself down for overheating after about 10 minutes with live-view on, to let the sensor cool. Exact time depends on ambient temperature.

 

A m4/3rds chip is 1/4 the area of a FF sensor, thus only has to deal with 1/4 the heat over a given period of time.

 

Eventually this may solvable with better heat sinks, or compact active cooling (remember that Contax managed to fit a vacuum back - normally only found in huge graphics process cameras - into the RTS III camera).

 

I do think there COULD be a broad market for a FF EVF camera (or even a modest crop - 1.2x or so) given that it would allow the use of Canon FD, Topcon, Miranda, Minolta manual, etc. lenses that can't adapt to Canon EOS (or Nikon via Leitax) FF bodies. And perhaps Leica R with full function via a "smart" adapter with aperture actuator lever.

 

Seems like Sony or Sigma is a more likely prospect than Panasonic, since they are already working with LV sensors bigger than m4/3rds (and short flange distance).

 

However (Doug ) there is a difference between expanding one's product line - and expanding one's product line profitably.

 

Panasonic and others may well have looked into this and decided there simply would not be enough demand to pay back development costs - or that it might well be profitable, but not as profitable as investing that same R&D money on something else.

[paulja]

i may get one of those leica decals and stick it on my canon 30D...... for now its the easiest solution !

[wildlightphoto]

The real practical problem is still - getting live-view/EVF to work over long periods of time with a FF sensor... Panasonic and others may well have looked into this and decided there simply would not be enough demand to pay back development costs - or that it might well be profitable, but not as profitable as investing that same R&D money on something else.

 

It may be that cooling technology is not presently developed well enough to make a product like this both profitable and attractive to the target market. I don't claim that this kind of product is marketable or profitable now but when the technology develops to make it affordable, practical and profitable then I suspect a camera that can accept numerous makers' lenses with no functional limits will be far more popular than one dedicated to a single lens mount.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[andybarton]

I think that you're always going to have a problem with a "Universal Mount" that is capable of flicking levers for Leica lenses, different levers in different directions for other manufacturers' and a multiplicity of electronic triggers for yet more.

 

This mule camera is going yo have to be completely in a different league from the top end Canon, Nikons and Sonys to make users of these even think about buying one. There has to be a killer feature, and I suspect that can only be the sensor.