Leica's growth plans

[stevelap]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Re James' post number 12 above.

 

I agree with the gist but remember reading somewhere (sorry, can't find the reference) of evidence emerging in the States that some newspaper and magazine titles were scaling back or abandoning their digital interactive offerings. If true it might indicate that the recent 'convergence' trend (of stills and motion) is slowing, at least for the time being, whilst publishers further investigate the demand for those services.

 

Of course that argument refers to digital spin-offs off from traditional print media, it wouldn’t necessarily apply to the many online only or social media sites but, who knows, perhaps some readers still actually prefer holding a real paper, magazine or book in the hand .

[Ecaton]

My iPhone can do all of that, well almost!

 

We are 'there' already, it's just that people are still adapting to the new technology and finding new ways to use it. I never thought book readers would ever really take off, but they've become cheaper and better and are set to boom.

 

When we have free wifi pretty much everywhere, and it will happen, we'll all be carrying them and reading our daily newspapers and favourite magazines on them.

 

Sure, we are there. I was rather replying to a comment of Leica licensing it's brand to (camera-)phone makers in order to reach the 1% market penetration. Thus my question whether camera-phone units sold would be counted as part of the camera rather than the global phone market.

[bill]

I do a lot of travelling on business and am a convert to Kindle in the form of the software on my Tab. It saves space, which is always at a premium and reduces weight. I wouldn't buy a dedicated reader. I buy newspapers at the weekends (and grab a free one for take-off and landing) and read "analogue" books regularly. I don't get all dewy-eyed over a book vs a screen, but each has it's advantages and disadvantages, a bit like digital "vs" film*...

 

*I do appreciate that this is the Forum equivalent of saying "Beetlegoose, Beetlegoose, Beetlegoose!"

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[AlanG]

And if my Granny had wheels she'd be a wagon.

 

I refuse to believe that photography as I have known it will be dead and gone, replaced by video cameras with infinite focus and all the other bells and whistles. Oh yes, those cameras will exist, but I believe with 100% conviction that the craft will continue, because at the end of the day every feature you're talking about does nothing to improve my images. You see, I like messing up things like focus and exposure. It lets me experiment, and learn, and try. No computer camera can do that for me. My Leica M9 is a PART of me.

 

Leica will continue to innovate and improve, as seen with the S2. They will also continue to partner with Panasonic or another Japanese high volume manufacturer to put their brand on more affordable cameras. But at the end of the day Leica is a niche brand, and will remain so.

 

Leica is caught in the middle between high volume, low cost, low feature cameras where they cannot compete, only rebrand, and the vast resources of Nikon and Canon, who can outspend Leica 100-1 on R&D, introducing new pro models and whizz bang features at an ever increasing rate.

 

I for one do not believe Dr.Kaufmann or Blackstone have deep enough pockets to fight either battle, and believe they will remain in their niche, playing up the brand's strengths of high quality and high price, albeit with limited features, as they formulate an exit plan with a new buyer in 24-36 months.

 

We don't really know what Leica will do. If they say they want to grow then they probably have some kind of plan for that already. I bet they are trying to be more forward looking and flexible than perhaps they have been in the past. Maybe they also feel that to remain viable long term they'll need to be larger.

 

We are not talking about what kind of camera that you and some "real" photographers prefer. But what will be predominant in the marketplace and what Leica will need to consider if they want to reach 1% market penetration. I wouldn't be surprised if Alpa and Linhof are still making technical cameras in 10 years but those cameras won't have anything near to 1% of the market either.

[earleygallery]

Of course that argument refers to digital spin-offs off from traditional print media, it wouldn’t necessarily apply to the many online only or social media sites but, who knows, perhaps some readers still actually prefer holding a real paper, magazine or book in the hand .

 

I definately prefer 'real' books, although when I look at all the books I have taking up space in my home I can see the advantages of digital copies!

 

The big problem that newspapers have with the transition to digital, and it has already severely impacted on local papers, is how to keep revenue up from advertising. eBay have taken a huge portion of their market - who thinks to advertise their car or whatever for sale in the local rag these days?

[IkarusJohn]

When we have free wifi pretty much everywhere, and it will happen, we'll all be carrying them and reading our daily newspapers and favourite magazines on them.

 

I have wifi at home and at work, and I use Instapaper for anything I see online that I want to read later. I also have the NY Times, the Economist, and our local papers on my iPad. Charging people for wifi access will become a thing of the past (we used to charge people for faxes).

 

I use my reader for things like technical information (cases, journals etc), news and information, and books that I want to read, but don't want to keep - I'm currently re-reading Le Carre's Smiley books on my iPad, and I have some Scandinavian crime books on there.

 

But for books I want on my bookshelf (I guess mostly history), books that have been made with care and passion, I'll take the hard copy, thank you. Sitting at home, listening to a CD, glass of wine, lovely hard back book - slow living, one of life's pleasures.

 

I think we need to be honest about Leica - the M3 is 60 years old, and film is an interesting oddity (sorry). There will be no real improvement on the MP & M7 - that's it. Similarly, niche film will be provided, but it's unlikely to see another Kodachrome moment.

 

While my M9 was being upgraded, I used my MP. It was nice, though I quickly realised how basic the control is - set the ISO for the entire film (not the particular image), set aperture and then think about shutter speed. That's it? The bit I really didn't enjoy was fooling about with chemicals; processing then scanning the film? Give me a break. First, was stuffing up the processing (chemical burn on a couple of frames, water marks - b0y, talk about out of practice); then the scanning (fooling about with drivers, keeping fluff and dust off the film, then processing the scanned image).

 

Honestly - popping an SD card into your computer is way simpler, and the result far better. I have given up the idea of unpacking my dark room ...

 

The M9 is in an odd place, to my mind. It's packaged like a film M, and only takes very tentative steps beyond ISO, aperture & shutter into the digital age. But in all honesty (much as I love mine), the M digital in its current form is hardly the future, and it won't get Leica to 1%.

 

Now, I'm not saying it should be discontinued, in the same way that the MP & M7 shouldn't be. But it's not the future of Leica digital. I don't know what the M10 is going to be, but if it's a continuation of the M9, there won't be an M11. Why would there? Line up the differences between the M3, M2, M4, M5, M6 and M7, and think for a moment how relevant that sort of progression is in a digital age.

 

That future is well above the D-Lux/V-Lux & other PanaLeicas, and between the X1 (in whatever form the latest X100 competitor from Leica takes) and the M9/P.

 

So, mid priced (it has to be accessible), with an M mount (at least - an R adapter should't be too hard without the optical rangefinder), but with all the other things which people want, and are available to photography - manual focusing and AF, live view, video, better use of the M lenses with somewhere around 20 MP and better noise handling and high ISO performance, but with the same levels of control we currently enjoy.

 

To my mind, Leica is not just about the M format, but thinking photography. You can have that in a modern digital camera, and Leica is the logical one to set the new direction. The X100 shows that (Fuji basically copying a Leica ideal - it is effectively aimed at the X1). Leica should be looking at the Nex 7, and thinking hard about getting people into something which requires more IQ than a cellphone, but which is more relevant than the M or the S to amateurs interested in top level photography.

 

Cheers

John

[AlanG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

To my mind, Leica is not just about the M format, but thinking photography. You can have that in a modern digital camera, and Leica is the logical one to set the new direction. The X100 shows that (Fuji basically copying a Leica ideal - it is effectively aimed at the X1). Leica should be looking at the Nex 7, and thinking hard about getting people into something which requires more IQ than a cellphone, but which is more relevant than the M or the S to amateurs interested in top level photography.

 

Cheers

John

 

I agree with all that you wrote and I think you are eluding (maybe sub-consciously) to a philosophical change that has been going on. That is from getting everything "right" at the time of exposure to having more control after the fact to get the look you want. This may have started with color negs in place of slides, but the ability to adjust color, exposure, contrast, dynamic range, retouching, and more digitally after the fact is a big change.

 

At some point photographers will be pulling frames from fast sequences or from video and with Lytro type technology, they'll be able to control the look of the focus any way they want. Now I know this doesn't appeal to everyone, but this is where photography is heading.

[earleygallery]

Blimey I'm actually agreeing with AlanG here

[NZDavid]

Old Leica values still count: quality, technical performance, concentration on the essentials. Much has to do with design (which means more than simply looks, style and packaging).

 

Is there a similarity with Apple in these respects?

 

Growing the business does not mean expanding ad infinitum, just building a stronger market share and keeping the business sustainable.

 

Would an R10 have gone better than the S2? Canon's 5D has been a rip-roaring success.

 

But I agree DSLRs are not the only way forward. EVIL compacts and an X1 successor would be highly capable.

 

Smart phones are not going to take over everything...are they?

[IkarusJohn]

HI David,

 

I think smart phones are going to put compacts into a very difficult place.

 

I agree that the old Leica values remain relevant, and the gadgetry and gizmos (complete with baffling options and hopelessly complex menus) of digital photography confuse the issue. But, to maintain those values, Leica has to be more flexible about how they are to be applied - much like Oscar Barnack with his Ur Leica, they need to be a bit bold.

 

At this stage, the SLR diversion (which Leica missed) has gone a full circle and will join the optical rangefinder in a bit of a dead end. We're now at a late 1920s, early 1960s moment of change. Leica has a variable track record on change - it stuffed up the SLR phase, maybe it can set the tone of the next wave of the digital phase.

 

The core values of image quality remain paramount, and that will be Leica's premium - great glass, the best sensor, manual control where wanted, purity and simplicity, but they need to grasp and use what digital can offer - the ability to make the most of the glass in a compact, high tech package that makes the most of what digital has to offer, at a price which is not ridiculous.

 

There is a gap in the market between ridiculous, monstrous dSLR dinosaurs (Nikon D3, Canon 1Ds and even 5D mkII), and fiddly little cameras with small knobs, ineffective manual controls and stupid menus - that is the high quality EVIL camera. That's where Leica should be heading.

 

It's actually where the original SLRs were in the 1960s - small, robust, high quality and good clear usable systems.

 

Cheers

John

[StephenPatterson]

What are Leica's chances of growing seven fold and capturing 1% of the market? You need look no further than the X1.

 

How long was the X1's reign as the "must have" compact? 3 months? 6 months? How many competitors does the X1 now have? How long did it take before the X1 was bombarded with competitors with more features, fewer "issues" and a price that was half that of the X1? How is the used X1 market compared to the used M9 market? Or the M8 market? Has any new Leica product lost more value in so short a time? How long was the X1 on backorder for consumers? How long has it taken Leica to respond to the competition with a new model? Oh sorry, I can answer that one...they haven't.

 

If Leica attempts this folly they're going to get killed. They don't have the engineers, support staff, or budget to compete head to head with the Japanese. The reality is these sorts of statements are nothing more than Venture Capital bravado. You can expect more of the same as the script unfolds, until the next ownership group signs on the dotted line and this group cashes out.

 

The only way Leica is going to achieve those sort of growth numbers is through acquisition. I leave it to you to decide who the "acquirers" are and who are the "acquiries" (or however you spell it).

[pico]

At some point photographers will be pulling frames from fast sequences or from video and with Lytro type technology, they'll be able to control the look of the focus any way they want. Now I know this doesn't appeal to everyone, but this is where photography is heading.

 

Of course, however no technology can tell the photographer where to be, and when to be there - how to visualize. A clueless picture maker can shoot at 60fps all day long and miss the picture. I feel the same about camera making - what to leave out, what constraints to impose are important. It is the very essence of Modern to be simple and rational at once.

 

Presently most high-end cameras, not Leica Ms, are rather Byzantine, irrational, hodge-podge, monolithic, temporary.

 

.

[AlanG]

What are Leica's chances of growing seven fold and capturing 1% of the market? You need look no further than the X1.

 

How long was the X1's reign as the "must have" compact? 3 months? 6 months? How many competitors does the X1 now have? How long did it take before the X1 was bombarded with competitors with more features, fewer "issues" and a price that was half that of the X1? How is the used X1 market compared to the used M9 market? Or the M8 market? Has any new Leica product lost more value in so short a time? How long was the X1 on backorder for consumers? How long has it taken Leica to respond to the competition with a new model? Oh sorry, I can answer that one...they haven't.

 

If Leica attempts this folly they're going to get killed. They don't have the engineers, support staff, or budget to compete head to head with the Japanese. The reality is these sorts of statements are nothing more than Venture Capital bravado. You can expect more of the same as the script unfolds, until the next ownership group signs on the dotted line and this group cashes out.

 

The only way Leica is going to achieve those sort of growth numbers is through acquisition. I leave it to you to decide who the "acquirers" are and who are the "acquiries" (or however you spell it).

 

You may be absolutely correct. It is hard for us to come up with a workable business model for Leica and it is their job to do so. I am glad that is not my job. But I do think that mirrorless cameras and the Nex7 in particular are the role models for future cameras so if Leica is going to grow to 1% of the market they probably need to bring something like that to the plate...SOMEHOW?

 

A full frame Leica version of the Nex7 would be very appealing but might have to be too expensive to get them that 1%.

[AlanG]

Blimey I'm actually agreeing with AlanG here

 

What took so long?

[AlanG]

Thus my question whether camera-phone units sold would be counted as part of the camera rather than the global phone market.

 

If we don't camera phones sold as part of the camera market, then the camera market will probably be considerably smaller in 10 years than it is today.

[Ecaton]

If we don't camera phones sold as part of the camera market, then the camera market will probably be considerably smaller in 10 years than it is today.

 

I don't think so. Significant prosperity shifts from the western world to much population richer regions will result in increased demand and grow the camera market. Accurate and robust USD 20 digital watches can be had everywhere, yet the segment of the industry booming is the higher-to high end one. And despite the fact that our smart phones tell us the time more accurately as well.

[NZDavid]

More "me too" products become obsolete very quickly. True classics don't.

[Ellie]

I think a mirrorless FF M-mount camera body like a smaller S2 would complement the rangefinder M. Something more substantial to hold than the current mirrorless offerings. The viewfinder has to be really good though. It could replace my Visoflex for macro

[AlanG]

I don't think so. Significant prosperity shifts from the western world to much population richer regions will result in increased demand and grow the camera market. Accurate and robust USD 20 digital watches can be had everywhere, yet the segment of the industry booming is the higher-to high end one. And despite the fact that our smart phones tell us the time more accurately as well.

 

What I'm getting at is that by 10 years from now smart phones and cameras will be pretty much the same product. (With a few exceptions.) A camera without the ability to directly upload still and video images, communicate, and geotag will be a non-starter. At worst they'll be linked to our cell phones. We're living in a very linked world already. Considering how small and inexpensive cell phones are now, it won't cost much to add this technology to most cameras.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Ellie]

What I'm getting at is that by 10 years from now smart phones and cameras will be pretty much the same product. (With a few exceptions.) A camera without the ability to directly upload still and video images, communicate, and geotag will be a non-starter. At worst they'll be linked to our cell phones. We're living in a very linked world already. Considering how small and inexpensive cell phones are now, it won't cost much to add this technology to most cameras.

 

I agree but I think to every reaction there comes a counter-reaction. I think Leica in the future could be a (small) one-stop-shop for film M too. You could buy a film M, film rolls and get it developed and enlarged the traditional way in store. At least in some of the larger Leica stores.