AP interview with Dr Kaufmann

[stunsworth]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think something like the F5 or EOS 1-V make for a better comparison. These were pro cameras and the best these companies had to offer and a Leica was not three times the cost of either one of these

 

The point I was making above was that a $10,000 Leica dSLR would not be much more expensive than a pro Canon dSLR.

 

The 3x figure came about by comparing the price of the hypothetical Leica to a Nikon D800, which I don't think is a fair comparison - its like comparing the R8 to a midrange Nikon or Canon.

[AlanG]

I think something like the F5 or EOS 1-V make for a better comparison. These were pro cameras and the best these companies had to offer and a Leica was not three times the cost of either one of these.

 

The problem is that Canon and Nikon also sell huge numbers of less expensive cameras and lenses. The profits from these sales, especially from lenses, gives them the resources for all of the R&D to add new features to cameras and lenses across all prices ranges and keep them competitive in each segment.

 

For Leica to make an in-house technologically competitive low volume DSLR system with advanced AF, IS, live view, video, etc. will probably force the price up to very high levels. This technology is fast moving and by the time they have even one model out they will need to be working on the model that replaces it. But there won't be enough income from sales to justify it. I don't even think Leica can call up Copal and get a 12 fps shutter. We can see why they chose to go the S2 route to play in a higher priced market that does not require as much technology.

[rosuna]

$10,000 would have been very close to the cost of the current most expensive Canon dSLR.

 

Converted to dollars an EOS 1DS from Ffordes would be $8,600. So the $10,000 that Andy proposed would probably be less of a premium over that camera than the R6/7/8 had over the Canons and Nikons of their day.

 

Many things have changed from the days of film... Now the top offerings are highly specialized cameras for action events and video. You may compare the $10,000 R10 with the D800 or the 5D Mark II of our days... assuming equivalence in sensors...

[thrid]

I really would be curious to know what the profit margin is for Leica on a digital M body.

 

When the M9M came out the dealer priced leaked at $6,676 ($7950 list).

 

So, how much of a profit margin does Leica make after R&D, marketing and manufacturing costs?

 

20%? 40%?

 

 

Wer weiß was?

[SJP]

For as long as I can remember Leica has been many times more expensive than the competition (I am not quite sure if "more expensive" is the right phrase, "larger investment" sounds better, and true to a large extent, also "competition" does not sound right).

 

In the good old M4/pre-euro(...) times - a M4 body was about 4000 guilders (no lens, no nothing just the body + a nice box), a quite decent Nikon FM2, FE2, F3 + Nikkor lens like thing would be in the 1000 - 2000 guilders ballpark. I saw a showcase with a M4 in the shop window and could not understand why anyone in their right mind (or otherwise) would even consider buying something like that, regardless of the ridiculous price. As the Dutch say "verstand komt met de jaren".

 

For the youngsters the Dutch Guilder (NLG) at euro assimilation was 2.20 NLG to 1 euro, approximately, add some decimals where required.

 

Anyway, for me enjoyment/price is pretty high - surely that is the only relevant criterion?