mjh Posted May 30, 2012 Share #21  Posted May 30, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I think it's more a case that Fuji wishes they bought Leica when they had the chance to. I don’t see why they should have bought Leica. Apparently all the Japanese vendors are smitten with Leica cameras and lenses but that doesn’t imply that buying Leica would have made any sense in the context of their own business strategy. Having said that, I don’t see how buying Olympus would have made much sense either, as far as photography is concerned. Nothing against Olympus as I happen to like their FourThirds and Micro-FourThirds offerings, but Olympus and Fuji wouldn’t really fit. Chances are Fuji was interested in Olympus solely on the strength of their medical business (endoscopes and such) which would tie in with Fuji’s medical business. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 30, 2012 Posted May 30, 2012 Hi mjh, Take a look here Fuji considered buying Leica- decided not too.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Paul J Posted May 30, 2012 Share #22 Â Posted May 30, 2012 Fuji has a genius marketing department and a very capable R+D department. Â By creating an M mount camera they may as well just say that their lenses aren't good enough...It makes no sense for Fuji to make an M mount camera. They are not the kind of company who want to play second best with someone else's lenses. They are an exceptionally forward thinking company who want market share and want to create better products at better prices. I would imagine they want their products to equal or better Leica at an affordable price. Â After buying an X1 I was hooked by the quality. The prestige and marketing of the brand got me curious for what else they had to offer me. Shortly after I discovered the M9 and 2 months later owned a body and 2 lenses. With that in mind....If I was an Fuji X-Pro M Mount camera user and had the money to use Leica lenses then I would probably try out and most definitely prefer a Leica body. They have already said they are not trying to compete with Leica that their products are be priced under Leica. Japan has always been about making things better, and they will be determined to do so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted May 31, 2012 Share #23  Posted May 31, 2012 If you predict enough you’ll inevitably be right a few times.  Leica Rumors pretty much nailed the 9/9/09 offerings as well as the recent May offerings. Many on this forum thumbed their noses at them at the time. Rumors of course depend on feeds...that's how they become rumors...some feeds better than others.  Reading the rumor sites is often as much fun, and as accurate, as reading all the rumors and predictions here. Ironic.  Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted May 31, 2012 Share #24 Â Posted May 31, 2012 Considering the point behind mirror-less cameras is for them to be smaller than DSLRs and since APS senors have improved a lot there won't be that much incentive to make full frame mirror-less cameras. I guess it is possible but I don't see the demand except from Leica lens owners who already have a FF camera solution. (So maybe future models will have EVFs.) Â For another company to bother to make a FF sensor camera that specifically can correct Leica w/a lenses seems unlikely to me unless technology changes making the lenses work easily. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaques Posted May 31, 2012 Author Share #25  Posted May 31, 2012 I don’t see why they should have bought Leica. Apparently all the Japanese vendors are smitten with Leica cameras and lenses but that doesn’t imply that buying Leica would have made any sense in the context of their own business strategy. Having said that, I don’t see how buying Olympus would have made much sense either, as far as photography is concerned. Nothing against Olympus as I happen to like their FourThirds and Micro-FourThirds offerings, but Olympus and Fuji wouldn’t really fit. Chances are Fuji was interested in Olympus solely on the strength of their medical business (endoscopes and such) which would tie in with Fuji’s medical business.  Well whatever the case: the CEO mentioned that they considered buying Leica and tried to buy Olympus. I am not at all sure of you assurance that they were only interested in non-camera parts of that business... Seems to me like Fuji's camera business would also tie in with Olympus's camera business- just as much as their medical businesses.... but what would I know?  And I think I am being misunderstood on the M solution: I never said it would be M only (though I think that is possible too). And to say that the M adapter is all you will ever get makes zero sense to me. What about the X-pro2? There are already many bemoaning the lack of focus peaking or similar. Do you think Fuji will just leave things where they are? Well- I don't- and they won't. They have done more than create an adapter ring- they have added significantly to the camera firmware. They will continue this process on the next model- and they will improve upon it.  and as for the 'won't make full frame': why not? I say there will be full frame camera of the size of the Leica or smaller soon (possibly not RF). If the great masses accept that smaller formats are fine- there will always be someone who wants a bigger sensor. A month ago the M9 was sufficient for a great deal of owners: they wanted nothing more. Now many of them realise the black and white performance really wasn't quite what it could have been. They suddenly need something else... Lets face it: many folks will never be happy with existing equipment (once something better has been released)- and they don't want to be happy- this is their hobby- a new camera is a new thing to talk about. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted May 31, 2012 Share #26 Â Posted May 31, 2012 Well whatever the case: the CEO mentioned that they considered buying Leica and tried to buy Olympus. [...] Â In the business world, dis-information is as valuable as truth. Red herrings abound as trial-balloons and for stock manipulation. Trust none of it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ash Posted May 31, 2012 Share #27  Posted May 31, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I considered to buy a Bugatti Veyron and bought a Volkswagen. Steve   Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 31, 2012 Share #28 Â Posted May 31, 2012 Leica Rumors pretty much nailed the 9/9/09 offerings as well as the recent May offerings. Many on this forum thumbed their noses at them at the time. Rumors of course depend on feeds...that's how they become rumors...some feeds better than others. Â Reading the rumor sites is often as much fun, and as accurate, as reading all the rumors and predictions here. Ironic. Â Jeff #18.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Thomson Posted May 31, 2012 Share #29 Â Posted May 31, 2012 I also predict there quite a few thousand M owners who wouldn't be if there was another cheaper option available when they bought in. Â Yep, that's me. I looked at all the alternatives because I didn't want to pay the cost of a Leica for what is essentially my hobby camera (I use DSLR's to make a living). Nothing had the combination of a good optical viewfinder, large sensor, availability of fast-ish lenses and a portrait lens available or included in the zoom range. Â If I was choosing today I would likely opt for the Fuji, but I wouldn't know that I was missing out on the simplicity of the M. I had the chance to briefly use the Fuji with 35mm lens twice in the past few days and both times I was very happy to return to the M8. Files from the Fuji are definitely very sharp and have an element of that "depth" that is so clear to me in M8 files, but the colours can be cartoonish; I also missed focus several times with the Fuji ( that might just be unfamiliarity). I'll have to play with the raw files now that Lightroom can handle them to see if there is anything can be done with the colour. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted May 31, 2012 Share #30  Posted May 31, 2012 Seems to me like Fuji's camera business would also tie in with Olympus's camera business- just as much as their medical businesses.... but what would I know? Fuji is pushing their own APS-C system; why would they have any interest in Micro-FourThirds? And by the same token, why would they have any interest in another FF system? The market for FF cameras is much smaller.  What about the X-pro2? There are already many bemoaning the lack of focus peaking or similar. Do you think Fuji will just leave things where they are? Well- I don't- and they won't. Sure enough, but then focus-peaking would benefit everyone and any lens, not just Leica’s. First and foremost Fuji wants to sell their own lenses; support for another vendor’s lenses is just an added bonus for their customers. Leica photographers adapting their lenses to a Fuji camera carries the message that a Fuji camera is worthy of being used with Leica lenses. That’s good for Fuji. At the same time the number of photographers using Leica lenses with their X-Pro would still be much smaller than the number of photographers sticking with Fuji’s own AF offerings, so this strategy isn’t actually threatening their bottom-line.  and as for the 'won't make full frame': why not? Supporting more than one mirrorless system would be costly; also it would send quite the wrong message: There would be one system for the masses and another for the pros. But the X-Pro system already is a system for professional work, or so the advertising would make you believe. Why would Fuji want to contradict themselves by introducing an FF system? (For the same reason neither Canon nor Nikon are likely to enter the MF market, btw.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaques Posted May 31, 2012 Author Share #31  Posted May 31, 2012 These points are reasonable- and logical however I am not dismayed from my therorising at all.  Companies contradict themselves all the time - it's part and parcel of marketing. I see no real problem in calling the x-pro Pro- and another more expensive camera 'Super Pro' (at least that's how SLR Magic might go about it:rolleyes:). In the same way the newest laundry detergent is better than the older one- even though that was already super and improved). The point is you can have more than one offering at the 'pro' end of the scale (and in truth the X-Pro probably isn't all that 'pro' yet).  Fuji is pushing their own APS-C system; why would they have any interest in Micro-FourThirds? And by the same token, why would they have any interest in another FF system? The market for FF cameras is much smaller.  stranger things have happened than for a company to pursue two or even more market segments at once... In fact it has been common in the camera market over decades. Maybe they wanted the Olympus for focusing tech? Or sensor tech? There would e many components that could translate across multiple sensor platforms... Who really knows how they made their consideration to purchase Olympus?  Sure enough, but then focus-peaking would benefit everyone and any lens, not just Leica’s. First and foremost Fuji wants to sell their own lenses; support for another vendor’s lenses is just an added bonus for their customers. Leica photographers adapting their lenses to a Fuji camera carries the message that a Fuji camera is worthy of being used with Leica lenses. That’s good for Fuji. At the same time the number of photographers using Leica lenses with their X-Pro would still be much smaller than the number of photographers sticking with Fuji’s own AF offerings, so this strategy isn’t actually threatening their bottom-line.  Well that may be true- but Fuji has announced a Leica adapter before any other- and made it different than any previous adapter of that sort, and developed matching firmware. And yes it would be good for Fuji if people think there cameras are worthy of being used with Leica lenses... How much better for them if they produced a camera that arguably was more worthy than Leica's offerings A coup of sorts? And a chance to cash in and make some M glass perhaps?  I am not sure I buy that old line about lenses being the main interest of camera makers at all times: perhaps bodies alone can make large profits? For myself I have purchased three Leica digital RF cameras but not one new M lens. Leica still made some bucks off me I am absolutely sure... Fuji could make some bucks- and also make a big splash in the photographic scene. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted May 31, 2012 Share #32 Â Posted May 31, 2012 The linked "Mirrorless Rumor" site has a comment that is very friendly and appreciative of our community... Â "Getting sick and tired of Leica fanboys who seem to do nothign but try and feed some Leica myth.Leica should het on their knees and thank Panasonic that they even rovie them with AF and all the other good stuff they cant even do, 50 years later. Made in Germany my ass". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted May 31, 2012 Share #33 Â Posted May 31, 2012 I considered buying Fuji and decided not to. I bought a second M9. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted May 31, 2012 Share #34 Â Posted May 31, 2012 #18.... Â I read it. And I read #15, which was specifically directed at Leica Rumors. Â If you write enough posts, one of them is likely to be right. Â Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevelap Posted May 31, 2012 Share #35 Â Posted May 31, 2012 To be fair Leica Rumours predicted the MM release for which they were pretty much universally scoffed at. Â Leica Rumours seems to get most of the big 'stories' right. Â As Jaap mentioned they seem to have some good feeds now, although that wasn't always the case. Some of those rumours started here of course:), LR's site owner is (or at least was when the site launched) a LUF member........ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaques Posted May 31, 2012 Author Share #36 Â Posted May 31, 2012 well they didn't get the (correct) rumour I started that it would be black chrome... but they did ok Hopefully they will pick up on this new (correct?) rumour of a Fuji M camera (M stands for Multiple lens camera) . Â http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/customer-forum/227826-leica-announcement-may-10th-15.html#post2027604 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eleskin Posted May 31, 2012 Share #37 Â Posted May 31, 2012 Some suggest there is no motive to make an M mount digital camera other than Leica. Why did Cosina do it with the Voigtlander name? Why is Zeiss making m lenses that many feel are a much better value than Leica? There IS a market! Film is getting more expensive by the day and sensor technology is improving vastly. Eventually Zeiss and Cosina /Voigtlander will have to change their business model, bite the bullet, and put a digital sensor in their cameras, plain and simple! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted May 31, 2012 Share #38 Â Posted May 31, 2012 Some suggest there is no motive to make an M mount digital camera other than Leica. Why did Cosina do it with the Voigtlander name? Why is Zeiss making m lenses that many feel are a much better value than Leica? There IS a market! Film is getting more expensive by the day and sensor technology is improving vastly. Eventually Zeiss and Cosina /Voigtlander will have to change their business model, bite the bullet, and put a digital sensor in their cameras, plain and simple! Â Plain ok... but not so SIMPLE... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted May 31, 2012 Share #39  Posted May 31, 2012 Why did Cosina do it with the Voigtlander name? The only digital rangefinder built by Cosina was the Epson R-D1. That was 8 years ago. After Leica’s introduction of the M8 Cosina/Epson ceded the market to Leica and that was that.  Why is Zeiss making m lenses that many feel are a much better value than Leica? Well, that’s the point, isn’t it? They are making lenses, not bodies. Zeiss sees no need to make their own digital rangefinders when photographers get Zeiss lenses for their M9 or M8.  Eventually Zeiss and Cosina /Voigtlander will have to change their business model, bite the bullet, and put a digital sensor in their cameras, plain and simple! It would be much simpler to just stop making 35 mm cameras, should the market dry up. They could still sell lenses which is where the real money is made anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrism Posted May 31, 2012 Share #40 Â Posted May 31, 2012 I learnt on Olympus endoscopes, but now only have access to a Fuji scope. I can understand why Fuji might want to buy Olympus to acquire a competitor in the endoscope business. Given that this aspect of the business - endoscopes - is worth much more than the camera aspect, I don't see Fuji as truly being interested in acquiring Leica, who only service a small niche market for cameras. I also suspect that since Dr Kaufmann has had the controlling interest in Leica, the firm has not been for sale. After all, he has let a venture capital firm in just to provide more capital, but they still don't have a controlling interest as I understand it. My understanding might be wrong, of course, but that's how it seems to me. Consequently I think this statement is bravado, but no more than that. Â Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.