rosuna Posted June 17, 2012 Share #141  Posted June 17, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Compared to competing products it would certainly be more expensive but still considerably less expensive than an M. It’s main selling point would be Leica lenses, I suppose.  Leica lenses would have to compete against Zeiss, Schneider, Olympus AF lenses...  Look at the offer for M system of lenses. Zeiss do not offer fast lenses just because they would be as expensive as Leica's. A good example is the discontinued 85mm Sonnar for M mount.  Leica can sell faster and more expensive lenses to the users of M system, because they are prepared to pay those prices for the camera and lenses. Many even prefer more expensive Leicas than Zeiss' lenses with the same speed, and the reason is not the performance. This is the segment of the market with people able to pay $7,000 for a camera and $2,000 or more for a lens. It is a very particular class of photographers. Rangefinder users.  Any APS-C mirrorless camera look a different public. You cannot charge typical Leica prices for M lenses to these users. Even worse, Schneider (for m4/3) and Zeiss (for NEX) are offering high speed / high prices lenses already! It is very difficult to differentiate the product in this segment of the market. Leica has to be competitive here: better image quality, or more features, or lower prices... maybe the brand name justifies an additional markup, but not too large.  Sorry but I cannot see how Leica will be successful developing a competitive or differentiated new APS-C system right now. Leica survives because they offer different products. They also offer superior products (M lenses), but they are superior at very high prices, and they find people inclined to pay those prices in specific niches.  You cannot go mainstream and offer "superior" products. That was the fate of the R system.  The differentiation has to be based elsewhere. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 17, 2012 Posted June 17, 2012 Hi rosuna, Take a look here Stefan Daniel Interview Offers Clues. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
rosuna Posted June 17, 2012 Share #142 Â Posted June 17, 2012 And AF? Is there any reasonably fast contrast-based AF for 36x24? Â That is a good question. I don't know. Even more, you need a 24x36 sensor able of continuous operation for supporting a EVF, not just casual live view. Â There are sensors with phase detection AF incorporated (the Nikon's 1 series and the new Canon 650). On the other hand, Sony plans to present a STL (translucent mirror) reflex with 24x36 format... So those technologies are (almost) here... Â Maybe these technical constraints are the real reason of the delay... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted June 17, 2012 Share #143 Â Posted June 17, 2012 Why would customers buy a $8k+ (or more including a clip-on EVF) rangefinder if they can have a $6k- full frame EVIL instead? This won't happen because Leica won't cannibalize their M system themselves. Â Because they are different products. I don't see why the price of the EVIL has to be $6,000, but anyway, the EVIL has AF lenses (a few of them) and the rangefinder uses MF lenses in the old way. You can buy the two models (one as a backup of the other), or just one. Of course, you can use MF on the EVIL camera but many people would prefer the rangefinder focusing and the optical viewfinder. Some people is interested in AF lenses, some people don't. I would buy a classical rangefinder... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted June 17, 2012 Share #144  Posted June 17, 2012 If a FF EVIL camera which takes Leica senses kills the M sales, then better Leica than Fuji make it! Peter  I don't see why a FF EVIL camera would kill the classical rangefinder M camera, but even if that happens some day... I agree with you: better Leica than any other. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted June 17, 2012 Share #145 Â Posted June 17, 2012 Most, if not all, mirrorless systems can use Leica lenses now. Are we talking about all-new, APS-C only (to contain size), AF Leica lenses? Â A new APS-C mirrorless camera would ask for a new system of AF lenses by Leica, specific for the format and mount. Leica would find strong competitors there (Zeiss, Schneider... even Canon soon). This implies to repeat the R system's story. Leica was not able to offer specific strengths. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted June 18, 2012 Share #146 Â Posted June 18, 2012 Why not simply modify the Panasonic GX-1? And give it X or M-style controls. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted June 18, 2012 Share #147 Â Posted June 18, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) a tiny modular FF camera that can shoot in infrared, B&W, cine- AF 'moving' sensor'- whatever back is required- capable of using multiple lens mounts, manual and dedicated AF. Â That would be nice too ... if Leica could take a page or two from the Ricoh GXR - I'd be more than happy to buy both the M and R mount modules. I doubt this would happen with a full frame sensor though - not for $6k or less ... this year's Photokina is shaping up to be another letdown I'm afraid. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted June 18, 2012 Share #148  Posted June 18, 2012 I'm curious, what EVF camera are you suggesting "handles just as a SLR camera"? The latest ones I've looked thru, up to and including NEX-7 and Oly OM-D, did seem somewhat crisper than the 1st-gen EVF attached to my LX5, and with a faster refresh rate they are less nausea-inducing when moving the camera about, but I still have the feeling I'm looking down a tunnel at a tiny TV screen. And I don't care for the way they brighten-up in a dark environment because every time I take my eye from the finder I've got one dilated pupil, and with the slow-down of visual accomodation that comes with age...annoying. I find rear-LCD viewing virtually unusable, which is the only reason I went from the DLux3 to an LX5, and maybe in the future there will be an EVF that replicates looking thru a Leica, or a mirrored SLR, but at this point, speaking personally, I would not want an EVF for my main camera system.  You spoke of the handling of an EVF camera. I replied on how an EVF camera with an eye lever finder handles. Then you start talking of the quality of current electronic viewfinders. I answered your question, and now you find that you were too confused to put the question you intended to put. That's not my fault.  And I did not speak of any specific model camera. I spoke of the general handling characteristics of a class of cameras.  But all right, I am going to answer your real question. Current EVFs leave much to be desired. But they left even more to be desired a couple of years ago. In other words, they are improving. Also, many of the problems stemmed not from the viewfinder itself, but from the limited live view capability of the sensor. That was eminently the problem with the X1 – low refresh rate, leading to Spastic Sensor Syndrome.  But again, this state of things will improve. In about two years, when Leica are ready to launch their EVIL camera, things should have got much better. And, remember there are SLR cameras with atrocious finders too – and they are being produced, and sold, by Canikon.  The old man from the Kodachrome Age Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveYork Posted June 18, 2012 Share #149  Posted June 18, 2012 The M9 already is a mirrorless 36x24 mm camera and an M10 supporting live-view and maybe an optional EVF appears to be likely. What would still another mirrorless 36x24 mm camera have to offer, except being marginally cheaper if it doesn’t include a rangefinder? The M system doesn’t need reinforcements (on top of the M10); rather Leica needs a sufficiently different system since the M system isn’t for everyone.  Ane remember what the CL help do to the M5. I'm sure Leica remembers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted June 18, 2012 Share #150  Posted June 18, 2012 You spoke of the handling of an EVF camera. I replied on how an EVF camera with an eye lever finder handles. Then you start talking of the quality of current electronic viewfinders. I answered your question, and now you find that you were too confused to put the question you intended to put. That's not my fault. And I did not speak of any specific model camera. I spoke of the general handling characteristics of a class of cameras.  But all right, I am going to answer your real question. Current EVFs leave much to be desired.  Thank you for finally answering the only question I ever posed to you. Well, it was phrased as a question so as not to seem combative, but it was basically a statement, which you have acknowledged as correct. However I've read and re-read my post several times and I can't imagine what I said that could have compelled a reasonable person to respond in such an immature, condescending and offensive manner. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted June 18, 2012 Share #151 Â Posted June 18, 2012 Thank you for finally answering the only question I ever posed to you. Well, it was phrased as a question so as not to seem combative, but it was basically a statement, which you have acknowledged as correct. However I've read and re-read my post several times and I can't imagine what I said that could have compelled a reasonable person to respond in such an immature, condescending and offensive manner. Â Thank you very much. Â The old man from the Kodachrome Age Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted June 20, 2012 Share #152 Â Posted June 20, 2012 Ane remember what the CL help do to the M5. I'm sure Leica remembers. Â The CL was introduced because the M5 had failed on the vine. The CL tided the company over till they could decide what to do with the M series. Today, OTOH, the M camera is selling well and the question becomes how to introduce a less expensive camera that doesn't compete with the M system but has some compatibility with it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuny Posted June 20, 2012 Share #153 Â Posted June 20, 2012 The CL story sounds much like the D2 story, tiding Leica over until the M* and DMR could be released. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomB_tx Posted June 20, 2012 Share #154 Â Posted June 20, 2012 The CL was introduced because the M5 had failed on the vine. The CL tided the company over till they could decide what to do with the M series. Today, OTOH, the M camera is selling well and the question becomes how to introduce a less expensive camera that doesn't compete with the M system but has some compatibility with it. The M5 was introduced in 1971. I worked for a Leica dealer in 1968-69 and the Leica rep was already talking about a new compact Leica in development that would be smaller and lighter than the (then current) M4, take M lenses, and have a built-in meter. So the CL was planned before the M5 was introduced. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted June 21, 2012 Share #155 Â Posted June 21, 2012 Interesting, Tom, since it was introduced after the M5. I think you may have heard salesman's palaver that later turned out to be true. According to your Leica rep, was the camera to be produced in Japan? Â I'll stay with my version, particularly since we Leica reps seldom got good data on future cameras before they were introduced. Just my own experience here, you understand! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomB_tx Posted June 21, 2012 Share #156 Â Posted June 21, 2012 Howard, Â I know what you mean - but Leitz and E.Leitz NY operated differently back then. I think these comments were before the Leitz-Minolta agreement, so I've wondered if the desire for a low-cost entry-level CL might have pushed for the agreement, and the camera waited a few years until it could be produced at the cost they required. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaques Posted June 21, 2012 Share #157  Posted June 21, 2012 Did anyone else notice an interesting part of the interview:  Daniel: "I can tell you a little bit about the experience with our Leica M9. The camera exceeded by far all our expectations regarding the quantities we could sell. What happened is that especially in the second and now third year of the product most of the buyers are first-time buyers who never had a Leica before. This camera just presents an addition to what is existing in the market, the smallest full-frame digital system camera. Therefore it’s appealing to non-Leica users. That’s what we’re targeting with our next two, with other products"   Interviewer: "I understand that you can’t reveal any details about these two products, but what does an M10 might have to have to attract even more buyers?"  Daniel: "We have done intensive research about what people like about the M9 and the M8, and what they rather dislike. We know exactly where are the weak points, for example battery life and processing speed. For the next generation we try to strengthen those weak points" Notice how Daniel stumbled- mentioning 'two' products, then changing to 'other products'? I like how the interviewer jumped in on this admission of 'two' products... Daniel then seems to have then been in evasive mode with 'next generation'... But he didn't retract the 'two'  so Photokina = M10 and the other thing... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 21, 2012 Share #158 Â Posted June 21, 2012 Photokina '12 = M10 and Photokina '14(+) = the other thing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted June 21, 2012 Share #159 Â Posted June 21, 2012 Photokina is only every other year. They can't wait until 14 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 21, 2012 Share #160 Â Posted June 21, 2012 True thanks. Just edited my post above. I think Leica will wait or do nothing about the EVIL but i may be wrong. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.