X Vario reduced price

[IkarusJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It's their latest camera, David!

[NZDavid]

Nearly 10 months old now! M cameras seem to hold their value better than compacts, but anything digital seems to take a price tumble. You buy it because you want to use it and like the results, and wince at the depreciation. Lenses, however, hold their value best of all!

[Advertisement]

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

[colonel]

It's not just a UK offer B&H have also knocked something off the price.

 

I don't think IQ is the issue, and I'm not actually saying the T will be a bad camera. Far from it. It just doesn't interest me, and I don't actually think it will interest the market. You say the X1, X2 & X-Vario sell well - where's the proof?

 

The anecdotal feedback I get is that they are okay cameras (the X-Vario better), but not moving well at all ...

 

The X1 and X2 sold well

The XV is underperforming

This is all anecdotal from Leica personnel in certain interviews as they don't reveal figures

For sure they wouldn't have made an X2 if the X1 hadn't done well and made the XV as the X2 had done well

It's understood that these cameras don't appeal to hardcore M shooters, as the compact cameras jointly made with Panasonic although many have as second camera. It's a different market. Some spouses of M shooters and people who want a high quality camera that's easy to use, produces excellent pictures and is something a bit different, a bit more stylish.

I don't expect any serious M amateur to approve of this market but Leica will continue to persure different groups and markets as IMHO it should do.

There is something that serious amateurs instinctively hate about boutique products, it's almost like its a slight on them being serious. Sony makes the A7R and play station 3, I say get over it.

[bill]

In all honesty it would be far easier to take what you say seriously if you a) based your assertions on fact not anecdote and refrained from breathtakingly sweeping and unfounded generalisations such as "some spouses of M shooters" and serious amateurs "instinctively hating boutique products"...

 

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

[colonel]

In all honesty it would be far easier to take what you say seriously if you a) based your assertions on fact not anecdote and refrained from breathtakingly sweeping and unfounded generalisations such as "some spouses of M shooters" and serious amateurs "instinctively hating boutique products"...

 

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

 

Being told information by Leica insiders and shop owners is pretty good information, I suppose you say they all lie!

Unlike you who uses projected generalisations, ie it's never going to sell well because it's junk. When it's just been released ........

 

You must be pretty sore that respected reviewers, such as Ming Thein and Irwin Putts, rate it so well.

[bill]

I'm not "sore" at all. It's a CAMERA... I simply have an aversion to giving undue weight to hearsay and statistically insignificant sources. It's a survival trait... Let's debate instead a fact or two. 1. 128,000 compact system cameras sold in the UK in 2011, 100,000 sold in 2013. 2. Four times as many DSLRs are sold in the UK than CSCs. That is the shrinking market in which Leica is fighting for market share. Fuji and Olympus - both small companies compared to Nikon, Canon, Sony or even Panasonic - have seen a 60% cut in their camera division losses (note that word - "losses") by bringing to market competitive cameras that people want - the X-E2 and the OM-D E-M1 respectively. This is the real world in which Leica operates. I guarantee that their business plans are fact-based projections.

 

Hope is not a strategy. Wishful thinking is not a tactic.

[NZDavid]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In all honesty it would be far easier to take what you say seriously if you a) based your assertions on fact not anecdote and refrained from breathtakingly sweeping and unfounded generalisations...

 

Both good points I think. If we didn't make breathtakingly sweeping generalisations what would we have to debate about? I've told myself a million times not to exaggerate. Bill, please don't cloud the discussion with facts!

[wda]

I note the OP merely launched this discussion. I wonder what he thinks?

[colonel]

Nearly 10 months old now! M cameras seem to hold their value better than compacts, but anything digital seems to take a price tumble. You buy it because you want to use it and like the results, and wince at the depreciation. Lenses, however, hold their value best of all!

 

yes

 

interestingly, looking at real world prices I see X-Varios going second hand on ebay for around £1,600 (and also advertised by UK retailers, e.g. R J Lewis have one at the moment) which is a 25% reduction based on the original £2,150 or 16% based on the current £1,949 norm. M's sold by classic camera, apertureuk and reddot recently have gone for £4200-£4,000, a 22% reduction on the original £5,150 or 16% based on the now common £4,799

 

Different but not that different

Edited March 26, 2014 by colonel

[nippa]

Good to see prices falling but not unexpected really.

 

My anecdotal evidence from a certain Manchester out-of-town retailer is that they haven't sold any XVs.

 

I've coveted the XV for months but the price point is too high to make me jump even though my dear wife has given me a green light..

 

Then other interesting cameras appear with similar IQ .I've just bought an amazing Sigma DP3 for 1/3 of the price with resolution and colour that betters the XV.

Had the XV a built in EVF I might have found the price more palatable.

 

As it is , I might look for a used version in a couple of years if there's a firmware update but for me it's no classic digital.

[bill]

...M's sold by classic camera, apertureuk and reddot recently have gone for £4200-£4,000, a 22% reduction.

 

You need to compare OSP not CSP.

[euston]

In his article What Matters Michael Reichmann expresses some thoughts on the state of the camera industry which touch on some of the issues raised in this thread. Whether you agree with him or not, his article is worth a look, I think.

 

If there is anything in what he is saying, I think Leica may be getting more right with the XV than some here realise - superlative lens, well matched sensor no bigger than it needs to be, robust build quality and ergonomics that make it a pleasure to use. It's a better camera than many of us are photographers and can output files that can print to sizes in excess of anything many of us will ever need.

[earleygallery]

In his article What Matters Michael Reichmann expresses some thoughts on the state of the camera industry which touch on some of the issues raised in this thread. Whether you agree with him or not, his article is worth a look, I think.

 

If there is anything in what he is saying, I think Leica may be getting more right with the XV than some here realise - superlative lens, well matched sensor no bigger than it needs to be, robust build quality and ergonomics that make it a pleasure to use. It's a better camera than many of us are photographers and can output files that can print to sizes in excess of anything many of us will ever need.

 

Or looking at it another way, he says "The differences between brands and between models comes down to features".

 

There are plenty of cameras with more/better features that the XV on the market which cost a lot less.

 

This is perhaps why we are seeing incentives offered now to buy an XV?

 

Note - I'm not saying it's a bad camera. I do however think that Leica are perhaps misguided in their apparent marketing strategy.

 

If any company should make the definitive serious photographers compact/high quality digital camera it is Leica. But they don't.

Edited March 26, 2014 by earleygallery

[thighslapper]

 

Then other interesting cameras appear with similar IQ .I've just bought an amazing Sigma DP3 for 1/3 of the price with resolution and colour that betters the XV.

Had the XV a built in EVF I might have found the price more palatable.

 

.... you will not find a similar camera with a lens that comes close to the performance of the XV .... higher resolution is pointless unless the bit on the front of the camera can use it .... and I am somewhat surprised about the 'colour' comment as I have found it consistently more accurate than the M ..... and the Sony A7's.

[colonel]

Or looking at it another way, he says "The differences between brands and between models comes down to features".

 

There are plenty of cameras with more/better features that the XV on the market which cost a lot less.

 

This is perhaps why we are seeing incentives offered now to buy an XV?

 

Note - I'm not saying it's a bad camera. I do however think that Leica are perhaps misguided in their apparent marketing strategy.

 

If any company should make the definitive serious photographers compact/high quality digital camera it is Leica. But they don't.

 

Sure

 

The article is also saying that with casual photography sown up by phones, google glasses, hero cams, etc it's only specialist that is left.

One specialist market is serious amateurs. Many of whom, but not all, are full of GAS and agonise over the minutiae of differences which make no difference to their photography.

Another market is folk after something simple to use, excellent results and stylish/different/cool. Leica has the M for one and X and compacts for the other.

 

The XV is not far off the definitive high quality compact.

[thighslapper]

Note - I'm not saying it's a bad camera. I do however think that Leica are perhaps misguided in their apparent marketing strategy.

.

 

.... yup ..... 2k is just too much even for Leicaman to take a punt on a camera that on paper looks uninspiring........

 

the fact that almost everyone who has actually bought and used one finds it really excellent must be a source of great frustration to Leica.....

 

I don't regret a penny... even a full RRP ....... and if anything it had me wondering whether 5k on an M had been the more foolish financial decision

[bill]

Sure

 

The article is also saying that with casual photography sown up by phones, google glasses, hero cams, etc it's only specialist that is left.

One specialist market is serious amateurs. Many of whom, but not all, are full of GAS and agonise over the minutiae of differences which make no difference to their photography.

Another market is folk after something simple to use, excellent results and stylish/different/cool. Leica has the M for one and X and compacts for the other.

 

The XV is not far off the definitive high quality compact.

In all honesty it would be far easier to take what you say seriously if you a) based your assertions on fact not anecdote and refrained from breathtakingly sweeping and unfounded generalisations such as "some spouses of M shooters" and serious amateurs "instinctively hating boutique products"...

 

I rest my case.

Edited March 26, 2014 by bill

[colonel]

I rest my case.

 

jeez

 

no one is allowed any speculation except you ?

 

from someone who calls cameras junk, rubbish, awful, not useful, no one will buy, no one will like, no market .... ad nauseam about cameras you have never seen or used

 

pot kettle black etc....

Edited March 26, 2014 by colonel

[bill]

Please find and feel free to quote directly where I have used a single one of those specific terms in regard to any camera. Please also explain the basis for your assertion that I have "never seen or used" the cameras that you seem to rate so highly. I trust you are not calling me a liar...?

 

It is truly depressing that expressing a fact-based view is shouted down.

 

I don't advertise apps or devices unless they pay me...

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[andybarton]

Gentlemen... please.