A very hypothetical "what if?"

[Me Leica!]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don't think this is likely to happen any time soon, but what if another company created a digital rangefinder - a true one, not like Fuji's hybrid gimmicks - with the capacity to take M lenses, and priced it significantly lower than the Leica equivalent (currently the M)? Let's also assume that the rival company's electronics knowledge is superior and the camera consequently suffers fewer issues. This is entirely hypothetical, as the RD1 is pretty much history these days, and where I have seen them sold, they are very expensive for what they offer. Hm, not unlike Leica

 

I could see several possible outcomes.

 

a) Leica loses a little business to the new RF and responds by diverting their attention to their other lines, i.e. compacts, etc, trusting that most of their customers will stay loyal.

The new company's RF fails to make even a challenge to Leica and are roundly mocked for trying.

c) The new company takes some business away from Leica. Leica responds by upping their game.

d) The new company takes some business away from Leica. Leica responds by raising their prices and playing the "exclusivity" card.

e) None of the above, or some combination thereof.

 

I can't see it happening, as I don't see any other manufacturer taking the financial risk. Nevertheless, you have to wonder if the brass at Leica don't have this at the back of their minds...

 

Just an idle speculation, but would be interesting to hear what the Leica aficionados have to say.

[jmr237]

I would look at the market for M-mount lenses for guidance on how to answer this question. Zeiss makes excellent lenses and prices them competitively relative to Leica. This keeps Leica honest and forces them to constantly advance their research and lens development to ensure their place in the "no compromises" top segment of the market. At the same time, Zeiss wins by catering to buyers who are more price-sensitive, willing to consider an alternative to the Leica brand, or both.

 

Bottom line, I think consumers and ultimately Leica would benefit by another entry into the digital rangefinder market.

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

In the film era there were cheaper competitors, for instance Voigtlander and Zeiss. None managed to make any impression on the market. Zeiss wanted to build a DRF, but could not come up with a camera that could compete successfully with Leica. And they could draw on a long history of building rangefinders and Sony electronic expertise. The Epson RD1 was an interesting hybrid of a Nikon D70 and Voigtlander film camera, but a white elephant for Epson. As fertile as a mule.

Since then Leica has forged ahead, making the exercise rather uninteresting for others. I could only see this happening as a prestige project, at a price that would make the Leica appear cheap.

Edited December 25, 2014 by jaapv

[BerndReini]

I don't see any company making another traditional rangefinder. The competition is already happening with Sony's EVF and Fuji's hybrid finder. There will be more of this in the future. I don't know how Leica will adapt to this. I think what they might do is develop new lenses that are more suited for a digital sensor than the M-line. These lenses would be bigger, more in line with Sony's lenses, but they could price them higher than Sony and optimize them for digital. From what I understand, lenses that have a tele-centric design work better with digital sensors. I believe Leica is already pursuing this with the T system and I wouldn't be surprised if there will be full-frame lenses based on the T-lens design in the future.

 

They have to do something because Sony's pricing strategy is so aggressive. It is quite impressive what the A7II offers for well under $2,000. How are you going to compete with that?

[semi-ambivalent]

As fertile as a mule.

 

Nice.

 

s-a

[bocaburger]

They have to do something because Sony's pricing strategy is so aggressive. It is quite impressive what the A7II offers for well under $2,000. How are you going to compete with that?

 

Leica has always been outclassed by much cheaper offerings, and their answer has been to raise prices, often near the end of a digital's product life. So I don't see them shaking in their boots over Sony's pricing strategy. Frankly to me and a lot of people I know, the A7 is a non-starter. For a few hundred the Nex series make a passable backup to an M for those like myself who don't want another multi-thousand dollar body depreciating like a lead baloon. Willing to tolerate an EVF for that. But for the price of an A7 no thanks. Can have a 6D or D610 for the same money, with true reflex viewing and truly workable AF and open to a huge range of high quality optics that integrate fully with the camera's electronics. Even an entry-level APS-C DSLR is more of a pleasure to view than an EVF.

[AlanJW]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

They have to do something because Sony's pricing strategy is so aggressive. It is quite impressive what the A7II offers for well under $2,000. How are you going to compete with that?

 

Leica hasn't reacted that way in the past. The Zeiss film rangefinder and Epson digital are examples. A completely electronic camera with an M mount by Leica at a fairly high price (as an alternative to, not substitute for M rangefinder) is more likely than price cuts. I would also expect to see improvements in the M EVF and other features. Not price cuts.

 

My experience with Sony A7r as a backup was not so smooth as others. I found the noise really bothersome, the shutter shake a problem, and the menu system infuriating (albeit better than the Nex system menus). But yes, Sony is learning and improving at a rapid pace, so maybe they will someday produce a smaller, quieter and more intuitive A7 type camera (maybe without the hump; see Sony RX100mkiii). And even if Leica does not respond with lower prices, there is no question that the marketplace is driving them to improve. Competition takes many forms, not just price competition, and it works for us as consumers.

[BerndReini]

Leica have increased their output. Leica stores are springing up everywhere and even the 50Apo is readily available now. They obviously need to grow as a company and it won't happen through special editions. Fuji and Ricoh are two companies that really listen to cutomer input, and I think Leica is doing the same. Andreas Kaufmann is a smart guy, and I believe he is more future-oriented than some of us - he has to be. I think with the M240, Leica have implemented a lot of the features many of us have been asking for. Now they just have to improve on them.

[CheshireCat]

RF cameras are a niche.

Epson tried to enter that niche, and it didn't work:

Epson R-D1 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

I am convinced that the future of mirrorless cameras is an advanced EVF that will be able to [also] simulate a RF by means of phase detection sensor elements.

 

I hope Leica R&D is working on something like that, as people of the RF generation are getting older an older, and the niche will get smaller and smaller.

Otherwise, Leica's failure to innovate in the camera field will lead to a lens-only company.

[pop]

...as people of the RF generation are getting older an older, and the niche will get smaller and smaller.

 

What is an RF generation? There are many people here in the forum who chose the RF over quite a few competing products, even at the prices we all know, and most of those I personally know are quite a bit younger than I am. Is the RF generation the age bracket between 30 and 45, then?

[Peter Branch]

What is an RF generation? There are many people here in the forum who chose the RF over quite a few competing products, even at the prices we all know, and most of those I personally know are quite a bit younger than I am. Is the RF generation the age bracket between 30 and 45, then?

 

I've met any number of photographers during my holiday travels who have returned to the Leica RF or taken it up for the first time after years of hauling about DSLR outfits.

 

I recognise them easily ; I'm one of them.

 

We are past the first flush of youth, have a bit of money in our pockets and value no compromise image quality combined with low bulk and weight - step forward the Leica M.

Ultimately a photograph requires only a lens and a sensor system. Leica currently have with their M system outstanding examples of both these requirements.

 

There is a never ending supply of potential Leica customers entering this demographic each year.

 

It is all too easy to become parochial about such things. I've met many young Chinese and other Asians carrying Leica M cameras. China and the Far East are now very important markets for Leica.

Edited December 26, 2014 by Peter Branch
Punctuation, formatting and to remove a word

[pgk]

..... what if another company created a digital rangefinder - a true one.....

Another true digital rangefinder would potentially suffer from many issues as Leica (with its immense experience on the mechanical side of things) has found. I would be (very pleasantly) surprised if another manufacturer decided that it was a viable and potentially profitable avenue to explore. To date, despite the obvious (niche) demand that such a camera evidently has, no manufacturer has attempted to follow Leica and Leica is learning a lot of lessons from following the RF path itself. A cheap, effective, M body would undoubtedly be of great interest to some people but whether it would be of enough interest to a viable number would be a real gamble which I am doubtful that any manufacturer is likely to take myself.

[CheshireCat]

What is an RF generation? There are many people here in the forum who chose the RF over quite a few competing products, even at the prices we all know, and most of those I personally know are quite a bit younger than I am. Is the RF generation the age bracket between 30 and 45, then?

 

The RF generation comprises all people that embraced photography when there was no way to focus a mirrorless camera but using a RF.

 

All the others are just an anomaly.

 

I am part of this anomaly, as I like the compactness of my M kit, and I love many Leica lenses. But my opinion is that the RF is medieval, and most people are ok with it just because they do not know better (and Leica's EVF is no better).

 

Other people are part of this anomaly just because they can afford a Leica, and someone told them cool people wear a Leica. If instead of the RF there was an EVF (or a logo, or a donkey) these guys wouldn't mind. Because it is a Leica.

Yes, there is still a market for these people. But it is called fashion, not photography.

[pico]

The RF generation comprises all people that embraced photography when there was no way to focus a mirrorless camera but using a RF.

 

I trust you are being facetious.

 

The first commercially successful 35mm SLR occurred in ~1936 with Exacta; before that there were very many SLR cameras, most LF or MF going back to the 1800's, and mirrorless cameras that can be accurately focused back to the dawn of photography.

[CheshireCat]

[...] before that there were very many SLR cameras, most LF or MF going back to the 1800's, and mirrorless cameras that can be accurately focused back to the dawn of photography.

 

SLR cameras are not mirrorless

 

Mirrorless cameras that could be "accurately focused" back in the dawn of photography were huge "view cameras" (they had Live View back then !).

 

The revolution for compact mirrorless cameras (what I am talking about) was the RF.

 

And now it is phase-detect sensor elements.

[pop]

... But my opinion is that the RF is medieval, and most people are ok with it just because they do not know better (and Leica's EVF is no better). ...

 

You're certainly entitled to having an opinion.

[jaapv]

The RF generation comprises all people that embraced photography when there was no way to focus a mirrorless camera but using a RF.

 

All the others are just an anomaly.

 

I am part of this anomaly, as I like the compactness of my M kit, and I love many Leica lenses. But my opinion is that the RF is medieval, and most people are ok with it just because they do not know better (and Leica's EVF is no better).

 

Other people are part of this anomaly just because they can afford a Leica, and someone told them cool people wear a Leica. If instead of the RF there was an EVF (or a logo, or a donkey) these guys wouldn't mind. Because it is a Leica.

Yes, there is still a market for these people. But it is called fashion, not photography.

So what are all these members that shoot their M side by side with a slew of other cameras doing with stuff they don't know how to use?

[pico]

SLR cameras are not mirrorless

 

I wrote that to establish my endpoint in the timeline.

 

Mirrorless cameras that could be "accurately focused" back in the dawn of photography were huge "view cameras" (they had Live View back then !).

 

Live View, yes but the image was upside-down and backwards.

.

[CheshireCat]

So what are all these members that shoot their M side by side with a slew of other cameras doing with stuff they don't know how to use?

 

I am not saying they don't know how to use stuff.

 

I am saying they don't know better. I have already posted examples of better in another thread, i.e. the ML unofficial firmware for Canon, which is not even using PD sensors.

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m-type-240/274855-m-rangefinder-vs-evf-focus-accuracy-3.html#post2704038

All I got is dismissing replies from people who have not even tried it, and someone even laughing at the size of the gear I use (much like many old people did seeing the first computers):

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/333798-rf-vs-evf-4.html#post2705175

 

I also believe many members will happily switch to another camera brand, provided:

- They can use their Leica lenses without side effects (color vignetting, blurry corners).

- They have a proper way to focus.

 

Currently, there is no camera that satisfies the above conditions. But this will change in the near future.

Edited December 26, 2014 by CheshireCat

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jaapv]

It would still need to have an optical viewfinder. I cannot see any M user (except Erick ) giving that up in a hurry...