Q or Q type FF body with interchangeable AF lenses?

[archi4]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Lenses remain, digital bodies have a "best before" date.

The Fui X100 series have a price point where this is acceptable for me.

I'll wait until a "Q" with interchangeable lens mount and maybe a two sensor electronic rangefinder comes along, and then come back to my love of more than 40 years, Leica cameras 

[IkarusJohn]

 

 

Intentionally hurting a new camera's sales by making its design less appealing in order to protect M sales, that would be an error.

 

I'm somewhat afraid to ask, but why do you say that Leica is intentionally hurting a new camera's sales in order to protect M sales?  That would be perverse. I agree it would be an error. Worse, I find it implausible. 

 

Do your marketing skills match your modesty in engineering?

[Advertisement]

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

[-Lss-]

But making the camera taller for no good reason, be it from a technical or a design perspective – how would that be good design?

It wouldn't, for reasons mostly related to tautology. It is possible to design a camera where a taller form factor makes sense, though. 

[mjh]

I'm somewhat afraid to ask, but why do you say that Leica is intentionally hurting a new camera's sales in order to protect M sales?  That would be perverse. I agree it would be an error. Worse, I find it implausible.

Quite implausible indeed. Having said that, a new system would have to be sufficiently different from any existing systems so as not to cannibalise sales. So if Leica had an idea how to improve on the M concept, they should build a better M. If they had an idea how to build a camera appealing to customers who wouldn’t have considered an M, S, or T, then a new system would make a lot of sense. What wouldn’t make sense is to introduce a camera aimed squarely at existing M customers when that camera wasn’t an M.

 

Which is to say that if a new system shouldn’t appeal to died-in-the-wool M enthusiasts then that’s OK.

[barjohn]

Note, I didn't say they were doing that.  I obviously don't know.  But if the new camera is an SLR design rather than an M like design, it is not unreasonable to think that part of the reasoning was to make it less appealing to the M user.  I suspect that the M user community demographics would show an aging group mostly over 50.  That means that even though they may want to use MF their eye sight is likely to make it more difficult or problematic and that is the attraction for AF (along with speed).  Many on this forum would love an interchangeable lens version of the Q with a range of AF primes or zooms and the ability to use their manual M lenses.  If they wanted an SLR form factor they have many other choices, Nikon, Canon, Sony, Fuji, Olympus and Panasonic with more FF cameras to come.  However, those same buyers for an ILC Q would then probably not buy the next M and thus negatively impact M sales. The market size with the requisite income and financial resources is small and approaching 1% of the population of which only a smaller percentage are photographers willing to spend that kind of money on a camera.  This leads me to speculate that if Leica produces and SLR form factor "Q" it can be for no other reason than to protect M sales.  It certainly can't be that it is because they want to be in competition with other SLR vendors.

[lucerne]

Note, I didn't say they were doing that.  I obviously don't know.  But if the new camera is an SLR design rather than an M like design, it is not unreasonable to think that part of the reasoning was to make it less appealing to the M user.  I suspect that the M user community demographics would show an aging group mostly over 50.  That means that even though they may want to use MF their eye sight is likely to make it more difficult or problematic and that is the attraction for AF (along with speed).  Many on this forum would love an interchangeable lens version of the Q with a range of AF primes or zooms and the ability to use their manual M lenses.  If they wanted an SLR form factor they have many other choices, Nikon, Canon, Sony, Fuji, Olympus and Panasonic with more FF cameras to come.  However, those same buyers for an ILC Q would then probably not buy the next M and thus negatively impact M sales. The market size with the requisite income and financial resources is small and approaching 1% of the population of which only a smaller percentage are photographers willing to spend that kind of money on a camera.  This leads me to speculate that if Leica produces and SLR form factor "Q" it can be for no other reason than to protect M sales.  It certainly can't be that it is because they want to be in competition with other SLR vendors.

 

 

Just remind me!   I won't have to look through a viewfinder located in a fake prism top centre of the rear of the camera, with my nose greasing the LCD and lining up my target with a mark on the barrel of my lens, and a flashgun resting on the top of my head.   Will I?

Edited August 31, 2015 by lucerne

[janki]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Michael knows more than any other in this Forum about what is coming from Leica, - I am sure about that.

 

He has spoken so nice about a retro SLR form factor system, that I think that's what is in the pipeline.

 

And I agree:

“The important point in going for a retro-style design is that you have to know where to stop, namely where retro becomes retro for retro’s sake.”

 

Personally, I can very well thrive with an EV system with SLR look.

But it must be built to withstand the elements.

 

Disregarding the environmental aspect, I suppose most of us can equally retro design like this:     

http://www.ford.com/cars/mustang/

http://www.chevrolet.com/2016-camaro/

 

 

[jdlaing]

There is a downside.

 

At the rate Leica introduces new lens you all will wait until hell freezes over for a decent range of autofocus lenses.

 

The T is a classic example.

[mjh]

Personally, I can very well thrive with an EV system with SLR look.

But it must be built to withstand the elements.

A sensible requirement.

[barjohn]

It does appear that Michael is confirming the SLR form factor which is actually a relief for me as I won't be tempted in the slightest to spend my money on it.  I have already owned most of the Sony's, the XT-1, the Em-5-II and the EM-1 along with a Nikon DSLR and I know I don't like the SLR form factor.  It is awkward to carry in a case and putting my nose on the LCD isn't for me either.  If the design avoids the nose problem the EVF protrudes from the back too far further increasing the difficulty of carrying it.  My wallet thanks you! 

[johnloumiles]

One thing I know for sure is the camera will look handsome and have great functionality no matter what shape it takes. Leica itself has never designed a bad camera.

[screwmount]

as long as they make it like a Leicaflex SL and not like one of the real ugly Rs (R3,R8,R9) I would like it.....

[johnloumiles]

I doubt it will look anything like an R8 or R9 because that's the S territory but do you really thing they're ugly? I think they are some of the best looking SLRs ever made. Smooth perfect lines that hide the bulk of the pentaprism, feels perfect in the hand. Modern classic from my POV, but I guess those discrepancies are what makes us human;)

[screwmount]

as usual, it's a matter of taste.

But put an OM or Fujica (35mm film) next to a R8/9 then you might know what I mean.

Although th SL was not really small, it still was a handy SLR.....

Edited September 1, 2015 by screwmount

[johnloumiles]

I have a black OM and an R8. They are completely different cameras so comparing the two is just a mater of preference. The OM is filed away in the "cameras of my past" cabinet while the R8 sits on my desk when not being used. Probably the best illustration of my feelings towards to two.

[AlanJW]

Where is Jono?  He will know.

[sblitz]

I think it would be a bit annoying for them to get everyone excited about the Q and then a few months later launch a interchangeable lens version of same. Unless the price point, camera plus lens is very very different. We will see soon enough. For me. I really like the Q and find the shots hold up really well when blowing. Up a small part of the shot

[Mike Rawcs]

Where is Jono?  He will know.

Out user-testing it.

[jaapv]

I doubt it will look anything like an R8 or R9 because that's the S territory but do you really thing they're ugly? I think they are some of the best looking SLRs ever made. Smooth perfect lines that hide the bulk of the pentaprism, feels perfect in the hand. Modern classic from my POV, but I guess those discrepancies are what makes us human;)

I still prefer the R4-R6 series, but that is just me...

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[adamdewilde]

I spent about ten minutes trying to figure out my password just so I could say that if Leica released a camera that didn't look like the M/Q. But instead looked more like an OMD/A7... I wouldn't buy it. One of the reasons I'd pay more, is because of how the camera looks.

 

Trust me, no matter what your mother told you, looks matter.