Jump to content

Are we beta testers?


IkarusJohn

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

.............................

 

Do I wish Leica gave better roadmaps or communication- sure. However, being in retail/distribution, this is a double edged sword. I have often eaten my words after informing my clients about an upcoming product. Its much better not to build expectations- your sales of existing products come to a screeching halt and you get pestered constantly for delivery dates and information, requests for product changes etc. Leica mostly take the right course here IMHO. 

 

..................

 

 

 

But, do you charge 2 to 3 times higher prices for your products than your competitors do for their nearest-equivalent products?

 

I'm not moaning about Leica's pricing, by the way.  I am suggesting that by virtue of having successfully created a unique place for themselves in the market, they have the opportunity to behave in ways that further set them apart from the normal accepted business and customer relations standards in the camera industry.

 

It would require care to carry it out effectively, but the benefits would be considerable.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My humble opinion as a neutral observer, being no longer a Leica user, is that the SL will be probably far more reliable and less 'quirky' than the digital Ms.

To begin with, the main parts of the camera are outsourced. It's no secret that Leica doesn't makes 'at home'  the sensor, LCD screen, EVF, electronic circuitry, or even the shutter, in all probability. My guess is that Panasonic takes charge of 90% of the components according to Leica's main design, but they must have quite a large degree of freedom on how to manufacture the parts, as long as the final product fits into the main project. Thus, Leica gets the 'half cooked' product, makes the assembly, testing and releases to the market.   
Hopefully gone are the days of memory card weird incompatibilities, 'temperamental' batteries, cracked-corroded sensors, greenbands and all the issues of the past ten years.   
Not saying by any means that the "Panaleica" SL will be perfect from the beginning .. rather online with what is to be expected nowadays from a good electronics-based product, ( including some additional beta testing by the final user.   :rolleyes:  )
That's for the camera. Lenses, of course, are a different question.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Beta testers?  All camera manufacturers have released digital cameras with firmware update needs - and some models also required manufacturer recalls. Leica cameras are little different from those of other manufacturers as regards post-release improvement needs. Unfortunately the regular forum naysayers try and make too much box-office of any shortcomings. 

 

dunk

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have only been in the Leica camp for the last year.  Before that for a long time I was in the Nikon camp and for a short time the Fuji camp.  

 

All have had issues of once kind or another.  I see no difference between Leica and they other companies.  Sure their prices are very high, but in return you get higher performance, better weight and much more haptics an aesthetics.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Beta testers?  All camera manufacturers have released digital cameras with firmware update needs - and some models also required manufacturer recalls.

 

 

In the good old days of ROM chips, software updates also required manufacturer recalls.

Most devices were thoroughly tested and released only when the manufacturer was quite sure that they didn't need a costly recall.

Of course, product release cycles were bigger, and product costs were higher.

 

Nowadays, Leica is still taking forever to release new products, still makes quite expensive products, and the only difference is that we have to deal with plenty of software issues for a long while.

 

- [boss] Is the camera ready for the market ?

- [Eng] No, it still has a lot of issues !

- [boss] Can they be fixed in software ?

- [Eng] Yes, probably, but it takes time !

- [boss] WTF, who cares ! Release the product and those suckers will get a software update eventually.

- [Eng] You are a genius, boss.

- [boss] I know ! Now stop wasting time on that, and start working on the new camera.

Edited by CheshireCat
Link to post
Share on other sites

Beta testers?  All camera manufacturers have released digital cameras with firmware update needs - and some models also required manufacturer recalls. Leica cameras are little different from those of other manufacturers as regards post-release improvement needs. Unfortunately the regular forum naysayers try and make too much box-office of any shortcomings. 

 

dunk

Yes.  Nikon had big AF issues with the D800 when it was introduced.  Canon had AF issues with one of its pro models.  I've had repairs on Nikons, Canons and Sony and the only reason I didn't on Olympus is I didn't keep it and none on Fuji because I've never owned one.   When I've needed a repair on a Leica it has always been no problem, and sometimes much faster than I thought.   If you read the Internet you'd never drive a car much less actually buy one, as they are all riddled with problems.  I do not feel like a beta tester for Leica any more than for any other camera that I bought early in its life-cycle, and I have been buying gear since 1959.  I think the early in the life cycle is the critical thing.   As for firmware, maybe the big manufacturers seem better, but they bring out new models every six months it seems.   At least for Leica the cycle is longer.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

But, do you charge 2 to 3 times higher prices for your products than your competitors do for their nearest-equivalent products?

 

I'm not moaning about Leica's pricing, by the way.  I am suggesting that by virtue of having successfully created a unique place for themselves in the market, they have the opportunity to behave in ways that further set them apart from the normal accepted business and customer relations standards in the camera industry.

 

It would require care to carry it out effectively, but the benefits would be considerable.

I'm not sure those benefits really exist, Peter.

 

The R10 is a clear example of the risks of broken promises, and people holding off buying now in the expectation of a new, ground breaking M the other side of the coin.

 

Next model expectations are the silly side of innovation. The SL had hardly hit the shelves and some here were speculating about SL2.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm more interested in communications regarding problems and fixes that are known to affect more than a few users than I am about communications regarding future products, which can indeed be tricky.  For instance, have we (or even affected customers) seen anything from Leica regarding apparent issues with the S system?   Leica could and should be far more transparent and proactive IMO.

 

Jeff

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure those benefits really exist, Peter.

 

The R10 is a clear example of the risks of broken promises, and people holding off buying now in the expectation of a new, ground breaking M the other side of the coin.

 

Next model expectations are the silly side of innovation. The SL had hardly hit the shelves and some here were speculating about SL2.

 

 

The world has changed since then. And it's not all about revealing your commercially sensitive development plans. It's about responsible communication.

 

Of course if you make unrealistic promises you will get trouble. But there's a world of difference between turning sales talk into promises, and being honest and working as closely as you can with your customers, as opposed to keeping them as far away as you can get away with.

 

I feel that Leica is missing-playing its own strongest hand. It is busy opening "boutiques" and promising a level of service and relationship that you might expect to accompany a genuinely premium product. But when it comes to it, in an area which could be genuinely worthwhile and valuable to many customers, it falls back to an ultra-conservative instinct from a bygone age.

 

Most of us have a great deal of affection for Leica and really want them to be successful and would enjoy contributing to that success. I know about the risks involved in treating customers a little more like partners but I also know that it can pay off, and I'd like Leica to take a few risks of this sort.

Edited by Peter H
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm more interested in communications regarding problems and fixes that are known to affect more than a few users than I am about communications regarding future products, which can indeed be tricky.  For instance, have we (or even affected customers) seen anything from Leica regarding apparent issues with the S system?   Leica could and should be far more transparent and proactive IMO.

 

Jeff

 

https://us.leica-camera.com/World-of-Leica/Leica-News/About-Leica-News/Global/2015/Goodwill-arrangement-for-Leica-S-Lenses

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A step in the right direction.  Seemingly not the only issue.  And the repair times, by reports here, are very long....a nice goodwill gesture would be to extend the overall warranty time for the users' camera and lenses for the repair duration.

 

Jeff

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The world has changed since then. And it's not all about revealing your commercially sensitive development plans. It's about responsible communication.

 

Of course if you make unrealistic promises you will get trouble. But there's a world of difference between turning sales talk into promises, and being honest and working as closely as you can with your customers, as opposed to keeping them as far away as you can get away with.

 

I feel that Leica is missing-playing its own strongest hand. It is busy opening "boutiques" and promising a level of service and relationship that you might expect to accompany a genuinely premium product. But when it comes to it, in an area which could be genuinely worthwhile and valuable to many customers, it falls back to an ultra-conservative instinct from a bygone age.

 

Most of us have a great deal of affection for Leica and really want them to be successful and would enjoy contributing to that success. I know about the risks involved in treating customers a little more like partners but I also know that it can pay off, and I'd like Leica to take a few risks of this sort.

 

 

I'm afraid I don't agree. As another poster noted, when you announce what you're doing in advance (particularly with a company that inspires enthusiasm like Leica) there is no upside to announcing prematurely. The desire for such a roadmap is just another symptom of such enthusiasm. take the SL as an example - in development for more than 3 years. As it is, there are relatively minor glitches. No upside in a premature release of the SL. And if the camera was not released before it was ready, people would be moaning that it was taking too long, and they're buying a 5Dsr instead, and why has it only got 24MP etc

 

I don't think this has anything to do with boutiques. If you want a road map, think back to the capital investment brought by Blackstone (or whatever it's called) - new factory, better production capacity, two new camera systems, new S, new lenses and boutiques.  

 

I suspect Andreas Kaufmann is a happy man. 

 

Do do we need a roadmap?  Why?  We have fabulous cameras. We have a steady stream of excellent lenses, and there will be something new around the corner which will have zero impact on what you have, but will be a nice surprise when it does.  I know you're personally intrigued at what the next M will bring, but your M(240) still works, right?  And you don't want an SL. 

 

Whats ts the problem?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Do do we need a roadmap?  Why?  We have fabulous cameras. We have a steady stream of excellent lenses, and there will be something new around the corner which will have zero impact on what you have, but will be a nice surprise when it does.  I know you're personally intrigued at what the next M will bring, but your M(240) still works, right?  And you don't want an SL. 

 

Agreed.  I practiced competition law for more than 40 years so I have learned a few things about how companies behave and why.  Leica is behaving exactly as one would expect in regard to revealing where it is planning to go.  One of the most secretive companies in the world is Apple.  They don't provide roadmaps either.  They seem to be doing pretty well.   I'd love to know what is in their pipeline, just like I would love to know what Leica is thinking about the next few years.  Critically, so would the competition.  I am sure Sony, as only one example, would also like to know what to expect from Leica just as Leica would like to know what Sony and Fuji and everybody else are planning and Samsung and others would like to know beforehand what products are in Apple's pipeline. Not going to happen, though they will all be trying to gather intelligence just as we customers try to divine things like "what will we see in Photokina?;  Isn't it time for a new M?"

It is unrealistic to think that Leica or any other prudent company could or would jeopardize its own competitive position to keep us curious customers happy.

 

This is a different question than "when can we expect a firmware update?"   That, I think is legitimate to ask. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not about road maps. It's certainly not about divulging commercially sensitive information. Its about gaining a competitive advantage by behaving slightly better than the competition.

 

When I suggest things I'd like to see improved I don't mean to imply that there's a problem. Polarising a conversation like this isn't helpful.

 

It's just that I think there are a few things Leica could do better, which applies to virtually all companies, even those with very happy owners.

Edited by Peter H
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had several cameras with problems that required action or recall, like the M9 sensor. I don't think you can beta test for that stuff. Leica's small production runs and hand assembly *could* make them a bit more susceptible to that. I'm understanding of that when I purchase and it's how a company responds to these issues that matters to me. Not the issue itself.

 

I have only had one camera that didn't work like it should (according to it's own manual). The SL. That can only mean that no one actually went through the manual and tested each listed function. This should never happen. At the least it should be noted for the buyer that these functions are still in development. I don't accept this and I think it has done some harm to Leica as they introduce a new "professional" system to market. Canon were (rightly) strongly confronted and pursued over the 1D3 focus issues. If Canon or Nikon had released a body with the flash issues of the SL I don't think they would have fared as well from their user base. And I think it's poor form to expect any one to lay out $AUD18,000 on a camera that then can't be used because features listed in the manual don't function.

 

Had it been any other brand I would have already returned my SL. I have already informed Leica Australia it isn't fit for purpose, and may still have to return it. However, I have been told by Leica Australia their working on it and I do give Leica special treatment that I would not afford others. But I'm not entirely happy I have left it at home for the last 6 wedding I have shot because of something simple like TTL flash.

 

Gordon

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

... It's just that I think there are a few things Leica could do better, which applies to virtually all companies, even those with very happy owners.

 

I'm sure that's always the case, for example acknowledging issues and front footing them.  This does eventually happen, but the problem needs to get very high up the food chain (for example, to Stefan Daniel) before it does.  Sadly, I have encountered one or two lower to middle management types who missed the memo about looking after customers!

 

On transparency, that requires care.  Improving feedback on where your product is in the pipeline at Customer Services in Wetzlar would be good.  Things do seem to disappear into a hole sometimes - though I have never had MarkP's issue with a lens just apparently vanishing...

 

I'm no fanboy, but when things haven't gone my way I have found being reasonably frank with senior people at Leica does have the intended result.  I'm pretty happy with my dealings with Leica, I'd have to say.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not about road maps. It's certainly not about divulging commercially sensitive information. Its about gaining a competitive advantage by behaving slightly better than the competition.

 

We have no idea what Leica's purchasing constituency really is. This group certainly does not represent them. For all we know they are blissful, wrapped in the aura of a luxury purchase. They have more important things in their life than worrying about where Leica is going next.

.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not about road maps. It's certainly not about divulging commercially sensitive information. Its about gaining a competitive advantage by behaving slightly better than the competition.

 

When I suggest things I'd like to see improved I don't mean to imply that there's a problem. Polarising a conversation like this isn't helpful.

 

It's just that I think there are a few things Leica could do better, which applies to virtually all companies, even those with very happy owners.

Fair comment Peter. I wasn't trying to be polarizing.  Certainly they can do better.  The TTL issues are a mess, and IMHO the SL Manual was a mess from the beginning.  I think your point about a competitive advantage by behaving better than the competition is a good one, and in fact I think Leica generally (but not always) does a good job and I think most of the time they genuinely want to do a good job.  Over the years, I have gotten very good service from Leica, most recently replacing my SL when the EVF failed, and very poor service most recently last year from Nikon.  Though Nikon eventually did the right thing, it was difficult to deal with them, and it was a fight. My attitudes about the two companies were shaped more by the way they handled problems than the problem itself.   In that sense, I think Leica already has a competitive edge re their attitude, but agree there is always room to do better.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...