Jump to content

SL Price Reduction


Jeff S

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

........

The problem with the SL is not that it's a bit more expensive than the alterantives, it's that it's a whole order of magnitude more expensive that the alternatives, all of which are, on paper at least, 'superior' to the SL. 

.......

Replace SL with M and you could say the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 218
  • Created
  • Last Reply

what's the Nikon equiv GeeTee? I have a D810 but it's just not like my SL. A D750? One of the many things an SL can do (and I guess a Sony too) better than an SLR  is let you look at the pictures you took on a bright day in the viewfinder. You can take a picture and check in sunlight. I can never see what the hell I've shot in the back of the Nikon, so when the light's bright I use it like a film camera. Realistically, using both, I would say the 'more pixels' on the Nikon aren't much of an advantage too. 24mp works fine for most circumstances. But probably I'm a crap judge - I'm happy with my M9 too.

Yes, a D810 is equivalent when the market segment is 'full frame digital camera'. Mirrorless is a subsegment of that and yes that option has many advantages. My point is that when you self select the camera you want then no other camera will be an equivalent product but that's not quite how products are brought to market and sold.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Leica raised the prices for the SL zooms in May of this year and they will keep raising them for all the SL lenses every year. The SL body combined its native lenses is therefore now a "whole whole order of magnitude more expensive than the alternatives". Leica doesn’t seem to give a rat's @ss about the concerns of some here that the SL with its lenses is “nothing like different enough.”

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Bought £5299 in the UK, end of 2016 - got a free (£120) battery

 

Now it's 4995 - so not much of a thing in the UK I'd say..

 

Bought the Leica Q for £2900 and now it's £3549

 

:D swings and roundabouts..

 

You bought it just before the price rise I guess. I think it went up to £5800?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You bought it just before the price rise I guess. I think it went up to £5800?

 

Oh I didn't notice that, it was 22/11/2016 I ordered my SL, and I'm using reddotcameras for my base level pricing - as different places have different prices.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I didn't notice that, it was 22/11/2016 I ordered my SL, and I'm using reddotcameras for my base level pricing - as different places have different prices.

I got mine in October last year and the prices went up not long after that, in fact I think I remember the guy in The Classic Camera saying the prices were going up some time soon.

 

I bought mine as an ex-display model for quite a bit less anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If one wants to try to infer anything from Leica’s price changes one has to look at the price in € as they produce in Portugal and Germany, both Eurozone countries. Looking at the price in £ is meaningless given how much the Pound has depreciated against the Euro since 2015.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If one wants to try to infer anything from Leica’s price changes one has to look at the price in € as they produce in Portugal and Germany, both Eurozone countries. Looking at the price in £ is meaningless given how much the Pound has depreciated against the Euro since 2015.

 

My sole interest is resale value down the line :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure but as I said, if what you want is a full frame digital rangefinder then there's no other option but the Leica M so you can charge a huge premium for it.

I understand that, but non-Leica aficionados don't. "Of course there's an alternative, it's called a DSLR".

Only Leica people see the value of rangefinders. Others just see an expensive camera that produces similar results to cameras much cheaper.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Greg, I don't think comparisons of Leica with other manufacturers is really the point. Nor is it that buyers particularly want or need a rangefinder. It's the whole package; the sum of the parts. You either get it or you don't; the lenses are significantly better than most alternatives; each iteration of its cameras is marginally better than the previous version; each camera is considered and fills a particular niche. Once people get that gestalt, then they tend to stick with it - otherwise the CaNikSony product has more appear.

 

The price may be a driver (covering the Sony A9), but I doubt it. The SL breaks new ground, much like the TL. Leica wants people to buy into these systems. The lenses are doing what Leica lenses always do - they're going up in price. Like all new products, the cost of production tends to go down with volumes. It could well be that Leica is passing those savings on to new customers to attract them into the new system. Or they could be dumping inventory for whatever comes on Monday.

 

It's all guesswork, but I doubt very much that Leica or the system is failing. It just takes time. Both L mount cameras are new and different from anything else (for those who notice differences). Unlike the "retro" M system, the L mount cameras point to the future for Leica. They seem committed to it. I like the cameras, and I hope they succeed. I will add to the system at some point. The alternatives are less appealing. I couldn't get my head around my D800e...

 

10 July is going to be interesting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect a new SL2 in about a year earliest. (3-4 years after the first announcement)

In the meantime the current SL will be sold for the reduced price.

In the meantime: Maybe there comes a new TL ?  Maybe a new S ?

 

This looks ok for me.  (Looks like a strategy.)

 

In the meantime I hope for a lot of new SL lenses. At least the 4 that are announced/promised.

 

 

Is panasonic ready for a new SL ? I think they still need some time for FF IBIS and PDAF on FF sensor. Leica will have to coordinate with them.   (Leica depends on many suppliers (sensor, AF, EVF, battery ?). Sony has a freer hand.)

 

 

Leica and Sony are in different leagues. If Leica doubles the SL sale (at the cost of Sony only), then Sony loses maybe one percent or even less. Sony cannot be a target for Leica. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only stuff I do see retaining asset value relating to Leica products are the M lenses. Firstly, they are fully optical-mechanical in nature and it stands the test of time. Secondly due to the limited supply vs demand and the rate of new models are far and few between. As for the rest of S, SL lenses and digital camera bodies are just liabilities in nature due to the short life span of electronics & motors plus technical/functional improvements of succeeding models making the succeeded models obsolete.

For example: between WATE & SL16-35mm, Price would likely be close between the two but resale value would likely be very different. With the WATE having better resale value.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Leica German only store offer the SL for 5.900 €. The price before was 6.900 €.

This might be also because of the new Sony A9 which is in a similar price range?

well that A9 is a different kind of beast all together. cant company SL to A9. i would say its own category. FF 21 F/Sec? 14 stop dynamic range. Unheard of... even it field it performs well. At least thats what all youtube videos say. I would buy the SL over A9 for Leica Lenses. Sony has no game over Leica and Sony mount Sucks. The mount itself that is. The build is poor and lens stays loose by a millimeter (slightly off topic) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since February, you could already get this camera for $800 off on Amazon.

 

I think it's a combination of slow sales after early adaptors (of which I am one), competitive market pressures whether direct or indirect competitors (e.g., X1D, M10, and A9), and a refresh upcoming (had this been a 36 mp sensor like the D810 it would have had more staying power).

 

I shoot fashion and use the D810 (of which I have 3) for that. If the SL had the resolution and dynamic range of the D810 I would use that but as it is, I use the SL for general purpose work.

Believe it or not Walmart had it for sale since Feb. Theirs was 1400$ cheaper since the beginning of year. So did Overstock.com !! I think the vendor was the same. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only stuff I do see retaining asset value relating to Leica products are the M lenses. Firstly, they are fully optical-mechanical in nature and it stands the test of time. Secondly due to the limited supply vs demand and the rate of new models are far and few between. As for the rest of S, SL lenses and digital camera bodies are just liabilities in nature due to the short life span of electronics & motors plus technical/functional improvements of succeeding models making the succeeded models obsolete.

For example: between WATE & SL16-35mm, Price would likely be close between the two but resale value would likely be very different. With the WATE having better resale value.

 

 

I dunno about this "short lifespan" stuff. I have electronic and servo motor things that are thirty-forty years old, still working perfectly. Much better than mechanical mechanisms of the same age, that all require disassembly, cleaning, and maintenance to work as they did when new. ALL of my mechanical cameras more than 20 years old have required some service, and always to the mechanical bits; and all of my old Leica mount lenses too. 

 

I'll let you know how the SL and its lenses fare when they hit 25 years old, if I live that long. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...