SL Price Reduction

[Belle123]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just talked with my contact in KL and he says that there is nothing new in the pipe line, and that there is just an adjustment due to the slow sales and also the new to be announcement of the Nikon MF mirror less camera...............hahahahahah

Nikon medium format? Cool! Can't wait to see what their version is like, and if pricing is approachable.

 

When you price a new 35mm camera so high, to almost medium format pricing, you have to consider going medium format.

[lm_user]

Price drop is nice. If I could just get automatic diaphram operation for my R lenses.... Then I might be interested.

[Advertisement]

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

[BernardC]

I see this in a very positive light, it tells me that Leica are hitting their numbers. The M10, SL, and Q are doing well, and they all use the same sensor architecture, which reduces cost. The new factory has to be running close to full speed by now. The A9 has validated the "professional mirrorless" category (which wasn't a category at all until the SL came along).

 

Leica has always been shy about producing too may cameras, because the M market is steady but limited. The SL's market is much bigger than the M's; it's an SLR and offers zooms, more AE options, and autofocus.

 

What David wrote about international pricing is also valid. We've been able to get the SL around this price point from HK and Europe for a while. Now I can get the same price from a Canadian dealer, and that's a massive plus. No more couriers, customs, and worries about support. (one always worries about support for any piece of gear, but at least I can go through the selling dealer)

 

I don't think the SL will be superseded soon. It's still a cutting-edge product. I only want for a few minor features: a Visoflex connector in the hotshoe for low-angle shots, timecode and ACES support on the video side. The still side is very good, especially with the 3.0  speed enhancements.

[Belle123]

I see this in a very positive light, it tells me that Leica are hitting their numbers. The M10, SL, and Q are doing well, and they all use the same sensor architecture, which reduces cost. The new factory has to be running close to full speed by now. The A9 has validated the "professional mirrorless" category (which wasn't a category at all until the SL came along).

 

Leica has always been shy about producing too may cameras, because the M market is steady but limited. The SL's market is much bigger than the M's; it's an SLR and offers zooms, more AE options, and autofocus.

 

What David wrote about international pricing is also valid. We've been able to get the SL around this price point from HK and Europe for a while. Now I can get the same price from a Canadian dealer, and that's a massive plus. No more couriers, customs, and worries about support. (one always worries about support for any piece of gear, but at least I can go through the selling dealer)

 

I don't think the SL will be superseded soon. It's still a cutting-edge product. I only want for a few minor features: a Visoflex connector in the hotshoe for low-angle shots, timecode and ACES support on the video side. The still side is very good, especially with the 3.0  speed enhancements.

And......when did the SL become an SLR? It is mirrorless, last I looked. Rather, it fills the spot of the Leica R that was an SLR in the Leica camera line up of the past, of which I used to shoot. And think you are wrong about its market. The M is much more popular, as is the Q.

[fotoshootoplocatie]

The price drop will also be in the NL. Noticed an announcement on the Leica Netherlands instagram .

[i-Leica]

The price drop will also be in the NL. Noticed an announcement on the Leica Netherlands instagram .

 

 

Price drop also in Germany: from 6.900 to 5.900 EUR

Edited July 2, 2017 by i-Leica

[BernardC]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

And......when did the SL become an SLR? It is mirrorless, last I looked. Rather, it fills the spot of the Leica R that was an SLR in the Leica camera line up of the past, of which I used to shoot. And think you are wrong about its market. The M is much more popular, as is the Q.

 

I meant to say "SLR form factor," but the sentence was already too long and meandering, what with Oxford commas, a semicolon, and a couple of possessive apostrophes. Just trying to keep things legible on an international forum. Sorry for the confusion.

 

I stand by what I wrote about the SL's potential market. I think it's bigger than the rangefinder market, but also more competitive and price-sensitive. The fact that the SL is priced slightly above the A9 will be of interest to a lot of photographers. It justifies the pricing and the very existence of the SL line in a way.

 

Remember when it came out? All the talk was about how big it is, how expensive it is, and how it's not an M. That all changed once Sony entered the same market at nearly the same price point. The size makes sense, the price makes sense, and people understand what it was designed to do (which is different from what the Ms are designed to do).

[LD_50]

Remember when it came out? All the talk was about how big it is, how expensive it is, and how it's not an M. That all changed once Sony entered the same market at nearly the same price point. The size makes sense, the price makes sense, and people understand what it was designed to do (which is different from what the Ms are designed to do).

Sony was in the market already with the A7 series. The A9 is positioned and priced against the 1DXii and D5.

[almoore]

The A9 has validated the "professional mirrorless" category (which wasn't a category at all until the SL came along)...

The number of Sony A7 series cameras being used by professional photographers would suggest that the category predates the SL.

[R3D-D0T]

The number of Sony A7 series cameras being used by professional photographers would suggest that the category predates the SL.

 

To be fair to that category, you know any professionals that use the SL?

[LD_50]

To be fair to that category, you know any professionals that use the SL?

Nick Rains lists an SL in his kit.

 

I'm sure there are a few photographers making money with an SL kit but I'd expect the number to be limited by price, limited native lenses, and limited support.

[bilbrown]

Something new IS coming, but it likely isn't the SL.

 

I would assume a SL-like S typ 008, putting the SL median between the TL and S as it sits.

 

KEEP the analog S typ 007 a little higher for the body and ADD A MIRRORLESS S typ 008 with MF and FF modes for all lenses.

 

I know for a FACT The SL is still being pushed hard, as is the S.

 

Neither is going away, only EVOLVING.

 

 

My 2¢

[jplomley]

An S typ 008 based on the technology of the SL but with a larger sensor would certainly meet the challenges posed by the recent Fuji and Hassy MF mirrorless options.

[BernardC]

To be fair to that category, you know any professionals that use the SL?

 

I do. One of the photographers I second for runs two of them.

 

That being said, celebrity endorsements are never convincing. Do you really need to pick your brand of guitar strings based on who else uses them?

[David Dennis]

I always justified the SL price in my mind by noting that the Nikon D5 is $6,500 and Wifi costs $700 and GPS costs $250 so we are almost up to the $7,500 price of the SL.  And of course as David Farkas knows, I really love the SL design and user interface.  Ironically enough considering the brand's old school image, their software is just crushingly superior to Nikon's.

 

Justifying the price of the glass is a lot harder, lovely though it is.  And sadly glass prices have not budged an inch.  If they could harmonize glass prices in the same way they did camera prices, I'd definitely be a lot more interested.  But the lower SL price makes me think maybe I could use the Nikon mount and keep my Nikon glass for the time being.  That would also make the outfit quite a bit lighter than it is with the Leica glass.

[Delrosa81]

I have gotten in touch with my local Leica dealer and they are looking at how to resolve the situation. A full refund in my part of the world is impossible therefore they can only look at how to sweeten the deal considering I got the SL just a few days before they reduced their prices significantly.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[ropo54]

I have gotten in touch with my local Leica dealer and they are looking at how to resolve the situation. A full refund in my part of the world is impossible therefore they can only look at how to sweeten the deal considering I got the SL just a few days before they reduced their prices significantly.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

 

When Leica does these price adjustments it might be wise for them to give credits to all prior purchasers, for example, discounts for the purchase of new items. (I.e. 20% discount for those buying a lens?).

 

Notwithstanding all of the other points made by other posters, there is a "value" to camera equipment, and price adjustments by Leica has an unfair impact on that market. 

[Delrosa81]

They are giving some gifts to make up the price difference. But on a business point of view, there is never a right time for price reduction or increase. Someone will definitely be caught in between during such price adjustment situations. I'm sure with experience, the management would be well prepared for such situations where customers would write in and highlight the unfairness, etc. Myself included.

 

Anyways, I think they called me a day after I emailed them and I consider it to be very prompt and impressed by their responsiveness. Am currently awaiting their response on this issue though.

 

When Leica does these price adjustments it might be wise for them to give credits to all prior purchasers, for example, discounts for the purchase of new items. (I.e. 20% discount for those buying a lens?).

 

Notwithstanding all of the other points made by other posters, there is a "value" to camera equipment, and price adjustments by Leica has an unfair impact on that market.

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[ramarren]

When Leica does these price adjustments it might be wise for them to give credits to all prior purchasers, for example, discounts for the purchase of new items. (I.e. 20% discount for those buying a lens?).

 

Notwithstanding all of the other points made by other posters, there is a "value" to camera equipment, and price adjustments by Leica has an unfair impact on that market.

 

Leica is not the only camera manufacturer out there who adjusts prices of existing, 'in production' product now and then. There is no precedent in this, or any other, industry that obligates or even proposes to make sensible such a program. The manufacturers do this for recent buyers because its fair—they could have bought the product a day, a week, a month later, at random, and gotten the lower price; never mind that they are purchasing out of the stock already in the distribution chain that would be discounted. But rewarding all prior purchasers is ridiculous and unjustifiable.

 

Basically, if something is worth what you paid for it yesterday, and it's less expensive today, well, be satisfied that it's still worth what you paid for it. If it wasn't worth what you paid for it, then why the heck did you buy it?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[ropo54]

Leica is not the only camera manufacturer out there who adjusts prices of existing, 'in production' product now and then. There is no precedent in this, or any other, industry that obligates or even proposes to make sensible such a program. The manufacturers do this for recent buyers because its fair—they could have bought the product a day, a week, a month later, at random, and gotten the lower price; never mind that they are purchasing out of the stock already in the distribution chain that would be discounted. But rewarding all prior purchasers is ridiculous and unjustifiable.

 

Basically, if something is worth what you paid for it yesterday, and it's less expensive today, well, be satisfied that it's still worth what you paid for it. If it wasn't worth what you paid for it, then why the heck did you buy it?

 

"Worth" is subjective. We could debate that one on and on. To some users it can be "priced" and to others it makes no difference. 

 

I certainly agree that recent buyers should be given a dollar for dollar adjustment.

 

From my perspective, when the price adjustment takes place in relation to the item first coming on the market is a key factor. If Leica's price adjustment devalues the market 1.5 years after introduction, then I would think a credit scenario is more apropos. If the product line was 3-4 years down the line then I would be more sympathetic to the point you are making. 

 

Rob