Sensor replacement and market impact

[AndreasG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes, Pippy is right. When the circuits of my M10-D eventually will fail, I continue with film and both my M6 cameras (1985, 1991) which still today are fine and when their day has come, as a final back up I keep a M4-P.

[adan]

3 hours ago, pippy said:

The reliability of 'Electronics' has been the Achilles Heel of cameras for decades.

And Leicas in particular - study up on the problems of the introductory R4, and various Leica motors over the years.

Leitz/Leica generally did/does mechanical and optical engineering extremely well, but not pushing electrons.

Edited July 7, 2020 by adan

[Advertisement]

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

[Jeff S]

Or when electronics and mechanical parts converge.... see S system lens AF motor debacle. 

Jeff

[wizard]

They do get better though. The SL2 (obviously with the help of Panasonic) does not appear to have any serious issues, and looks quite robust to me. Same with the M10.

Cheers,

Andy

[250swb]

Isn't the problem the 'luxury brand thing? Leica's don't need to be built as well as they are, nobody would feel the difference if they weren't, the price could then come down to the point where nervousness over longevity was measured alongside a Nikon or Canon, and where the customers investment isn't so much of a worry. The cameras would then move easily down the second hand chain with far less stress and angst, the result being more new ones would be bought with confidence that it was 'disposable'.

We all know the sensors, shutters, circuit boards etc that Leica buy in aren't any more expensive than those for a Nikon, so pro rata it's actually a small part of the functioning camera that we pay so much extra for. I'm sure some people wouldn't buy a cheaper Leica, but then what else would they buy as an alternative? Leica already control the rangefinder market place, but they are backing themselves into a corner and another mass recall could come at any moment and where the cost of the camera and after sales service comes to the fore again as it has done in this thread.

[jaapv]

Actually the sensors are far more expensive, as they (all of them) are a dedicated design built in small series, even if the actual pixel technology comes from a common wafer.  Bayer filter, micro-lenses and IR filter are Leica-specific.The circuit board of the M10 is a very expensive part, as it is a specially designed split unit, which cost Leica a year to develop in conjunction with the electronics manufacturer. I'm sure there are more examples hidden inside our cameras.

[pippy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

29 minutes ago, 250swb said:

...Leica's don't need to be built as well as they are......the price could then come down to the point where...the cameras would...move easily down the second hand chain......the result being......it was 'disposable'....

My apologies, Steve, for having culled the first part of your post so comprehensively but you piqued my curiosity. If I interpret your post correctly the general gist seems to be that you feel that a Leica should somehow be designed from the outset to be considered as ultimately a "disposable" camera.

Not wishing to start any sort of bunfight whatsoever, I assure you, but I'd be interested to hear why you might think going so far downmarket might be an attractive proposition for a company such as Leica.

Philip.

Edited July 7, 2020 by pippy

[250swb]

3 hours ago, pippy said:

My apologies, Steve, for having culled the first part of your post so comprehensively but you piqued my curiosity. If I interpret your post correctly the general gist seems to be that you feel that a Leica should somehow be designed from the outset to be considered as ultimately a "disposable" camera.

Not wishing to start any sort of bunfight whatsoever, I assure you, but I'd be interested to hear why you might think going so far downmarket might be an attractive proposition for a company such as Leica.

Philip.

Well you can cull what I said however your prejudice swings, but I didn't say a 'downmarket' Leica that doesn't work, just one where the owner wasn't in permanent trepidation. You buy a Nikon and you know you are going to sell it at some point, you get market value, you buy a digital Leica and you maybe have a lemon or the worry from potential purchasers in the open market that it's too much potential trouble for the price. Maybe that answers your unwished for bunfight?

[pippy]

5 minutes ago, 250swb said:

Well you can cull what I said however your prejudice swings, but I didn't say a 'downmarket' Leica that doesn't work, just one where the owner wasn't in permanent trepidation...

Ah, well, it would appear that I did misunderstand your post and for that I apologise once more. There really was no offence intended.

Philip.

[250swb]

2 minutes ago, pippy said:

Ah, well, it would appear that I did misunderstand your post and for that I apologise once more. There really was no offence intended.

Philip.

Simply a case of prioritising function over form, cut out the build quality BS and sell on dependability and not luxury.

[alwinvrm]

11 hours ago, 250swb said:

Simply a case of prioritising function over form, cut out the build quality BS and sell on dependability and not luxury.

Well the luxury and the price point are already there in the brand inheritance anyway. Why throw that away? Their challenge is to maintain the price point and the associated brand image in shorter profitable product cycles while producing  essentially a 'Rolex/Zenith with a modified Swatch calibre'. 

Edited July 8, 2020 by alwinvrm
correction

[adan]

13 hours ago, 250swb said:

Simply a case of prioritising function over form, cut out the build quality BS and sell on dependability and not luxury.

Isn't build quality exactly what produces dependability? How else would build quality be measured?

__________________

On a slightly different tack, in 16+ years of using Leica digitals for paid work, usually two at a time, I've had to send in cameras for service exactly three times.

Digilux 2 - fell out of my camera bag, lens alignment was whacked, got replacement in lieu of repair.

M8 - for the first-production-run problems with green blobs and mirrored bright lights issues. However, I actually asked for that problem. My pre-ordered camera got tied up in the recall, and I pulled strings with my Leica rep and had it swiped right off the shipping palette going back to Germany in Nov. 2006 instead of waiting three months. And used it very successfully for 6 months until I got a second body, and then sent in the "defective" one under warranty.

M9 - once corrosion showed up after 8 years (2017).

My expectation of Leica digitals is that they will function for 10 years. I've never hit that barrier, because some improvement or other (real M camera, full-frame format, massive increase in ISO, quieter shutter, or size) comes along before the clock runs out, and I upgrade.

On the whole, for me, the value of a camera (or lens) drops to zero the moment I walk out the shop door - except for the value of the pictures it produces. Leicas have delivered enough value - in picture sales, publication and recognition, and personal growth - to pay for themselves over the 19 years I've used them.

[250swb]

4 minutes ago, adan said:

Isn't build quality exactly what produces dependability? How else would build quality be measured?

 

A Mercedes S Class is a luxury car, a Rolls Royce is a luxury car, both are dependable. Yet one manages to be a dependable luxury car for much less money than the other. That's an analogy.

[adan]

Since I can't find a "Spirit of Ecstasy" or other such decorations on my M10s (maybe they pop up if I push a button?), and don't recall Larry Burrows or David Douglas Duncan driving Rollers through the mud of Vietnam, I fail to see the analogy.

(Personally I drive a Subaru 6-speed, expect it to last 14 years like my last Honda, find it comfortable, and can't think of even a Mercedes as anything but a car for spendthifts. )

For me it is pretty simply. I want a full-frame 24x36 digital camera that provides full-time split-image manual focusing, in a package that weighs 660 grams. And uses equally-small lenses (generally), including legacy lenses of reasonable IQ.

If we use your analogy, and the Leica M10 (or M9, or M240) is the "Rolls-Royce" - where is the "Mercedes" I should consider instead?

 

[TomB_tx]

8 minutes ago, adan said:

If we use your analogy, and the Leica M10 (or M9, or M240) is the "Rolls-Royce" - where is the "Mercedes" I should consider instead?

Exactly. When I wanted a Full Frame digital RF for my M lenses, M9 was the only choice. It was also the first digital camera I liked. A bigger expense than I should afford, but no other option for me. M10 is just a repeat of the situation. If Voigtlander, Canon, or anyone else had a functional equivalent at a lower price, I would try it (as I did with the Zeiss Ikon ZM for film instead of M7), but there are no other players for FF RF Digital.

For my R digital solution I went with an A7, instead of the SL. It meets my needs at an affordable price.

[ianman]

34 minutes ago, adan said:

If we use your analogy, and the Leica M10 (or M9, or M240) is the "Rolls-Royce" - where is the "Mercedes" I should consider instead?

Who said there is one?