Good news from Wetzlar

[erlingmm]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My objective opinion, (ie I have no investment or interest in the S system), is that kparseg has has passed a value judgment to which he is entitled. Where he has crossed the line, as picked up by Pop, is that he has cast an implied criticism of those who have, or would spend their money on an S system rather than some alternative. Those members don't need to be told how to invest or enjoy their own disposable dollar/euro. If I were one of them I would feel affronted.

 

 

I have spent a lot of money on the S system. Contrary to many others, I have stayed put, upgraded my lenses, and continued to use the S camera, which I think is great to work with, and gives me 1st class results.  It has not been an easy ride with the lenses, but I regard that as solved now. I don't feel offended at all, I feel gratified.

[kparseg]

Just looking for the courtesy of a response.

 

Jeff

Well, honestly I'd think that Leica could ask to pay a premium price 10 years ago when no alternatives (except Pentax 645D) existed in the affordable and compact digital MF market. At that time I'd say that it could be a good idea to invest into S system, even at a higher cost. But now with some many existing and emerging alternatives, it's just not acceptable to charge that much. 

 

Leica thinks it's still the 20th century when it could charge a premium price for excellent bodies and lenses which had no alternatives. There are alternatives now, and they are advancing much faster than Leica. With our economy, people don't want to spend that much and get very little advantage over very similar gear. 

 

Those who get insulted by me saying this, would you want to buy my Jaguar at a price of Lambo? Just get real. 

[Advertisement]

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

[kparseg]

My objective opinion, (ie I have no investment or interest in the S system), is that kparseg has has passed a value judgment to which he is entitled. Where he has crossed the line, as picked up by Pop, is that he has cast an implied criticism of those who have, or would spend their money on an S system rather than some alternative. Those members don't need to be told how to invest or enjoy their own disposable dollar/euro. If I were one of them I would feel affronted.

And I don't tell them how to spend their money. If you paid a closer attention, I've several times mentioned that it's their money and they can spend them the way they want. All I'm saying is that a company cannot charge $18k for a MF body when there are alternatives at $6-9k. Unless you own Leica's stocks, I don't understand the logic of defending Leica's price policy. 

[kparseg]

I have spent a lot of money on the S system. Contrary to many others, I have stayed put, upgraded my lenses, and continued to use the S camera, which I think is great to work with, and gives me 1st class results.  It has not been an easy ride with the lenses, but I regard that as solved now. I don't feel offended at all, I feel gratified.

Because you invested into the system. I'm a dentist and I know that unless you attract new patients to your practice, your existing patients won't be able to provide you a financial success. You have to bring new people to your practice. Do you think if I charge 300% as compared to my close competitors, I'll attract many new people? That's what I'm trying to say. 

[basse]

maybe S008 will be so nice to accept € 18k for innovation.    

 

But if not.....  

[erlingmm]

Because you invested into the system. I'm a dentist and I know that unless you attract new patients to your practice, your existing patients won't be able to provide you a financial success. You have to bring new people to your practice. Do you think if I charge 300% as compared to my close competitors, I'll attract many new people? That's what I'm trying to say. 

 

 

Oh, you're a dentist. Then I understand.

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well, honestly I'd think that Leica could ask to pay a premium price 10 years ago when no alternatives (except Pentax 645D) existed in the affordable and compact digital MF market. At that time I'd say that it could be a good idea to invest into S system, even at a higher cost. But now with some many existing and emerging alternatives, it's just not acceptable to charge that much.

 

Leica thinks it's still the 20th century when it could charge a premium price for excellent bodies and lenses which had no alternatives. There are alternatives now, and they are advancing much faster than Leica. With our economy, people don't want to spend that much and get very little advantage over very similar gear.

 

Those who get insulted by me saying this, would you want to buy my Jaguar at a price of Lambo? Just get real.

You didn't directly address my comment.

 

So apparently you don't understand.

 

Jeff

[jaapv]

Because you invested into the system. I'm a dentist and I know that unless you attract new patients to your practice, your existing patients won't be able to provide you a financial success. You have to bring new people to your practice. Do you think if I charge 300% as compared to my close competitors, I'll attract many new people? That's what I'm trying to say. 

As a fellow dentist I know that this style of discussing will not get you very far, either in your professional work nor in this forum. By all means post your opinions, but do not belittle other members in the process.

[kparseg]

As a fellow dentist I know that this style of discussing will not get you very far, either in your professional work nor in this forum. By all means post your opinions, but do not belittle other members in the process.

Thanks for your suggestions, but I'm doing very well professionally and recognized nationally and internationally. As a fellow dentist, I'd be more concerned about biased decisions that you make. I'm posting my opinions, but you selectively delete them. Not a good practice. 

[jaapv]

I deleted nothing, a fellow moderator did. I fully agree with his action, however. I would suggest that you read the forum rules first.

This is a moderated forum.

The moderators do their job in as an unbiased way as they can. Should you feel that you have been treated unjustly, you can appeal to the forum owner.

 

 

What the forum is not for:

 

This isn’t the place for those who think that Leica, Leica products and Leica customers are inadequate, deceitful or stupid.

Some members, apparently, use the forum exclusively to express the same criticisms again and again, spoiling for others the enjoyment of their hobby.

This isn’t a forum for sycophants and fanboys but neither is it a Leica-bashing community. No-one in the Leica forum should ever have to justify their purchase of a Leica product or their enjoyment of it.

[kparseg]

I deleted nothing, a fellow moderator did. I fully agree with his action, however. I would suggest that you read the forum rules first.

This is a moderated forum.

The moderators do their job in as an unbiased way as they can. Should you feel that you have been treated unjustly, you can appeal to the forum owner.

All I've said is that Leica needs to lower the prices and keep the excellent quality, and you don't like that?

 

Your rules are already biased towards anyone who dares to say that something Leica does may not be right or adequate for needs of its customers, and bring facts to support the statement. Good luck with that attitude. 

[andybarton]

All I've said is that Leica needs to lower the prices and keep the excellent quality

 

. 

 

Why? Just because you would like them to?

 

They seem to be doing OK with their present strategy and if you want to have your cameras and lenses built the "Leica way", you have to pay the premium.

 

If you want cheaper cameras and lenses, you need to look elsewhere.

[Jeff S]

All I've said is that Leica needs to lower the prices and keep the excellent quality.....

No, once again. You then said owners wasted their money, and offered other similar judgments.

 

This is so obvious that, without acknowledgement, I think the mods would be right to consider this trolling behavior.

 

Jeff

[jaapv]

And, at this point, this part of the discussion is closed - I suggest that the participants resume discussing cameras in accordance with our rules.

[helged]

And, at this point, this part of the discussion is closed - I suggest that the participants resume discussing cameras in accordance with our rules.

+1.

[Jon Warwick]

Maybe to get the thread going again, I’ll flag again the link to the (as always) excellent article and Q&A by Mr Farkas.

 

http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2017/12/thoughts-next-generation-leica-s/

 

I personally opted for 80mp, but was torn between 60 and 80mp. I’ve done prints off other 50mp cameras and think the S lenses help the S 007 to punch above its megapixel weight, but it perhaps needs a strong boost in resolution to see an obvious difference from its 38mp status quo. A strong boost in megapixels might be partly for “marketing”, admittedly, but I’m not sure a low megapixel camera has helped residual values of the S system either. Fine detail subjects like landscapes would also benefit hugely from a 60 or preferably 80mp version of the S, in my view, and the lenses would no doubt absolutely sing on that combo.

[atanabe]

Maybe to get the thread going again, I’ll flag again the link to the (as always) excellent article and Q&A by Mr Farkas.

 

http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2017/12/thoughts-next-generation-leica-s/

 

I personally opted for 80mp, but was torn between 60 and 80mp. I’ve done prints off other 50mp cameras and think the S lenses help the S 007 to punch above its megapixel weight, but it perhaps needs a strong boost in resolution to see an obvious difference from its 38mp status quo. A strong boost in megapixels might be partly for “marketing”, admittedly, but I’m not sure a low megapixel camera has helped residual values of the S system either. Fine detail subjects like landscapes would also benefit hugely from a 60 or preferably 80mp version of the S, in my view, and the lenses would no doubt absolutely sing on that combo.

 

I have the S2, old and ancient by todays standards but it still produces great images.  When the Hasselblad X1D and subsequent Fujifilm GFX were announced my interest was piqued, mirrorless and less expensive.  I demoed the Hasselblad, found the camera too buggy at the time, the Fujifilm I rented for a week to shoot side by side with the "Ancient" S2.  I found little gains in resolution shooting with the Fujifilm at 50 mpx, nothing to do backflips over at least.  My desire to change out systems, even upgrading the S2 to 007 is tempered by wallet palsy, I don't want to go through a HUGE sum of money for moderate gains in image quality.  With the current state of values of the S system and the way I shoot with the S, on a tripod mainly, upgrading to the latest platform that Leica or any manufacturer makes no financial sense. 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

All I've said is that Leica needs to lower the prices and keep the excellent quality, and you don't like that?

 

 

As a counter point I'd say this....

 

Almost every camera manufacturer or division is currently struggling. The exception is Leica. Both sales and profit are up again this year. And They're about they only one. The other manufacturers have played the price war with each other and they ALL lost. Furthermore since it was announced that Nikon were in trouble most of the major manufacturers have started increasing the prices on new models. The price wars are over except where Leica don't play, the entry level DSLR market. The D5, 1Dx2, 5D4, D850, EM1.2, XT2, A9, A7R3 and others all now all more expensive than the models they replaced by a double digit percentage. Camera manufacturers are very slowly realising that they need to increase profit margins because the days of low profit high volume are slowly disappearing.

 

Currently, Leica is healthy. They sell as many cameras as they can make. They regulate supply and maintain margins to stay healthy. They're innovating (sort of) with new models and product lines. there's obviously a lot of R&D going on somewhere deep in Wetzlar. It's not like they can live off their sensor division like Sony and just throw sh*t at the wall to see what sticks. They can't move their camera technology into their printer or copier division to profit share. Where they want to compete or where they have stock they react, like with the SL price drop. But when there's still a waiting list after a year (Q) prices are what people are willing to pay.

 

No one wants to pay more than they have to. However, if Leica charges less they become less healthy as a company. This is not a good thing. We want a healthy Leica.

 

The only reason to drop prices would be to be available to a wider economic demographic. To sell more stuff and become more mainstream. It's a big leap to think that Leica can do that or even want to. Do they want faster growth? Do they want bigger production runs with the possibility of more stock on shelves or in warehouses? Do they want to expand their marketing base, management and logistics? Even if they wanted to could they make more M10's each month or hold more stock of CL's in a warehouse? Say they do drop prices and maintain quality. What's in it for Leica?

 

Personally, if Leica are going to change, I'd like to see a dramatic improvement in the announcement to release schedule of the promised SL lenses. Keep the money and get going with the development of more CL lenses. Followed promptly by an complete overhaul of their service centre and policies. Because there's another way to increase markets share. Rather than dropping prices increase the value of the products with support and efficient service.

 

Your assertion is incorrect. Leica don't need to drop their prices. As they healthiest camera company in the world, they're doing just fine as they are.

 

Gordon

[kparseg]

As a counter point I'd say this....

 

Almost every camera manufacturer or division is currently struggling. The exception is Leica. Both sales and profit are up again this year. And They're about they only one. The other manufacturers have played the price war with each other and they ALL lost. Furthermore since it was announced that Nikon were in trouble most of the major manufacturers have started increasing the prices on new models. The price wars are over except where Leica don't play, the entry level DSLR market. The D5, 1Dx2, 5D4, D850, EM1.2, XT2, A9, A7R3 and others all now all more expensive than the models they replaced by a double digit percentage. Camera manufacturers are very slowly realising that they need to increase profit margins because the days of low profit high volume are slowly disappearing.

 

Currently, Leica is healthy. They sell as many cameras as they can make. They regulate supply and maintain margins to stay healthy. They're innovating (sort of) with new models and product lines. there's obviously a lot of R&D going on somewhere deep in Wetzlar. It's not like they can live off their sensor division like Sony and just throw sh*t at the wall to see what sticks. They can't move their camera technology into their printer or copier division to profit share. Where they want to compete or where they have stock they react, like with the SL price drop. But when there's still a waiting list after a year (Q) prices are what people are willing to pay.

 

No one wants to pay more than they have to. However, if Leica charges less they become less healthy as a company. This is not a good thing. We want a healthy Leica.

 

The only reason to drop prices would be to be available to a wider economic demographic. To sell more stuff and become more mainstream. It's a big leap to think that Leica can do that or even want to. Do they want faster growth? Do they want bigger production runs with the possibility of more stock on shelves or in warehouses? Do they want to expand their marketing base, management and logistics? Even if they wanted to could they make more M10's each month or hold more stock of CL's in a warehouse? Say they do drop prices and maintain quality. What's in it for Leica?

 

Personally, if Leica are going to change, I'd like to see a dramatic improvement in the announcement to release schedule of the promised SL lenses. Keep the money and get going with the development of more CL lenses. Followed promptly by an complete overhaul of their service centre and policies. Because there's another way to increase markets share. Rather than dropping prices increase the value of the products with support and efficient service.

 

Your assertion is incorrect. Leica don't need to drop their prices. As they healthiest camera company in the world, they're doing just fine as they are.

 

Gordon

Don't see many manufacturer's, probably except Nikon and Pentax, to struggle. So far, Canon is a market leader and I'm not quite sure where it looses (according to what you claim). Sony is doing great selling amazing products. Fuji and Hasselblad are doing well as compared to what they were just few years ago. Even if the camera market struggles, it's a global event due to cell phone competition. 

 

Pentax has been struggling for many years, and it has nothing to do with current prices. As you might remember, Nikon's problems started with three big events: 1) left AF point in d800 and oil spots on d600 sensor; 2) unwillingness to acknowledge these manufacturer's defects and offer free repairs/replacements, and 3) release of Sony a7® mirrorless cameras at a reasonable price. Doesn't it remind you anything in medium format universe? 

 

Could you please provide data that support that Leica is getting more healthy/wealthy because of the S system? Which you called "ludicrously expensive" in the other thread? If so, I'd be happy to read that you purchase your $20k S008, while many other users would enjoy their $7-8k Fuji or $11k Hasselblad with a new 100MP Sony sensor.

 

To each his own! 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[mgrayson3]

I would much rather have a $20,000 S008 at 60-80MP than any of the current mirrorless at 100MP. I would never use something I didn't like. If I *needed* a high MP camera and I were running a business, then, sure, cost might rise above usability. The absence of Capture 1 is a more serious problem for the S than its cost, but then Phase stuff is just too heavy. Wonderful equipment, but I'd never use it.

 

And are you being deliberately obtuse? Or do you really find Gordon's "Leica is successful with their pricing" and "I think the S is ludicrously expensive" statements contradictory. No matter. Your eagerness to tell us that we're crazy has earned a spot on the cherished ignore list. 

 

Matt

Edited December 19, 2017 by mgrayson3