Really, new cheap(er) film M in 2021 ?

[IkarusJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

15 hours ago, Al Brown said:

@Steven already knows, as it seems. Would he indulge us?

That raises a whole host of interesting questions …

I can see why Leica might introduce a new film camera.  It has the MP and M-A and they make a nice pair.  Both following the M3 paradigm.  So, what would another M film camera look like?  I would think there are two options - (1) an automatic version of the same camera, or (2) something “entry level”.  As Leica has recently discontinued the M7, I can’t understand why they would release an automatic M based camera.

I hate “entry level” - it sounds so condescending.  But, what need would another film camera fill, if not a cheaper film camera with an M mount?  If it has an M mount and takes film, isn’t anything else possible?  Such a camera wouldn’t necessarily be aimed at an M traditionalist.  Wouldn’t it bee aimed at the younger crowd, interested in film, and giving them an entry point for M lenses?

In that scenario, anything is on the table …

[adan]

2 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

Such a camera wouldn’t necessarily be aimed at an M traditionalist.  Wouldn’t it bee aimed at the younger crowd,

I think that may be a false distinction. I suspect many of the people buying up used M6s are young, possibly hipster types, maybe even in the tech world themselves ($$$), but are looking exactly for something "analog and traditional" for their spare time.

That is certainly what I see in the local suburban camera store I frequent - most film M gear (in fact most film gear in general) is selling to under-35s. That is backed up by who is most likely to bring in film for processing.

(But note that saying most film gear is being bought by young people is NOT the same as saying most young people are buying film gear!)

[IkarusJohn]

1 hour ago, adan said:

I think that may be a false distinction. I suspect many of the people buying up used M6s are young, possibly hipster types, maybe even in the tech world themselves ($$$), but are looking exactly for something "analog and traditional" for their spare time.

That is certainly what I see in the local suburban camera store I frequent - most film M gear (in fact most film gear in general) is selling to under-35s. That is backed up by who is most likely to bring in film for processing.

(But note that saying most film gear is being bought by young people is NOT the same as saying most young people are buying film gear!)

So, then what will be the distinguishing feature, if it really is to be cheaper?

I suppose the electronics for aperture priority linked to the meter are relatively cheap, so where’s the saving?  It’s film, it will need the rangefinder (probably the most expensive bit); same shutter; do away with the frameline selector and self timer; perhaps CNC the body from an aluminium billet and anodise it, with a more traditional swinging bad door, rather than a removable baseplate?

I’m sure there are cheaper and more precise ways of making a film camera than the 1953 M3 design ...

Edited October 25, 2021 by IkarusJohn

[adan]

30 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

I’m sure there are cheaper and more precise ways of making a film camera than the 1953 M3 design ...

I don't know about that - because the "1953 design" has already amortized a bunch of fixed costs. Leica already owns the factory spaces, and the machinery, and the trained and experienced staff. All they have to do is run off an extra 5000-10000 MP/M-A parts from existing infrastructure.

If someone can tell me

- how many million €€€€ it will cost Leica up front to create new factory spaces (assuming the M-A/MP remain in production), and buy additional machines, and hire/train new staff, for making all-new, different parts

- and how many thousands of the "cheaper Ms" will have to be sold for the profits to recoup that investment...

....then we can have a discussion.

Quote

 

A little parable:

The way that Cosina was able to introduce Bessa RF cameras very rapidly and very inexpensively was that the Bessas were about 90% parts that Cosina had already been making for 20 years - for a series of SLRs (CT-1, CT-1A, CT-1 Super - as well as badge-engineered versions of those for Nikon, Olympus, Vivitar and other brands).

Compare and contrast....

http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Cosina_CT1_Super

https://www.cameraquest.com/voigtbl.htm

Wind levers, rewind knobs, take-up spools, advance gears, self-timers, meter LED panels, shutters, body castings - you name it. Cosina just made more of what they were already making, and built viewfinder, and then rangefinder, cameras with them (by leaving out the prisms, mirrors, and aperture-actuator arms, doubling-up the shutter blades, and stamping different top plates).

 

Nikon did something similar (but in reverse, and not quite as comprehensively) in adopting existing SP/S3 rangefinder body parts as Nikon F SLR parts, in 1960. See comparison picture about halfway down this page:

http://www.stefanopasini.it/Index_Love_For_Nikons.htm

I would submit that for a small-volume company like Leica, the same economics apply. Much, much cheaper to make additional MP parts to build a less-expensive M, than to run around spending gobs of Dr. Kaufmann's money for "new manufacturing" - that may be cheaper per item, but only once the fixed costs are recovered.

Unless Leica expects to sell 500000 "cheaper film M's" within 5-10 years. ***giggle***

[IkarusJohn]

14 hours ago, adan said:

I don't know about that - because the "1953 design" has already amortized a bunch of fixed costs. Leica already owns the factory spaces, and the machinery, and the trained and experienced staff. All they have to do is run off an extra 5000-10000 MP/M-A parts from existing infrastructure.

If someone can tell me

- how many million €€€€ it will cost Leica up front to create new factory spaces (assuming the M-A/MP remain in production), and buy additional machines, and hire/train new staff, for making all-new, different parts

- and how many thousands of the "cheaper Ms" will have to be sold for the profits to recoup that investment...

....then we can have a discussion.

Nikon did something similar (but in reverse, and not quite as comprehensively) in adopting existing SP/S3 rangefinder body parts as Nikon F SLR parts, in 1960. See comparison picture about halfway down this page:

http://www.stefanopasini.it/Index_Love_For_Nikons.htm

I would submit that for a small-volume company like Leica, the same economics apply. Much, much cheaper to make additional MP parts to build a less-expensive M, than to run around spending gobs of Dr. Kaufmann's money for "new manufacturing" - that may be cheaper per item, but only once the fixed costs are recovered.

Unless Leica expects to sell 500000 "cheaper film M's" within 5-10 years. ***giggle***

Not sure about that, Andy.

The highest cost in manufacturing is labour, and assembling an M film camera properly is labour intensive - skilled labour which we here is in short supply.  If the rumoured new film M is to be “cheaper”, they’ll need to do more than raid the MP parts bin.  Leaving out the frameline lever won’t save much.

The other thing we don’t know is the impact on the MP & M-A - would such a new camera be in addition to those, or a replacement …

[Helge]

vor 15 Stunden schrieb adan:

I don't know about that - because the "1953 design" has already amortized a bunch of fixed costs. Leica already owns the factory spaces, and the machinery, and the trained and experienced staff. All they have to do is run off an extra 5000-10000 MP/M-A parts from existing infrastructure.

If someone can tell me

- how many million €€€€ it will cost Leica up front to create new factory spaces (assuming the M-A/MP remain in production), and buy additional machines, and hire/train new staff, for making all-new, different parts

- and how many thousands of the "cheaper Ms" will have to be sold for the profits to recoup that investment...

....then we can have a discussion.

Nikon did something similar (but in reverse, and not quite as comprehensively) in adopting existing SP/S3 rangefinder body parts as Nikon F SLR parts, in 1960. See comparison picture about halfway down this page:

http://www.stefanopasini.it/Index_Love_For_Nikons.htm

I would submit that for a small-volume company like Leica, the same economics apply. Much, much cheaper to make additional MP parts to build a less-expensive M, than to run around spending gobs of Dr. Kaufmann's money for "new manufacturing" - that may be cheaper per item, but only once the fixed costs are recovered.

Unless Leica expects to sell 500000 "cheaper film M's" within 5-10 years. ***giggle***

In addition, the present manufacturing capacity is according to Leica completely used-up by the current demand for MP and M-A. So any „side“ production for a new, cheaper model would cannibalize on the capacity for the expensive ones 😉

 

[IkarusJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, Helge said:

In addition, the present manufacturing capacity is according to Leica completely used-up by the current demand for MP and M-A. So any „side“ production for a new, cheaper model would cannibalize on the capacity for the expensive ones 😉

 

Not sure “cannibalisation” is a problem.  If, as we suspect, the issue is having experienced staff to assemble the MP and M-A, Leica can’t meet demand.  Augmenting the existing film M production line with a simplified camera which eases the production bottle neck is presumably the goal.  A more modern design, based around the OVF and M mount might be the solution, made with greater automation and less reliance on long departed gnomes of Wetzlar with film camera expertise.

[Helge]

When I purchased my MP this year I got told that the production capacity (machinery) for the OVF is at its limit.

So they either would have to reduce production volumes of the MP/M-A (or even Digital M) in favor of a cheaper model - or they have to make investments in new machines (and also new staff).

[Herr Barnack]

On 10/24/2021 at 7:10 PM, IkarusJohn said:

 ...Such a camera wouldn’t necessarily be aimed at an M traditionalist.  Wouldn’t it bee aimed at the younger crowd, interested in film...

So it would be the Leica version of a Samsung Galaxy S21 Plus that uses film?

[adan]

4 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

Augmenting the existing film M production line with a simplified camera which eases the production bottle neck is presumably the goal.

But whose goal? I've seen no evidence that Leica actually has such a goal - just the hopefuls here, and the rumor-mongers.

However, lets take a look at this from another angle.

In the past 20-odd years there have been multiple attempts at a "moderately-priced M-mount film camera:" Konica Hexar RF, Voigtländer Bessa-R2/3/4, Zeiss Ikon. And if one wants to stretch the time-frame a little, the Minolta CLE.

All of those seem to match up with what IkarusJohn is recommending (but he can correct me, of course). Generally, as boxes that can take pictures with M-mount lenses, they were competent, often had more features than Leica's Ms, and certainly used more modern and streamlined production. In some cases they were more battery-dependent  - but so was the M7.

Where are they now?

For that matter, what happened to the companies that made them? (Minolta and Konica - out of the camera business, and merged for survival; C/V - doing well sticking with lenses - but no cameras at all; Zeiss - out of the film camera market also).

And more importantly, why are they not sharing significantly in the 2-3x price run-up of M6s?

They are out there (used) in the marketplace right now. Anyone who wants to have a reasonably-priced M-mount camera can get one. But they simply don't seem to be as - attractive - as an authentic, clockwork M6. Despite their modernity.

Someone needs to explain why those cameras died out - but a similar "moderately-priced M" camera made by Leica in Germany will somehow be more successful.

[logan2z]

25 minutes ago, adan said:

Someone needs to explain why those cameras died out - but a similar "moderately-priced M" camera made by Leica in Germany will somehow be more successful.

Because it'll be a Leica? 😉

[ianman]

3 hours ago, Helge said:

When I purchased my MP this year I got told that the production capacity (machinery) for the OVF is at its limit.

Maybe it’s an EVF only M film camera  That would ruffle a few feathers in the M11 thread 😂

[wattsy]

5 hours ago, logan2z said:

Because it'll be a Leica? 😉

Yes, I'm not even sure why Andy asked the question. That said, I agree that a cheaper M film camera (at least meaningfully cheaper) is very unlikely to be coming out of Wetzlar (or the factory in Portugal). Which of course doesn't preclude a cheaper film camera being made under contract in Asia. Unlikely too IMO (for many reasons too boring to go into) but at least more economically feasible.

[adan]

11 hours ago, logan2z said:

Because it'll be a Leica? 😉

Ahhh - you mean that brand and logo that I tape over?

I'm afraid that for me, "Leica" has usually been a sub-standard brand label, to be avoided.

The only exception, in the 35mm film world, being the classic, clockwork M bodies, which just happened to have specific features that the rest of the photographic world was abandoning when I "bought in" in 2001 (M4-2). It is those features that are valuable - not the name (which once upon a time could also have been Contax - Canon - Nikon).

split-image manual focusing -  light weight and compact volume - low-impact, quiet horizontal-travel dual-spool shutter - independence from batteries and electronics - compact, competent interchangeable manual lenses.

In other words, precisely the "guts" that have defined the film-M Leicas from the M3 through the M-A - and which appear to be the features many suggest as the first things to throw overboard to create a "less-expensive" M.

[IkarusJohn]

15 hours ago, adan said:

But whose goal? I've seen no evidence that Leica actually has such a goal - just the hopefuls here, and the rumor-mongers.

However, lets take a look at this from another angle.

In the past 20-odd years there have been multiple attempts at a "moderately-priced M-mount film camera:" Konica Hexar RF, Voigtländer Bessa-R2/3/4, Zeiss Ikon. And if one wants to stretch the time-frame a little, the Minolta CLE.

All of those seem to match up with what IkarusJohn is recommending (but he can correct me, of course). Generally, as boxes that can take pictures with M-mount lenses, they were competent, often had more features than Leica's Ms, and certainly used more modern and streamlined production. In some cases they were more battery-dependent  - but so was the M7.

Where are they now?

For that matter, what happened to the companies that made them? (Minolta and Konica - out of the camera business, and merged for survival; C/V - doing well sticking with lenses - but no cameras at all; Zeiss - out of the film camera market also).

And more importantly, why are they not sharing significantly in the 2-3x price run-up of M6s?

They are out there (used) in the marketplace right now. Anyone who wants to have a reasonably-priced M-mount camera can get one. But they simply don't seem to be as - attractive - as an authentic, clockwork M6. Despite their modernity.

Someone needs to explain why those cameras died out - but a similar "moderately-priced M" camera made by Leica in Germany will somehow be more successful.

I agree, Andy.

That’s what makes this rumour so curious.  Can’t recall where the rumour came from, but I seem to recall it has been presented as fact by a credible source (whatever that means).  If it is true, I can’t get my head around what the camera would be.

You opined that such a camera would just raid the MP parts bin (if I understand your prior post correctly), as this would be the cheapest approach, assuming there is a surplus parts bin somewhere … If that is the case, what would be the point?  Why not just increase production of the MP, or M-A?  Would a camera based on the MP be different enough and actually be cheaper?  This is unlikely to be an R&D saving - those costs will have been recouped decades ago.

As I understand it, the issue is that demand exceeds supply.

To my mind, the MP and M-A provide perfect options for film photography, and Leica has said they will continue to make them for so long as there is demand.  If they can’t meet demand, why aren’t they increasing production? And what would make increased production easier?  That then raises the interesting question of what would meet demand?  If the constraint is the production line, making an MP or M-A less a few bits is unlikely to ease production - it will still need precision assembly, and an OVF …

No idea what the answer is to any of this.  If we look back at the digital equivalents (the M-E), can Leica produce a similar, simplified film M?  Those cameras were hardly cheap, and what would the impact be on the MP & M-A?

Maybe it’s a lomography type camera?  One piece cast in plastic, without the rangefinder … perhaps not.

[earleygallery]

15 hours ago, logan2z said:

Because it'll be a Leica? 😉

'Cheap' Leica stuff always flops. Look at the Summarit line of lenses - they just didn't sell so they were scrapped.

Leica needs to find a way to make a more expensive version of the MA or MP that's not a special edition.

[earleygallery]

53 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

I agree, Andy.

That’s what makes this rumour so curious.  Can’t recall where the rumour came from, but I seem to recall it has been presented as fact by a credible source (whatever that means).  If it is true, I can’t get my head around what the camera would be.

 

Someone on here claims to have seen the new camera and says it's basically the same as an M6. I'm very confused by that because the M6 is basically the same as the MP.

If I had to guess at how Leica would offer a cheaper M I'd say it would have a metal vertical travel shutter, probably battery operated, die cast body/top/base plates and possibly a less complex viewfinder assembly (maybe fixed frame lines/indicators?).

Edited October 26, 2021 by earleygallery

[IkarusJohn]

I agree, James.  I can't see the point in an M6, unless Leica this it has a legacy interest - shiny, black paint etc.  How would that be cheaper? Zinc wasn't a success.  Plastic? or machined aluminium?

[adan]

29 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

Can’t recall where the rumour came from, but I seem to recall it has been presented as fact by a credible source (whatever that means).

Still linked in post #1 of this thread. The fact it has never been updated at all in 10 months (despite a plea for more leakers) suggests it was really just the blind leading the blind.

https://leicarumors.com/2020/12/28/a-new-cheap-leica-m-film-camera-is-rumored-for-2021.aspx/

Note that are two parts to the rumor - that it will be "similar to an M6 ttl" - and that it will be cheaper.

As I write, James is mentioning that "I'm very confused by that because the M6 is basically the same as the MP." And here is why that is not the case.

1) In 1967 Leica made the second greatest design innovation in the whole M series (outside of creating it in the first place). Leica got rid of the stupid, slow 1920s-era rewind knob, and replaced it with a crank - like every other market-leading 35mm camera after 1960.

For me, that is a large difference - so large that it would be the sole determinant of which film Leica M I might buy (never, under any circumstances, an M3, M2, MP or M-A - but just possibly, an M6.2). And the increase in used M6/M7 prices, compared to the increase for an M3 or M2, tends to indicate that a lot of would-be Leica owners agree.

Dump the knob!

2) Another difference between the M6 and the MP/M-A is that the M6 retained many of the "cheapening steps" introduced by ELCAN in creating the M4-2 as the "cheap" M4 - to save the M system in 1976-77. Most importantly, stamped zinc-alloy top and bottom plates, in place of oh-so-preciously-carved-from-a-single-billet brass. With the fat stamped (rather than engraved) logo script on the top.

I loved the "industrial - almost Soviet - chic" of the stamped-out, gross-scripted blackened-chrome M4-2, M4-P, and M6 - no-nonsense picture-making machines (bubbles and all). For me, the MP and M-A are "a triumph of jewelry over function."

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Now, in terms of cost, the knob/crank change wouldn't mean much either way. Just desirability.

But stamped-out alloy coverings - maybe in a garage in Portugal?  Those could be quite a savings.

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[adan]

15 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

Zinc wasn't a success.

Well, it was for 25 years - right up until Hermès got into the act. A scarf and purse company making cameras, for bog's sake.

One of the really good things about Dr. Kaufmann's take-over was that he tossed "Hermès chic" out the back door and onto its butt, and took Leica back to engineering. At least for a while.

Edited October 26, 2021 by adan