ETA on the SL2-S firmware update?

[Simone_DF]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

10 hours ago, hansvons said:

 

•  a stills photographer who doesn't need the video features would pay less than a videographer 

A stills photographer who doesn't need the video features will pay the same as now, not less. The videographer will pay more.

This model benefits only companies, never customers.

Edited March 25, 2021 by Simone_DF

[geotrupede]

I do not see any justification in buying a luxury brand and then be robbed in order to use it at its full potential. 

if it is a luxury item there is a need to honesty, integrity, luxurious experience, all included at an excruciating cost, but without having to think about 20 quids here and 40 there in order to enjoy. Seems cheap and unconventional and not luxurious at all. Mean if you ask me. 

Expensive yes, but paid subscription is a cheap scenario to end up with. Most of us buy the brand and the object to enjoy, are devoted to the object, love it. Now make it a paid to use one button and pay a little more to select which button, etc.. make it a complex buy in app system, rubbish!  

Not justified by anything but profit.

My suggestion, leave us alone. Increase camera prices by 500 pounds / euros / dollars more and let the software be free for the life of the device, which BTW is not that long (in a sense of updates). 

More importantly, improve reliability, sell finished products, improve defect handling with faster repair, etc.

G.

 

[hansvons]

I bought into the SL system (SL2-S) without thinking of buying luxury. I never did with any of my tools. They are there to support my work. The SL2-S so far seems to be ideally suited for a particular kind of work that every here and then pops up.

If Leica would offer me an upgrade that would expand the camera's ability for my workflow, e.g. 444RGB ProRes internal recording (one can dream) or ACES compatibility, I'd pay in a heartbeat 400 EUR or more for that offer.

Those sudden easter egg kind of upgrades we witness elsewhere (birds-eye recognition, more video frame rates and whatnot) are primarily a marketing tool and great for specs braggers at the pub. Practically they rarely make a difference, only confirm your purchase psychologically and foster somewhat the customer's relationship to the brand by appealing to their greed - hey, I got that landmark-upgrade for nothing (although I never photograph birds). 

Other upgrades should be free, especially when they fix bugs or add value to the camera that was promised in advance of the product release, such as the upcoming SL2-S firmware upgrade that probably solves some issues of AF capabilities and offers other fixes. 

In my opinion, we should distinguish between maintenance and extra features. Cameras of today are software-driven platforms. Advances on the software side, enabling new features should be paid, as we already do with apps. But bugs should be fixed ASAP and, of course, at no extra costs. As I mentioned above, other professional manufacturers are doing that already and are widely accepted within their customer base. 

Sure, one could argue that Leica is a luxury brand and should treat its customers from that perspective. But we all know that this only half of the story. A proportion of Leica customers make a living out of Leica cameras and don't understand their purchase as luxury. Primarily the SL camera line is targeted at professionals. Thus, I find treating them as professionals and not as well-off enthusiasts makes sense. Many enthusiasts would prefer such treatment too. At least, I would.

[hansvons]

3 hours ago, Simone_DF said:

A stills photographer who doesn't need the video features will pay the same as now, not less. The videographer will pay more.

This model benefits only companies, never customers.

It's a thing of perspective. The photographer who orders the camera without expanded video capabilities would pay less than the filmmaker who wants all the video goodies. In a market economy driven by offer and demand, usability and price matter and are thus are valued differently, reflected in price and numbers of orders. And, there is no winner because it's not a zero-sum game. 

The idea that companies and customers are in a competition is an expression of our frustrations with many occurrences that come from distorted and fraudulent markets. Leica, which manufactures hardware based on manual labour and scientific research, is undoubtedly not part of such schemes. 

I think we have to acknowledge that hardware today is software-driven and can be developed with added feature after the purchase in the hands of the customer. This is a paradigm shift and must be reflected in the market. 

[geotrupede]

The high end / luxury manufacturers, such as Leica, take pride in giving us the best experience possible. At a very premium price.  Nobody complains. Nobody asks for discounts. We all pay big money for cameras and lenses.

It is sad thinking of them adopting a ransomware like logic, where to unlock a product potential one needs to pay an extra. And it is almost offensive to a brand like Leica to think that they would charge us, say 100 pounds, when one has spent thousands on their products. 

Thinking that a small fraction of us will then proceed and buy the update makes this financial operations ludicrous. Not worth as it will be more expensive to fix in term of reputation damage via PR and marketing. 

I would rather prefer they increased the entry price to pay in advance for additional upgrades. There is something really uncool in this idea, something that will stress test the strength of client - brand bound.

G>

 

[geotrupede]

Anyway, a matter of viewpoints. Just to state I aknowledge there are different views I do not agree with.  Peace and Love!

[frame-it]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Still waiting for Leica Sl2-S 2021service pack 1.5😃

[LD_50]

4 hours ago, Simone_DF said:

Except Sony also gives some great firmware updates for free, as does everyone else. For example the A7III 3.0 firmware update implemented Real-time Eye AF for animals out of the blue. It was not a promised feature, it was brand new.

What Sony does will never be what Leica successfully does. I think a paid model for firmware upgrades (not bug fixes) makes more sense for Leica. 

[frame-it]

6 minutes ago, LD_50 said:

What Sony does will never be what Leica successfully does. I think a paid model for firmware upgrades (not bug fixes) makes more sense for Leica. 

so everyone's camera might have a different operating system? i dont care about video, someone else might want prores raw and many more video features but no updates for stills..his OS will be different from mine with a different fee attached?  weird..

 

 

 

[LocalHero1953]

45 minutes ago, geotrupede said:

The high end / luxury manufacturers, such as Leica, take pride in giving us the best experience possible. At a very premium price.  Nobody complains. Nobody asks for discounts. 

............................

 

😁 You may want to explore some other parts of the forum!

[Photoworks]

30 minutes ago, LD_50 said:

What Sony does will never be what Leica successfully does. I think a paid model for firmware upgrades (not bug fixes) makes more sense for Leica. 

Sony did that with their older cameras a7. They had time-lapse and other fun filter to buy for 9.99. 
Once a new model came out all the apps didn't work anymore. That is the reason I never for the M10-D where the only option to change setting is the iPhone app. One day that is not going to work anymore in future IOS versions.

[Photoworks]

The only service I am willing to pay is a PRO service.

At the moment any in the US any repair of SL will need to get shipped to Germany. that is a 3-6 month turn around.

There is a need for Better repair service, Loaners, and a deal with rental houses that will send you a camera or lens when your is in repair if it takes so long.

[Simone_DF]

1 hour ago, LD_50 said:

I think a paid model for firmware upgrades (not bug fixes) makes more sense for Leica. 

It certainly does. But does it also make sense for the end users? What would be the advantage?

I know I'll move 100% to other brands if Leica decides to go the paid firmwares route.

I'm currently in wait and see mode but already looking at Fuji and Canon options.

[LD_50]

1 hour ago, Simone_DF said:

It certainly does. But does it also make sense for the end users? What would be the advantage?

I know I'll move 100% to other brands if Leica decides to go the paid firmwares route.

I'm currently in wait and see mode but already looking at Fuji and Canon options.

Leica is currently in the no firmware (or very few firmware update) business. That isn’t good for them or the end user. 

I’m not in favor of a paid replacement for today’s level of firmware updates. Today’s system isn’t good enough to warrant additional cost. I’m in favor of a much better system and I think to make it sustainable it would make sense to pay for it. The advantage for end users would be more rapid firmware updates, with more improvements offered and more communication regarding future improvements. The advantage for Leica would be revenue coming in for that work. 
 

2 hours ago, Photoworks said:

Sony did that with their older cameras a7. They had time-lapse and other fun filter to buy for 9.99. 
Once a new model came out all the apps didn't work anymore. That is the reason I never for the M10-D where the only option to change setting is the iPhone app. One day that is not going to work anymore in future IOS versions.

I’m not suggesting apps that transfer from model to model. The suggestion was paid feature updates for a camera you already own. If the next model doesn’t include something then you wouldn’t buy it, no different than today.

For example, with today’s business model we lost exposure preview from SL to SL2 and I don’t like that at all. I had to choose to overlook it if I wanted an SL2. That’s completely independent of a paid feature update model for a camera.

This is also completely independent of a pro service, rentals, phone support, loaners, etc. Leica should offer something better in these areas, I agree. 

Edited March 25, 2021 by LD_50

[BernardC]

I am morally opposed to paying for a feature that is already in my camera. Panasonic tried that with the S1 and had to backtrack. Odyssey did that with their video recorders, and lost their market to Atomos (the Odyssey 7Q was a better product). They've recently closed-up shop.

On the other hand I have paid for upgrades that added new features not available previously: 4K on some Sony cine cameras, digiback support on Hasselblads. Both of those involved trips to service centres, so they aren't just flipping a bit in the firmware.

The other thing I would consider buying are features that Leica has to pay for. For instance, I might consider paying for in-camera ProRes support, because Leica needs to pay Apple a licence fee.

My nightmare scenario would be recurring fees or "per-day" unlock codes. I would switch brands instead.

[Photoworks]

1 hour ago, LD_50 said:

I’m in favor of a much better system and I think to make it sustainable it would make sense to pay for it. The advantage for end users would be more rapid firmware updates, with more improvements offered and more communication regarding future improvements. The advantage for Leica would be revenue coming in for that work. 

Don't you think selling cameras and lenses is an incentive enough , the better they are and more people would be interest.

I took months for the FOTOS app to get fixed.

I have been waiting for a year for fixes like:

• Flash  under backlight shooting, contacted support back in may.
• Battery limitations.
• USB time out. Tether problem with SD cards in Leica shutter software and C1P
• Lut preview in SL2
  
   Panasonic did charge for ProResRAW.  on pay upgrades do you have to send the camera in like the brands do?
  Personally I have no need fo ProResRaw.
  Prespective Control? it is a cute idea, but if I would have to pay for it, I would do without!  I mostly process my row and I would have to go back edit that again to my liking.
  Multi shot? it is a nice option, but I have used it 2 time in a year.

[jrp]

They have to develop a better track record on providing firmware upgrades / apps.  The quality of the paid Leica Photos app suggests that they have work to do to develop their software / firmware development capacity. 

[LD_50]

1 hour ago, Photoworks said:

Don't you think selling cameras and lenses is an incentive enough , the better they are and more people would be interest.

No, obviously not given they don’t offer what I’m suggesting today and yet people are still generating lists of changes they want made to cameras already purchased. I think price is the issue with Leica sales, not so much missing features. 

1 hour ago, Photoworks said:

I took months for the FOTOS app to get fixed.

I have been waiting for a year for fixes like:

• Flash  under backlight shooting, contacted support back in may.
• Battery limitations.
• USB time out. Tether problem with SD cards in Leica shutter software and C1P
• Lut preview in SL2.

I’ve stated multiple times I would support a paid firmware update model for upgrades, not fixes to existing bugs. You provided a list of fixes that you want made, which would remain free if they intend to fix them. 
 

 

1 hour ago, Photoworks said:

Panasonic did charge for ProResRAW.  on pay upgrades do you have to send the camera in like the brands do?
Personally I have no need fo ProResRaw.
Prespective Control? it is a cute idea, but if I would have to pay for it, I would do without!  I mostly process my row and I would have to go back edit that again to my liking.
Multi shot? it is a nice option, but I have used it 2 time in a year.

You may have to send in the camera if necessary. If not, and it could be handled In a firmware update, then you wouldn’t. Simple enough. 

You provided a list of features you wouldn’t pay for. In the model I suggested, you would choose not to. Others may want those features and would pay for them. Simple enough. 

This discussion seems shortsighted to me and reminds me of when music first went to downloads and many people said they would not pay without a physical copy. Once the obvious benefits were clear for many consumers, that model disrupted the physical format sales and the companies tethered to it suffered.

Later when streaming kicked off people would say they would never pay to “rent” music, that they must own it. Once the benefits became clear, that model disrupted the download model and again companies too shortsighted to see it missed out. 

With cameras we are reaching a point of diminishing returns on new features (hardware and software) and sales are dropping as the market shrinks. Most companies are focusing more on the high end of the market and I would like to see Leica survive this shift. Sony is aggressively grabbing market share with new hardware now, but at some point I don’t see the upgrade path being so rapid, further dropping sales. Price will limit upgrades and so will rapidly diminishing returns in resolution, AF speed, etc. 

Leading in software development may help Leica differentiate as others encroach upon their hardware quality. They have an opportunity to be disruptive in software (sharing capabilities, elegant and simple UI, etc). They’ve shown a willingness to take risks before with the TL, S, and SL interfaces. I believe a clear revenue stream would help to make this sustainable and people would pay if the product was good enough to warrant it. 

Many disagree with what I have suggested and I assume Leica won’t do this anyway. In the current model I would like more communication and more rapid updates to fix bugs that are found. 

[hansvons]

@LD_50 I absolutely agree. 

In video postproduction land, there is an application called Flame, which belongs to Autodesk. This application was invented in the early nineties by Discreet, which was bought by ADSK 10 years later. In the beginning, this revolutionary software was running on expensive Silicon Graphics workstations. It sold as turn-key systems with prices way beyond 100k. At some point down the road, they switched platform and became Linux based on PC hardware. Still, they were able to sell turn-key systems but also started to sell the application without hardware. Back then, the application alone was 40k+. 

7 years ago, they realised that they either go the way of the Dodo or switch to a subscription model. Today, ADSK rents the Flame software for around 4K per annum to their customers in a highly competitive market with behemoths like Adobe on the forefront. But they manage to keep their niche and earn more revenue than 10 years ago with the old sell and upgrade model. As a user, I can testify that development, bug-fixing, and communication with the community has never been better. And, of course, they offer different versions at different pricing, thus meeting their client's need better. I'd love to see that with Leica too, as Arri and Sony already do. 

When switching to such a model, there will be imbalances that must be dealt with fairly (ADSK was very generous at that). But, in the end, everyone benefits.  

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Simone_DF]

5 hours ago, LD_50 said:

Leica is currently in the no firmware (or very few firmware update) business. That isn’t good for them or the end user. 

I’m not in favor of a paid replacement for today’s level of firmware updates. Today’s system isn’t good enough to warrant additional cost. I’m in favor of a much better system and I think to make it sustainable it would make sense to pay for it. The advantage for end users would be more rapid firmware updates, with more improvements offered and more communication regarding future improvements. The advantage for Leica would be revenue coming in for that work. 
 

It seems to me that Fuji is offering rapid firmware updates, with more improvements offered and more communication regarding future improvements, for free. Why should I pay Leica? It's up to Leica to up their game in a competitive market, not to the end user.