Will R10 too expensive for me?

[platoali]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

From what I read in the forums and the other places. Peaple are pushing Leica to make R10 a super dream camera that will be cost more than 8k$. I love to have a 21MP FF sensore with the autofocus and etc, but my pocket dictate me to lower my wishes to more sensible choices.

Almost more than 99% of SLR users don't choose Leica, and the main reason is the price. Canon and Nikon are earning most of their profits from the low priced bodies like EOS 400D and D50. It is intresting When sony did enter the SLR market, they didn't choose to compete with high end SRLs like EOD 1D.

 

IMHO, R10 should be price between 3000 to 4000$ to be successfull and if they want to get more market share they should get another body with much lower price( 2000 to 3000) after that.

 

Another thing is the lens prices. vario-Elmarit 70-180 is 7k$. and all the other lenses except 2 or 3 are more than 4k. What I'm thinking is Leica should began to produce a series of low price lenses (500$ to 2500$). They can be built in countries like china, aimed for the mass market. We have Leica lenses for the Panasonic, why should'nt we have Leica lenses for the Nikon and Canon. This little company is a master in optic industry. but they are no good with electronics at least now. building lenses for the other brands is good solution to get more revenue while they are not good in building bodies for their costumers. Many of SLR users have already using canon with their current leica lenses, why don't leica produce these lenses directly for canon or nikon bodies, at least untill they can produce more competive bodies.

 

Please Leica don't listen to your small minority of multi-millionaire fans.They are spoiling you, They are showing you the wrong path. Lets build good quality products for mass market.

 

Thanks

[Advertisement]

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

[Guest stnami]

................they just want to make sure that the working pro cannot afford the camera/lens so they complaints from the ............."ahh dunno but I can afford it set".........less R&D required:)

. and so it should be, we don't want the camera to ba available to the masses.......I say that 10 - 12 grand would be reasonable

[carstenw]

Everybody is building good quality products for the mass market. Almost every SLR in the world is very good, digital or film. Leica wants to go beyond that, and that requires more attention. Many of Leica's manufacturing methods are proprietary and I doubt severely that they will ever use them outside of Germany and Portugal.

 

There is a relatively large number of "affordable" Leica lenses in the M range now, well within the range you state. 28 Elmarit Asph, 35 Summarit and Cron, 50 Summarit and Cron, 75 Summarit, 90 Summarit and Elmarit all fit in your price range, and there are some great deals on the second-hand market. I imagine that the strategy Leica has followed in the M segment will be followed by a similar strategy in the R line, ie. new, cheaper lenses, and well as some rationalisation.

 

If Leica makes a 1Ds3 competitor, resolution-wise, it is only fair if it costs around $8000. If they make a 1D3/D3 competitor, then around $5000 is fair, and that is my personal guess. Probably a little more resolution but less speed, but around the $5000 mark. The M8 was about 30% more than a film M, and I think Leica will try to do the same with the R10, except maybe a bit more due to the larger amount of technology in it.

 

I don't think that Leica is bad at electronics any more. They need to pay more attention to testing though, because digital requires different, more stringent testing methodologies than film.

 

I am not sure why you think that most people don't buy Leica due to price. The price of the Leicas is fair compared to their competition. I suspect most people don't buy Leicas because they don't know enough about them.

[Iron Flatline]

It will be priced the best way Leica can manage. I doubt they'll be getting rich off this product, right now they want to be part of the game, and sell lenses.

 

Believe me, whatever the price will be - it's not done without thinking about the market place.

[platoali]

It will be priced the best way Leica can manage. I doubt they'll be getting rich off this product, right now they want to be part of the game, and sell lenses.

 

Believe me, whatever the price will be - it's not done without thinking about the market place.

 

I hope they earn more money from R10 that enable them to work on r11 and r12. What I'm saying that Leica should not put so much features and technology in this body that make it so pricy, If a 21MP sensore cost 3000$ more than a 12MP, It is OK for me that R10 comes with much cheaper one.

 

Another issue is that almost all lenses are somehow more expensive compare to the copetitors. I think what leica can do is produce two series of lenses, first is the current one that is produced on Germany and can satisfy the thouphest tastes and a much cheaper series that have good quality but not as good as the first one. These lenses can be produced on countries like china to reduce costs. They can expand the Leica's custmer base and gives more revenue to build other products. This is exactly what Zeiss is doing.

[Guest tummydoc]

From what I read in the forums and the other places. Peaple are pushing Leica to make R10 a super dream camera that will be cost more than 8k$. I love to have a 21MP FF sensore with the autofocus and etc, but my pocket dictate me to lower my wishes to more sensible choices.

 

If the R10 is also 21MP FF it will surely cost more than $8000 (the price of Canon 1DS-MKIII). The DMR with a new R9 and 40% less resolution cost approximately the same as a 1DS-MKII.

 

Almost more than 99% of SLR users don't choose Leica

 

Quite true.

 

and the main reason is the price.

 

That was (and is) often the reason purported by Leica R proponents. Buyers of other brands tell a different story, most often citing the Leica's lack of desired features such as autofocus and vibration-reduction. Price, when mentioned as a factor, is in the context of that comparative lack of features.

 

Canon and Nikon are earning most of their profits from the low priced bodies like EOS 400D and D50.

 

I don't know about Nikon but Canon doesn't earn most of their profits from cameras at all.

 

It is intresting When sony did enter the SLR market, they didn't choose to compete with high end SRLs like EOD 1D.

 

I'd characterise it as sensible and intelligent, rather than interesting. It would take something of a miracle to get a significant number of professionals to defect from Canon or Nikon. The Leica name carries significantly more weight in the photographic arena than Sony, and yet only a hand-ful of professionals world-wide prefer it over Canon/Nikon.

 

MHO, R10 should be price between 3000 to 4000$ to be successfull and if they want to get more market share they should get another body with much lower price( 2000 to 3000) after that.

 

It would be an enormous and most likely unsurmountable challenge for Leica to remake the image of their SLRs in the eyes of a wider market without risking alienating the R-series' infinitessimally small but fiercely loyal customer base. It would involve the inclusion of autofocus and some sort of vibration reduction, which would leave faithful Leica R proponents no choice but to either condemn the camera or lose face by doing a 180-deg turnabout w.r.t. their anti-technology rhetoric.

 

Please Leica don't listen to your small minority of multi-millionaire fans.They are spoiling you, They are showing you the wrong path. Lets build good quality products for mass market.

 

Thanks

 

Thank goodness we're required by ordinance to have protective covers on our computer keyboards here, or else I'd have just fried one with the mouthful of tea I just spat whilst laughing at that last part

[ruiespanhol]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

From what I read in the forums and the other places. Peaple are pushing Leica to make R10 a super dream camera that will be cost more than 8k$. I love to have a 21MP FF sensore with the autofocus and etc, but my pocket dictate me to lower my wishes to more sensible choices.

Almost more than 99% of SLR users don't choose Leica, and the main reason is the price. Canon and Nikon are earning most of their profits from the low priced bodies like EOS 400D and D50. It is intresting When sony did enter the SLR market, they didn't choose to compete with high end SRLs like EOD 1D.

 

IMHO, R10 should be price between 3000 to 4000$ to be successfull and if they want to get more market share they should get another body with much lower price( 2000 to 3000) after that.

 

Another thing is the lens prices. vario-Elmarit 70-180 is 7k$. and all the other lenses except 2 or 3 are more than 4k. What I'm thinking is Leica should began to produce a series of low price lenses (500$ to 2500$). They can be built in countries like china, aimed for the mass market. We have Leica lenses for the Panasonic, why should'nt we have Leica lenses for the Nikon and Canon. This little company is a master in optic industry. but they are no good with electronics at least now. building lenses for the other brands is good solution to get more revenue while they are not good in building bodies for their costumers. Many of SLR users have already using canon with their current leica lenses, why don't leica produce these lenses directly for canon or nikon bodies, at least untill they can produce more competive bodies.

 

Please Leica don't listen to your small minority of multi-millionaire fans.They are spoiling you, They are showing you the wrong path. Lets build good quality products for mass market.

 

Thanks

 

Finally someone understand the way that Leica should go!

It´s time to change the market aproach at Leica.

I understant that Leica is the most famous brand in photo world and this means pay lots of money for ther products,but now whit digital tecnh. who changes every day they dont make any sense to pay lots of money for one camera that cames obsolete very quickly.

I would like to see one R10 cost under 4000(maybe 3500 EUR) and I would like to see one new range of good and affordable zoom lenses.

Who pays 3500EUR for the Vario-Elmar 28-90?

It was one great lenses but to much expensive in my point of view.

If Leica put that lenses in the market whit one cost about near 2000EUR maybe sell much more.

Whit that price I buy one!

Now let me dream whit one

It was that Leica whish for the coustumers dream whit Leica products?Or buy it?

I think the last is tha way to go or not Leica?

 

Best,

[platoali]

Thank goodness we're required by ordinance to have protective covers on our computer keyboards here, or else I'd have just fried one with the mouthful of tea I just spat whilst laughing at that last part

 

:D

[AlanG]

Unfortunately a million dollars isn't what it used to be.

 

B&H has the 70-180 2.8 at $7200. (Manual focus lens) This is a pretty commonly used range for a lot of shooters to the point that it is almost a requirement. In the Canon system this will buy a 70-200 2.8 IS, plus 4 or 5 of their top zoom, TSE, or best high speed prime lenses. (Not counting long teles.) All AF lenses. I guess Nikon lenses are about the same.

 

I think this pretty much tells the story regardless of what the R10 comes in at.

 

Many Canon and Nikon shooters reprogram their focus buttons so that they use AF much as one would use a manual focus lens - only it's quicker and more accurate in my experience. (Maybe others are just more skilled at manual focusing than I am. But I think the market has spoken on the subject.) Many also feel that IS (or VR) is extremely useful on the 70-200 and longer lenses.

 

So other than current users (with lenses) and the very well heeled, I'm not sure who else could comprise the target market for the R10. But maybe that will be enough for Leica and they'll just be providing new tools mostly to keep old customers happy. And if the R10accepts current lenses but supports new AF lenses that will add perhaps $3000-$7000 a pop if you want AF on a lens or two.

 

At those prices, I think the R-10 would have to be pretty incredible with a deep system to attract typical pros to move from Nikon and Canon.

[andybarton]

Hang on - Leica already have cheap SLRs in the form of the 4/3 system. These take R-glass if you want them to.

 

The R10, however, needs to be the best (define this how you wish) digital SLR out there, in just the same way that the M8 is the best digital rangefinder out there (oh, hang on..., let's think this through again...)

 

The R10 will fail if it tries to compete with the 400Ds and D200s of this world. Canon sell more SLRs in a day than Leica do in a year, easily, so it would be ridiculous to try to compete in that market. Other big Japanese players struggle against the big boys. The R10 needs to appeal to the core and loyal R market, in just the same way as the M8 appeals to the core M user (from what I have heard, there have been relatively few M8 buyers, who haven't already got a film M).

 

The R10 needs to offer something that Canon and Nikon don't - that has to be the very best image quality, and a longevity that doesn't mean that people are tempted by the next model that comes along in 2 or 3 years time.

 

I am very, very satisfied with my DMR, but will look at an R10 if/when it comes along and if/when stockists stock them. However, it will have to offer something much more than I have now in image quality to get me to be tempted to spend more thousands of pounds. Given that I can blow my DMR images easily up to 20x30", and have no desire for larger prints than these, I think the DMR will be in my bag for many a year yet.

[carstenw]

I cannot imagine that Leica will go for serious competition with Nikon's and Canon's top models with the R10. There is too much to catch up with, too much to be learned. I don't think it is realistic for Leica to add the knowledge that is required to build a Nikon D3 or Canon 1D3 or 1Ds3 in just a couple of years, when it took Nikon and Canon many, many years.

 

What is realistic is to take the best sensor they can find, probably Kodak (who have their own axe to grind, to redeem themselves after their own disastrous digital SLR debut) and build a solid, relatively simple and mostly manual SLR around it, with a superior viewfinder, great image quality, solid backward compatibility, a great manual focusing experience, and at the same time, make some modest, but well-considered steps forward. I imagine that there will be a more affordable line of lenses with typical Leica quality, to accompany the R10, perhaps a line of Summarits, as well as at least one new exciting top-end lens.

 

The interesting question is what will the advancements be? I presume, personally, that they will add autofocus, and a couple of AF zooms to go with the system. Given their experience with OIS from the Digilux 3 system, it is possible that they will add that too. I think (and somehow hope) that it will stop there. Given their "full-frame or larger" comment, they may add a slightly larger sensor which can be set up for 3:2 or 4:3 in firmware. I would love to have a dust-removal system, and a few other features, but I would much rather that Leica makes slow, solid steps forward, while not making mistakes, than that they try to bite off too much at once.

[telyt]

Please Leica don't listen to your small minority of multi-millionaire fans.

 

I'm no multi-millionaire. I'm a thousandaire, maybe a multi-thousandaire. I have a passion for making high quality photographs and I'm willing to give up beer, gambling and haircuts to afford the tools that do what I want.

[sdai]

I'm with Doug, I've decided to get rid of my cafe latte habit.

[andybarton]

What if you've already given up beer, gambling and haircuts to get this far down the road?

 

I will have to give up my camera habit to afford a new camera....

[Guest tummydoc]

One would have to have serious drinking and gambling problems such that abstaining would free up enough cash to finance a Leica addiction

[Jamie Roberts]

One would have to have serious drinking and gambling problems such that abstaining would free up enough cash to finance a Leica addiction

 

It's the haircuts that cost the coin. Sheesh (sorry Doug) Since I'm going bald, I have no hopes...

[CarlM]

The R10 won't have autofocus if we even see it in the near future.

[jrc]

The problem Leica faces is that its R system is brutally obsolete. With the M system (which is also technologically obsolete), they can get away with it, because they have no serious competition among those who like rangefinders. This gives them time to upgrade, and perhaps the M9 will become more modern (selectable in-camera anti-vibration like the Pentax, dust removal, perhaps some form of focus confirmation, perhaps a larger sensor.) The main thing, is that they have time and a niche.

 

They don't have time or space with the R system. They either make a leap, or they fail. If the next R has an inferior sensor, no AF, no vibration reduction on longer lenses, AND the typical Leica price, they will sell mostly to wealthy collectors. I was just looking at the price of longer R lenses, because that would be the main reason for me to get a R, and it would not be difficult to spend $40,000-$50,000 on a professional-level R system, if the body price comes in near what most of us think it will (~$8000): two bodies, six or seven lenses, acessories. Unlike the situation is Nikon and Canon, it's not possible in the Leica system to buy a cheaper backup camera: lots of pros buy a 5D to go with a 1Ds, or a D200 to go with a D2x.

 

To get ANY pro (who must earn back what he spends) to buy into that system, it simply has to generate images that are clearly better than the competition's, and frankly, the images from Nikon and Canon are pretty damn good. I mean, there's some prestige in using Leicas, but is there more prestige in Leicas than in a Hasselblad 39mp system? And those are the prices an R system would be competing with, if it comes in like we think it will.

 

It has no choice but to be the absolute best.

 

 

JC

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Guest tummydoc]

It's the haircuts that cost the coin.

 

My wife cuts my hair. Numerous offers by me to reciprocate have been politely declined

[doctorlol]

John has put the case as clearly as any I have read in the recent past. In the end Leica has to trump the opposition, or it will fail. We read on this forum of Leica cameras failing, eg Digilux 2, M8, DLux 3. The lenses are also not averse to a glitch ot two.

 

So we have Nikon et al, coming up with well priced, state of the art products, and Leica sitting on its ****!

 

Well heeled collectors will buy Leica, but real photographers will get the message and leave a brand that shows little loyalty to its ardent supporters.

 

But, perhaps is the red dot really that good?

 

Laurence