M11 without baseplate: Do You really know, what this means?

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

There was a CEO fired over that idea...🙄

[Herr Barnack]

2 hours ago, Ouroboros said:

I think the real conundrum is how will Leica attract new buyers in a market that no one can guarantee has long-term viability in it's current recognised form. 

 

 

Offer new buyers an APS-C format DSLR with an 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 zoom and price it at $449 USD similar to this?  https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1461734-REG/canon_2727c002_eos_rebel_t7_dslr.html

[pgk]

1 minute ago, Herr Barnack said:

Offer new buyers an APS-C format DSLR with an 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 zoom and price it at $449 USD similar to this?

And I expect that it is a very capable camera although with a potentially limited lifespan. Tha said  I know a business using Canon 60Ds which has racked up 150-200k exposures on each body and if they weren't trashed due to dust ingress in the switchgear, they'd probably do more. Qualitywise the images were up to the job they were intended to do (scientific photography). High quality images are not actually reserved to just expensive cameras.

[IkarusJohn]

47 minutes ago, jaapv said:

There was a CEO fired over that idea...🙄

Many years ago, followed by spectacular failures by Leica to provide the technical support for the electronic parts in its very expensive cameras which matched the over-engineered bodies.  The prices of the cameras was consistent with its market position, but simply didn’t match the quality of the critical parts.  It seems the cameras would have been better made of cheap plastic.  Is there really a place for an electronic camera wrapped in expensive clothing?  I often think of the daft Virtu cellphone …

Do we need to rehearse this discussion?

Many here said ad nauseam that an electronic camera can only be expected to last 10 years.  If that’s the case, Leica would be better served supporting the M mount by stripping the cost out of its cameras.  It’s future is very uncertain, and its customer base ever diminishing, if it is relying on selling $8,000 cameras with APO and Noctilux lenses.  When was the last time Leica announced a “cheap” or “entry level” lens or camera into the M system?  Or just sensibly priced, considering the wisdom here that electronics have a depressingly short shelf-life.

If Leica follows its competitors into video etc etc with the M cameas, it will simply illustrate that it cannot compete on price or performance.

I agree that Leica’s position is as a disrupter - but innovator?  I don’t think so.  The coupled M mount was a refinement of existing technology; its attempt at SLR was late to the party, never caught up and frankly was never as good in the hand as the older Nikon F; the M5 was not ground breaking in providing for an in camera meter - there were many cameras with meters before that.

Even the SL, which is a fine camera oozing Leica build quality and refined user interface, relies on its fantastic lenses - how many times have we read people here commenting on its AF and other shortcomings compared to its rivals from Nikon and Canon?  Its appeal to me was its use with M lenses …

I hope Leica does better than just removing the bottom plate (not a significant selling point).

Edited December 14, 2021 by IkarusJohn

[SrMi]

10 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

<snip>

Many here said ad nauseam that an electronic camera can only be expected to last 10 years.  

<snip>

 

Also lenses with electronics have a limited lifespan. Peter Karbe said that they cannot guarantee 20 years for electronics.

 

Edited December 14, 2021 by SrMi

[Herr Barnack]

25 minutes ago, pgk said:

And I expect that it is a very capable camera although with a potentially limited lifespan. Tha said  I know a business using Canon 60Ds which has racked up 150-200k exposures on each body and if they weren't trashed due to dust ingress in the switchgear, they'd probably do more. Qualitywise the images were up to the job they were intended to do (scientific photography). High quality images are not actually reserved to just expensive cameras.

Don't take my suggestion too seriously - I doubt that offering a Leica EOS Rebel T7 is the answer.  Leica makes a little over 100,000 cameras per year and around 36,000 cameras per year (or so says Google).  Leica has more in common with Patek Philippe (62,000 timepieces made per year) than they do with Canon, who makes around 450 billion cameras and lenses per year.

I think protecting, curating and perpetuating the Leica legacy - and the M line - is absolutely mandatory. 

As for catering to market demands to keep the company on sound financial footing or even to stimulate modest growth, I can't help with that one - my APO crystal ball is in the shop for a CLA.

Edited December 14, 2021 by Herr Barnack

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

29 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

Many years ago, followed by spectacular failures by Leica to provide the technical support for the electronic parts in its very expensive cameras which matched the over-engineered bodies.  The prices of the cameras was consistent with its market position, but simply didn’t match the quality of the critical parts.  It seems the cameras would have been better made of cheap plastic.  Is there really a place for an electronic camera wrapped in expensive clothing?  I often think of the daft Virtu cellphone …

Do we need to rehearse this discussion?

Many here said ad nauseam that an electronic camera can only be expected to last 10 years.  If that’s the case, Leica would be better served supporting the M mount by stripping the cost out of its cameras.  It’s future is very uncertain, and its customer base ever diminishing, if it is relying on selling $8,000 cameras with APO and Noctilux lenses.  When was the last time Leica announced a “cheap” or “entry level” lens or camera into the M system?  Or just sensibly priced, considering the wisdom here that electronics have a depressingly short shelf-life.

If Leica follows its competitors into video etc etc with the M cameas, it will simply illustrate that it cannot compete on price or performance.

I agree that Leica’s position is as a disrupter - but innovator?  I don’t think so.  The coupled M mount was a refinement of existing technology; its attempt at SLR was late to the party, never caught up and frankly was never as good in the hand as the older Nikon F; the M5 was not ground breaking in providing for an in camera meter - there were many cameras with meters before that.

Even the SL, which is a fine camera oozing Leica build quality and refined user interface, relies on its fantastic lenses - how many times have we read people here commenting on its AF and other shortcomings compared to its rivals from Nikon and Canon?  Its appeal to me was its use with M lenses …

I hope Leica does better than just removing the bottom plate (not a significant selling point).

Back in 2007/2008 the idea of modular upgradeable electronics within a more permanent mechanical body was a technological impossibility, but now with miniaturization and precise printing it might well be more feasible. 

[pgk]

15 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Back in 2007/2008 the idea of modular upgradeable electronics within a more permanent mechanical body was a technological impossibility, but now with miniaturization and precise printing it might well be more feasible. 

Thinking about this, especially after pushing it when technology couldn't meet the expectation, would be very bold and potentially positive move for very many reasons.

[IkarusJohn]

18 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Back in 2007/2008 the idea of modular upgradeable electronics within a more permanent mechanical body was a technological impossibility, but now with miniaturization and precise printing it might well be more feasible. 

So references to Mr Lee aren’t really relevant.  I’m not sure modular is the point.  Repairable and upgradeable might be more attractive, but still cost effective?

My first Leica was the M9.  At that time, a lot of ink was spilt about the performance of many M lenses on the new digital sensor - focus shift with the f/1 Noctilux and 35 Summilux spring to mind, but there were others that were in the M gamut which were found wanting (the 28 & 35 Summicrons both subsequently upgraded for the less forgiving digital sensors).  Sensor based focusing was discussed a lot to deal with these issues.  Leica has, I think, solved this problem with a vastly improved OVF and an improved EVF option.

It’s also worth remembering that when the M9P was announced, Leica offered an upgrade option (we both availed ourselve of that), and there was the a la carte programme (now gone).  Do you think Leica can invest in its Customer Service department, and make it profitable?  Repainting my M-A was just within what I considered reasonable cost (compared to buying a new camera).

So, what’s the core of the M system that justifies its expense?  It’s lenses; the OVF, with an EVF option; its size; the traditional, compact form factor; its apparent simplicity.  It apparently isn’t video, IBIS or the baseplate …

I love using my M-A; I still really enjoy the simplicity of my M9 based Monochrom; and I prefer my M10-D without the EVF and just used in the same way as I used my M9 …

So, what will future M cameras look like?  I think the recent M lenses give us a clue - close focusing, apparently (35 APO Summicron); capable of accurately focusing fast lenses (75 Noctillux & 90 Summilux), what else?

PS - what brought many of us into the M system?  At the time of the M9, the most popular choice was the Canon 5DII - a huge, electronic, complicated, nasty piece of plastic (I only held one once, so I’m going on brief, first impressions).  Coming from an F5, I found the drift into menus and electronics alienating - not something I was even remotely interested in.

Finding the M9, with aperture, focus and shutter speed, all in direct controls right where they should be, was a breath of fresh air …

Edited December 14, 2021 by IkarusJohn

[pgk]

1 hour ago, IkarusJohn said:

PS - what brought many of us into the M system?  At the time of the M9, the most popular choice was the Canon 5DII - a huge, electronic, complicated, nasty piece of plastic (I only held one once, so I’m going on brief, first impressions).

The M (rangefinder) is what appealed (and still appeals) to me. Very simple.

I had 5DIIs (my wife now has them) and it was (and is) a highly competent camera which delivered great images (they are still being used).

If you look at the current prices of used M9s and 5DIIs you will see that one still has a good value but the other only a residual value. The good value may be enhanced if its support were to continue (the 5DII is no longer supported). Whilst I don't see cameras as investments, the difference in values between the two cameras suggests that one is still in demand dispite age and flaws.

Edited December 14, 2021 by pgk

[IkarusJohn]

I don’t doubt the co;etence of the 5DII - it was a hugely successful camera for Canon.  The M9 had a clear point of difference …

[setuporg]

11 hours ago, 250swb said:

True, very true. I hadn't planned for an M11 but if I do I'll make sure I neither buy or purchase but instead I'll do the fully relaxed approach and 'pick one up'. This could be on the way to an airport, probably going to my holiday home in Phuket or a glamourous party in Monaco. I would be more specific on my destination but if I search Google for 'worldwide map of Leica Dealers' it comes up with a world map of drug dealers (true).   

Similar to how some (new) Russians do not say "I bought a car," they say "took" one (взял тачку).  You take what is rightfully yours.

46 minutes ago, pgk said:

one is still in demand despite age and flaws.

M9 is an amazing camera, I got one a few months ago for its CCD rendering and it adds hugely to the palette of Leica look.  More so than some lenses.  Looks like all interesting digital Leicas floor at about $3K.  You can't find a silver M9M even.  So those will probably be around for a long, long time.  Let's see how long the electronics holds.  You can repair mechanical cameras for much longer, of course.

Edited December 14, 2021 by setuporg

[roverover]

I don't have decades of experience with Leica as many here do, but seems there are many M users that want the M camera to be something else or
see it evolve to become more similar to other makers modern cameras.
I feel that there is a place for all of them and to be competitive and current, I presume this is why Leica offers updated S, Q and SL cameras. The SL series
seems to have many of the features that some Leica M users say they want the M to have.

So if the M were to develop into an even more modern camera in every way and lose the rangefinder, then it would stop being the M so many love.
Maybe someday Leica might develop a new model, a "modern" M alongside a traditional M model but it seems the M with rangefinder is here to stay.
After all, this Rangefinder camera is somewhat of a unicorn in todays camera marketplace and a lot of us like it. I occasionally use a tripod and I occasionally
use a Visoflex on mine M10R too, but I also bought an SL-2 to satisfy my needs when I want a more modern camera in my hands. It's really great and accepts M lenses.

I like the M as it is and will accept future versions of it in any form Leica decides to deliver it. They seem to know their customers, the marketplace as well as
their own heritage. It also seems that they have a feel and deep respect for continuing the M "heritage" while moving into the M into the future "alongside" their
more "modern" cameras.

I'm not trying to get any flames going here and I realize that everyone's opinion's are valid and some of the comments made in this thread are "tongue in cheek."
This is just 1 more M users personal opinion.
 

[jaapv]

On 12/14/2021 at 9:36 PM, roverover said:

and lose the rangefinder,

That is a no-go. It should be a modern rangefinder camera, not a retro piece of nostalgia. By all means produce a parallel stripped version for the minimalists, an M-N.

[SrMi]

5 hours ago, jaapv said:

That is a no-go. It should be a modern rangefinder camera, not a retro piece of nostalgia. By all means produce a parallel stripped version for the minimalists, an M-N.

Indeed! We need rangefinders, and we need DSLRs. It will be a sad day when all cameras are EVF-based (at least with what EVFs are available today).

[Mikep996]

OTOH,  at one time folks were saying, "It'll be a sad day if automobiles ever replace horses!

[SrMi]

9 hours ago, Mikep996 said:

OTOH,  at one time folks were saying, "It'll be a sad day if automobiles ever replace horses!

Imagine a world where they have killed all horses because automobiles have replaced them.

Edited December 17, 2021 by SrMi

[kwsmith45]

Lecia seems to be evolving away from the rangefinder, albeit slowly. It started with the 90 Elmar Macro that did away with the goggles, then perspective control that was added to live view on the M10, and now the new close focusing 35 APO. 

[roverover]

15 minutes ago, kwsmith45 said:

Lecia seems to be evolving away from the rangefinder, albeit slowly. It started with the 90 Elmar Macro that did away with the goggles, then perspective control that was added to live view on the M10, and now the new close focusing 35 APO. 

Leica make non-rangefinder cameras those of us that want those, but the M will not likely change that way. Goggles were replaced with a Macro ring,
that made sense and is a great improvement over goggles.
I have a new 35mm APO lens, it's a great leap forward in many ways and works fine on the M in the Rangefinder focal distances but requires Live View
for focusing closer than .07 meters as we know. Doesn't mean the Rangefinder is going away and these lenses work on the SL series cameras too.

We have Live View and an EVF to add on too, but seriously seems the Rangefinder is here to stay. I don't see anything that indicates that is changing.
It's the "heritage" of the M, I think this has been discussed ad nauseam.

Edited December 17, 2021 by roverover

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[sebben]

The beauty of a circle is that it goes around and around forever