Panasonic S9 - a harbinger of things to come at Leica?

[Simone_DF]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 minutes ago, Le Chef said:

How quickly can you report back with the numbers?

I'd need to make some phone calls, I guess by Monday afternoon.

[Advertisement]

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

[Olaf_ZG]

3 hours ago, bobtodrick said:

Yes…some people here really need to take a few business courses.

And some people at Leica should learn their business regarding customer service and programming.

But then, some people here are living the high, and always looking at the bright side. Meanwhile m11 is still having problems, sl3 is losing images, but, the business course told us to bring a new app, so we don’t need expensive lenses anymore….

@Simone_DFis right: the l-mount is great, as it offers a lot, not necessarily Leica

[Olaf_ZG]

I do like this development of Panasonic. I always thought I would buy a q40/50 at once if Leica would release it. Now I am not sure anymore as latest releases of Leica has been as such that I won’t buy neither the latest m nor sl…

Having a panasonic for 2k€, leaves quite some nice money for some lenses. Not necessarily Leica either, as sigma, panasonic and cosina are doing wonderful things.

[bobtodrick]

17 minutes ago, Olaf_ZG said:

And some people at Leica should learn their business regarding customer service and programming.

But then, some people here are living the high, and always looking at the bright side. Meanwhile m11 is still having problems, sl3 is losing images, but, the business course told us to bring a new app, so we don’t need expensive lenses anymore….

@Simone_DFis right: the l-mount is great, as it offers a lot, not necessarily Leica

And here’s your answer…buy a different brand camera that fulfils your needs.

Why do people find that so difficult to understand????

[BradS]

4 hours ago, Le Chef said:

If you can show the return on investment to cover development and production costs, and show an increase in Leica’s overall profitability then I’m sure they would love to hear how you could accomplish that.

 

6 hours ago, bobtodrick said:

Yes…some people here really need to take a few business courses.

It doesn't take a Harvard MBA to recognize that Leica has been plagued by low quality and poor reliability for at least the last decade. Obviously, it would be detrimental for them to introduce a new product line with a whole new set of quality issues.  Doing so would, at minimum,  further tarnish the brand reputation and exacerbate the already abominable wait times for repair service. 

No, I think they are doing the right thing by focusing on improving the quality and reliability of their existing products.

Edited June 15, 2024 by BradS

[student]

4 hours ago, BradS said:

 

It doesn't take a Harvard MBA to recognize that Leica has been plagued by low quality and poor reliability for at least the last decade. Obviously, it would be detrimental for them to introduce a new product line with a whole new set of quality issues.  Doing so would, at minimum,  further tarnish the brand reputation and exacerbate the already abominable wait times for repair service. 

No, I think they are doing the right thing by focusing on improving the quality and reliability of their existing products.

Perhaps Leica might consider getting some of those deft Shanghai guys to work at the Wetzler facility to help sort out matters at some speed

[Olaf_ZG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

8 hours ago, bobtodrick said:

And here’s your answer…buy a different brand camera that fulfils your needs.

Why do people find that so difficult to understand????

I will, and assume many others will as well, and or will not upgrade anymore. 

[dsalamena]

I believe it’s undeniable that there’s a void in Leica lineup: a compact L-mount with interchangeable lenses is definitely missing (CL or mini SL) and, in my opinion, it would sell very well. 
I believe Leica has doubts on its profitability (it would compete with the SL and Q which guarantee higher margins of profit probably), but don’t tell me it’s not technically possible. 
Panasonic and Sigma have already (partially) filled that void with the S9 and FP cameras.  
 

[JNK100]

4 minutes ago, dsalamena said:

I believe it’s undeniable that there’s a void in Leica lineup: a compact L-mount with interchangeable lenses is definitely missing (CL or mini SL) and, in my opinion, it would sell very well. 
I believe Leica has doubts on its profitability (it would compete with the SL and Q which guarantee higher margins of profit probably), but don’t tell me it’s not technically possible. 
Panasonic and Sigma have already (partially) filled that void with the S9 and FP cameras.  
 

Again, the S9 and even more so, the FP are utterly different cameras. Being video -focussed and not having EVFs they are not likely to appeal to Leica-users.in my view. 

If people like the S9: buy it.

The Q,M and SL range covers most people's needs I imagine.

I have no idea of the margins made on existing cameras. I don't realise this has been published?

 

 

[Simone_DF]

10 hours ago, bobtodrick said:

And here’s your answer…buy a different brand camera that fulfils your needs.

And what happens to Leica when all customers leave?

[Simone_DF]

1 hour ago, dsalamena said:

I believe Leica has doubts on its profitability (it would compete with the SL and Q which guarantee higher margins of profit probably), but don’t tell me it’s not technically possible. 

I'm not so sure about profitability against a Q. Once you buy a Q, you're done. Leica can only hope to sell you some overpriced trinkets like the thumb rest or the wireless charging base.

With the L mount, you can buy a body, then you start buying into lenses, and there are plenty of them that Leica can sell you, both in L and M mount. I got 2 SL APO lenses, both of them together are more expensive than a Q3. Add to that the cost of my SL2-S, and a L-M adapter.

The SL internal competition is a moot point. People not interested in the SL3 won't buy it, and there's plenty of competition out there. I know I'll definitely skip it, to me the sensor is a downgrade compared to the -S variant, my only valid alternative at the moment is the S5II or perhaps the S9, but I see the S5II is currently on sale, so I may settle for that.

[sebas_]

I have had the SL2 and Q2, sold both in the end, have had the Panasonic S5II for a while - it is still lying around. Now I am back with Leica and the M11-P.  I really love the small form factor of the M system, especially the lenses. The only thing I am missing is IBIS. The reason why I am back with Leica is the feeling of the camera and its operation philosophy. They surely need to get their act together on firmware - I hope they learn from the M11 and SL3 shortcomings. 
I was thinking long if I should get into Leica again, and which line. In the end the SL system was too big and heavy, the Q is a great camera and its size is right, but I wanted the flexibility to change focal lenses. The M I am taking with me everyday – that was the purpose, I wanted to get back to enjoy photography. 
If Leica brings out a M12 with IBIS (and a Visoflex 3 with the manual AF confirmation like Nikon) I would jump on it immediately (if the price is just one kidney  ). If it would be a mini SL3/4 or Q-M variant without rangefinder I would accept it as well. I guess they could use an integrated L/M adapter to be able to mount L and M mount lenses. 
I guess there are many options Leica could take, let's see which direction they are choosing. 

For my perspective, if they could create a premium, high-end small full-frame  interchangeable camera in the format of the M / Q, they would have far less competition than they are facing with the SL line for example. They could also do the trick and releasing it with an autofocus L/M adapter. 
Maybe we need to wait until Leica can get stacked sensors without trading off too much quality/dynamic range, to get rid of the focal plane shutter. 

[Olaf_ZG]

1 hour ago, Simone_DF said:

And what happens to Leica when all customers leave?

They will sell their new app 🤪

[bobtodrick]

A comment from a dealer (we have been a Canadian Leica dealer once the 1950’s).

The design philosophy of the Q is a full frame premium compact camera, influenced by the (continuing success of the X100).  Since its introduction the Q has been very successful and a tremendous source of income for Leica, which BTW has been the most profitable camera company for the last four years (profit, not overall sales).

It is meant for people who want want to travel with…a camera…not a 10 kilogram camera bag.  Pretty much all our Q customers have a full camera kit already.

Most of my customers (been here since 1993) I see on a regular basis.  I have not had one of my customers regret their Q purchase.

The vast majority of people find the Q to be exactly what they want…this forum included.   It’s just the odd thread like this where the same 4 or 5 people who want the Q to be what it was never designed to be go on and on.

[BradS]

31 minutes ago, bobtodrick said:

A comment from a dealer (we have been a Canadian Leica dealer once the 1950’s).

The design philosophy of the Q is a full frame premium compact camera, influenced by the (continuing success of the X100).  Since its introduction the Q has been very successful and a tremendous source of income for Leica, which BTW has been the most profitable camera company for the last four years (profit, not overall sales).

It is meant for people who want want to travel with…a camera…not a 10 kilogram camera bag.  Pretty much all our Q customers have a full camera kit already.

Most of my customers (been here since 1993) I see on a regular basis.  I have not had one of my customers regret their Q purchase.

The vast majority of people find the Q to be exactly what they want…this forum included.   It’s just the odd thread like this where the same 4 or 5 people who want the Q to be what it was never designed to be go on and on.

 

are admonishing people for wanting what they want? for speaking their desires?

[bobtodrick]

22 minutes ago, BradS said:

 

are admonishing people for wanting what they want? for speaking their desires?

Not admonishing anyone…just stating facts.

The majority of people (backed by sales figures and reviews) are happy with the Q as it is.

There are lots of options out there from other brands…buy them if you don’t like the Q as it is.

I have no issue with Leica bringing out a new line of camera if they think it would sell…but most want the Q to remain what it is…a full frame compact fixed lens camera.

Edited June 16, 2024 by bobtodrick

[BWColor]

The manufacturer that figures out how to transition people from using the camera on their smart phone will own that market, but I question if this is even a possibility.

[student]

1 hour ago, bobtodrick said:

A comment from a dealer (we have been a Canadian Leica dealer once the 1950’s).

The design philosophy of the Q is a full frame premium compact camera, influenced by the (continuing success of the X100).  Since its introduction the Q has been very successful and a tremendous source of income for Leica, which BTW has been the most profitable camera company for the last four years (profit, not overall sales).

It is meant for people who want want to travel with…a camera…not a 10 kilogram camera bag.  Pretty much all our Q customers have a full camera kit already.

Most of my customers (been here since 1993) I see on a regular basis.  I have not had one of my customers regret their Q purchase.

The vast majority of people find the Q to be exactly what they want…this forum included.   It’s just the odd thread like this where the same 4 or 5 people who want the Q to be what it was never designed to be go on and on.

Greatly appreciate your account of your knowledge of the brand and the customer base. Though I bought the camera for the feel and the of course also because it was a Leica, I also like the fact that it is an easy carry; in that context a full case, the kind that served the 116, rather than a half case would have been more helpful for me personally.

That said, I quite enjoy and learn from the variety of views, the discussion, and the odd controversies I read on this forum; and would encourage such activity. Speaking for myself, such discussion is helpful in advancing my rather limited knowledge. 

Of course I might consider an M camera once I feel I have "outgrown" the Q3, and that seems some distance away right now

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[Olaf_ZG]

1 hour ago, bobtodrick said:

 I have not had one of my customers regret their Q purchase.

Obviously I didn’t bought the Q in your store. I tried, I really did. Had the original, had the Q2, cause simply, for every day, a 28mm is not my thing, despite Me really enjoying the 28mm summaron.

I have a great m-set, as well as a great sl set. The q would be on top. No loss in sales.

I am hoping for an addition to the current Q, not a replacement.

Ofcourse, for Leica this is a factor of ROI, but for a dealer there is no risk, just additional sales and profit. Additional. But the Canadian dealer from Bob doesn’t seem to want this. Interesting.

[BradS]

1 hour ago, bobtodrick said:

Not admonishing anyone…just stating facts.

The majority of people (backed by sales figures and reviews) are happy with the Q as it is.

There are lots of options out there from other brands…buy them if you don’t like the Q as it is.

I have no issue with Leica bringing out a new line of camera if they think it would sell…but most want the Q to remain what it is…a full frame compact fixed lens camera.

It is not valid to draw conclusions about, "the majority of people" based only upon a sample of the opinion of people who've already made the purchase.  I've seen many, many, many folks state that they wish the Q / Q2 / Q3 had a focal length other than 26/28mm for example. Interestingly many owners also express this desire/regret.

I'm also a bit perplexed by the "if you don't like it, buy something else" attitude expressed by some here - especially from someone who makes a living in retail sales. I was under the impression, possibly erroneous, that listening to customers, treating them with respect and responding to market opportunities was considered good business.

Edited June 16, 2024 by BradS