Why did Leica abandon APS-C ?

[earleygallery]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've said this before, a few times, and I still stand by it. Leica missed a trick in ditching the SLR (or DSLR) when they said they couldn't compete with Canon/Nikon etc.

They could have focussed on an APS C system rather than full frame - who actually needs FF? Yes it makes sense for people with a 35mm system and the ease of thought in terms of focal lengths etc. but digital was an opportunity to rethink what was really necessary.

Leica could have made a truly great APS C DSLR system (and or maybe an EVF based system) to appeal to amateurs and professionals. Instead they went the other way and decided the way to beat Canon/Nikon was the S system, the larger than FF system which has never gained the traction they hoped it would and is surely for the chop fairly soon.

Will Leica look at APS C again? I doubt it.

[lct]

APS-C = FF in crop mode. Take a Panasonic S9, put a 61mp sensor in it, Sigma did something like that already (FPL). Then stick a hotshoe for Visoflex 2, a mechanical shutter and a red dot on the beast and here comes the new CL 👏

[TL3]

Yeah the S system was very niche, isn't that officially discontinued as well, in anticipation of a new mirrorless medium format camera?

Although with the way DSLRs are dying out, perhaps it was ultimately fine that they released the SL instead of soldiering on with the R line.

[earleygallery]

11 minutes ago, TL3 said:

Yeah the S system was very niche, isn't that officially discontinued as well, in anticipation of a new mirrorless medium format camera?

Although with the way DSLRs are dying out, perhaps it was ultimately fine that they released the SL instead of soldiering on with the R line.

The R system was long since dead and buried by the time the S was announced and it was even later until the SL came along.

I never understood why Leica said they couldn't compete with the large Japanese manufacturers, I don't think they ever tried to in the past!

[lct]

They cannot compete at Leica prices.

[Le Chef]

29 minutes ago, earleygallery said:

I never understood why Leica said they couldn't compete with the large Japanese manufacturers, I don't think they ever tried to in the past!

It's called simple economics. You can't beat economies of scale, so you have to play elsewhere where there are fewer competitors and bigger opportunities for greater profitability.

[earleygallery]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

33 minutes ago, Le Chef said:

It's called simple economics. You can't beat economies of scale, so you have to play elsewhere where there are fewer competitors and bigger opportunities for greater profitability.

Which is exactly my point!

[Ko.Fe.]

From business perspective LCAG put a lot of effort to APS-C in the past. X series and TL, CL. Really lot of effort to be appreciated for. Return in sales - not really massive, it seems.

Why?

For dials, real OVF and fake RF feel FujiNoFilm rules in APS-C. Cheap frills, as it should be for APS-C..  Everything with EVF or SLR, Canikon are well in front of LCAG. And so is Sony NEX APS-C. Not to mention Pentax K5 and their other cheaper series, which are as weather sealed as LCAG's SL line.

So decision was made to abandon APS-C at LCAG, because here is no problems to meet the profit target with just a FF digital and film. As of Leica bottom feeders on "what else to buy as "new"" they hose those with antique Panasonic M43 camera in the new body for now. Good business approach, got the (to be) discontinued chassis at heavy discount, made by cheap labour MiC with nice looking Qiush layout. Hosing at its best. Bottom feeders will always swallow Mic instead of MiG. 

But...

LCAG never was, is, going to be leader in advanced computerised technology. LCAG is the unsurpassed, so far, leader in the feeling good. No need for latest and greatest technology for it. Technology isn't really progressing much in the ten years or so, anyway. 

And since it became obvious to me, I spend my money on NIB X2 in 2023.  And it feels so good. 😏

   

[elambo]

On 6/28/2024 at 11:14 AM, andybarton said:

Leica aren't a charity. They have to make money on every product they sell and if they weren't making any on the APS-C cameras... well, the answer is obvious.

That was precisely the point of my post.

[SrMi]

On 6/28/2024 at 11:14 AM, andybarton said:

Leica aren't a charity. They have to make money on every product they sell and if they weren't making any on the APS-C cameras... well, the answer is obvious.

That is true, but I also think they could have made tons of money from the CL system if they had put their hearts into it. Leica CL is still unique and valuable in the current APS-C offering. But you need to keep updating cameras and lenses to increase demand. Leica has a big hole in its current offering: a small, high-quality system is missing.

[lct]

14 minutes ago, SrMi said:

Leica has a big hole in its current offering: a small, high-quality system is missing.

Indeed but that small high quality system cannot be based upon a crop camera according to Leica. Rather a FF camera with crop capabilities like the Sigma FPL or a possible Pana S9 pro with a 61 mp sensor. Just a guess.

 

Edited July 6, 2024 by lct

[SrMi]

11 minutes ago, lct said:

Indeed but that small high quality system cannot be based upon a crop camera according to Leica. Rather a FF camera with crop capabilities like the Sigma FPL or a possible Pana S9 pro with a 61 mp sensor. Just a guess.

Because of lenses, an FF system will always be larger and heavier than an APS-C system. Investing into an APS-C system means also creating new lenses, not only bodies.

 

[lct]

8 minutes ago, SrMi said:

Because of lenses, an FF system will always be larger and heavier than an APS-C system.

Not in crop mode. TL lenses work fine on the Sigma FPL i was told and so does my compact Sigma 18-50/2.8 for APS-C.

[SrMi]

Just now, lct said:

Not in crop mode. TL lenses work fine on the Sigma FPL i was told and so does my compact Sigma 18-50/2.8 for APS-C.

Sigma FPL and S9 neither have EVF (clumsy with add-on) nor mechanical shutter, which would increase their size and weight. Sony A7CR has both but is larger and heavier. But my call is not only for new APS-C bodies but also for new APS-C lenses.

[lct]

Won't happen at Leica price i'm afraid.

[Einst_Stein]

No doubt Leica can make APS-C profitable, 

Also no doubt Leica can make FF even more profitable with the same efforts. 

 

[KenTanaka]

I cannot speak for Leica's decision processes.  But I believe that Fujifilm is, and has long been, king of the APS-C format camera world. Their cameras and lenses are wonderful (speaking as a long-time enthusiastic owner of several), they are firmly committed to continuous customer experience improvement, and they maintain a strong community via events and a quarterly magazine ("Fujilove").  It seems obvious that Leica cannot compete in this sector.  This spring I purchased a like-new CL (2nd time around for me) and several used Leica TL lenses.  It's been fun using the CL...but it doesn't hold a candle to today's Fuji X cameras versatility, usability, image depth, or imaging in a broad range of usage conditions.  Sorry, but it's true.

Nevertheless, I've been greatly enjoying using Leica's excellent TL lenses (and a Sigma or two) on my SL3! When I don't need a 60mp image file I can mount a TL lens and turn the SL3 into an outstanding 30mp APS-C camera with IBIS while making it lighter. Works beautifully.  

 

[LocalHero1953]

I wonder how much more money both Leica and Fuji could make if Fuji joined the L-mount alliance.

Just dreaming.

 

Edit: because of mount registration distances a L-mount Fuji could not use current Fuji lenses by adapter. A disincentive for Fuji to take the plunge.

Edited July 8, 2024 by LocalHero1953

[Stuart Richardson]

On 6/28/2024 at 7:47 PM, earleygallery said:

I've said this before, a few times, and I still stand by it. Leica missed a trick in ditching the SLR (or DSLR) when they said they couldn't compete with Canon/Nikon etc.

They could have focussed on an APS C system rather than full frame - who actually needs FF? Yes it makes sense for people with a 35mm system and the ease of thought in terms of focal lengths etc. but digital was an opportunity to rethink what was really necessary.

Leica could have made a truly great APS C DSLR system (and or maybe an EVF based system) to appeal to amateurs and professionals. Instead they went the other way and decided the way to beat Canon/Nikon was the S system, the larger than FF system which has never gained the traction they hoped it would and is surely for the chop fairly soon.

Will Leica look at APS C again? I doubt it.

Leica knows that they are not necessarily going to sell huge volumes, so in the case of the S at least, they chose to try to make a very premium system geared towards professionals, primarily fashion photographers. Especially in the beginning, they put in things that they thought professionals would want, and at the time, it really was completely novel. It was higher resolution than any 35mm SLR (the D800 was not launched yet), it was half the price of a Phase One or Hasselblad back system, while being faster, smaller, weather sealed, and having endless battery life. It had the option for nearly all the lenses to be available with leaf shutters. I think people forget that when the S was launched, it was very innovative and ahead of the market. We forget because the D800 and later mirrorless and the GFX/X1 came and ate its lunch by offering some similar features at a lower price. Leica knew it would be a low volume/high price system, and apparently it met or exceeded sales numbers in the early/mid days of the system. At roughly 20K per system and 6-10k per lens, they did not have to sell as many cameras to be profitable as they would have with APS-C. I think they would have fought a very uphill battle to convince pros to use APS-C. The professional market has not really embraced APS or smaller other than in a few cases (The Fuji X series for certain journalism/travel, the Ricoh GR's/X100s as pocket cameras for pros/serious amateurs). Whether or not this is fair or not is another story, but clearly Fuji has scored a hit with pros with the GFX, and Sony, Canon and Nikon all have 35mm as their main pro kit. I think a lot of this is that it is a good balance of sensor size and performance to camera/lens size. APS cameras have not been all that much smaller (not half the size of 35mm cameras at least). In general it seems that for most photography, the 35mm size has been the best balance of resolution and noise performance to camera/lens body size.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Le Chef]

APSC is the happy hunting ground of social media professionals who do not necessarily need the highest quality but the fastest delivery, from camera to client. Pivoting screens, selfie sticks, wireless/BT transfer to phone, fast editing, and off to client. It's the antithesis of the thoughtful "Leica approach".