Leica vs Sigma -split-off thread

[lencap]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Blackstone owns 45% of Leica.  They seem to be protective of the M series moving it decidedly higher in price separating it from the SL and Q series.  Along with that the M lenses remain among the most expensive Leica products.  I'd suspect both of those decisions are intentional, maximizing brand heritage and providing robust profits.  At the same time they seem very willing to "farm out" some lens designs/product to Panasonic and Sigma - feeding the "mass market" portfolio and protecting profit margins as well.  The majority of the SL prime lenses have the same basis dimensions/interior motors/etc maximizing flexibility and keeping costs manageable.  The lowest priced products are Asian built, likely "experiments" to see the limits of Leica Branded appeal.  Their TV and watch products may be another experiment.

Given their actions so far if I were Blackstone I'd keep doing what has been working until it doesn't work any longer.  Why kill an iconic product when your catalog has EVF in Q and SL versions?  That makes the M even more unique - continuing the heritage/nostalgia demand willing to pay ever increasing prices.

 

Edited August 21 by lencap

[Advertisement]

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

[IkarusJohn]

16 minutes ago, lencap said:

Blackstone owns 45% of Leica.  They seem to be protective of the M series moving it decidedly higher in price separating it from the SL and Q series.  Along with that the M lenses remain among the most expensive Leica products.  I'd suspect both of those decisions are intentional, maximizing brand heritage and providing robust profits.  At the same time they seem very willing to "farm out" some lens designs/product to Panasonic and Sigma - feeding the "mass market" portfolio and protecting profit margins as well.  The majority of the SL prime lenses have the same basis dimensions/interior motors/etc maximizing flexibility and keeping costs manageable.  The lowest priced products are Asian built, likely "experiments" to see the limits of Leica Branded appeal.  Their TV and watch products may be another experiment.

Given their actions so far if I were Blackstone I'd keep doing what has been working until it doesn't work any longer.  Why kill an iconic product when your catalog has EVF in Q and SL versions?  That makes the M even more unique - continuing the heritage/nostalgia demand willing to pay ever increasing prices.

 

Interesting.  Do you really think Blackstone, a minority shareholder, gets a say in such detail?  Dr Kaufmann seems to me to be a man firmly in control.

[JNK100]

26 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

Interesting.  Do you really think Blackstone, a minority shareholder, gets a say in such detail?  Dr Kaufmann seems to me to be a man firmly in control.

Agreed. Blackstone own 44% and are just an investor. They have no expertise nor experience in high-end photo-optical products as far as I am aware.

[jaapv]

Actually Leica does not farm out designs to Sigma and Panasonic, it is just the other way around: they clone and rebrand Sigma and Panasonic designs. 

[SrMi]

3 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Actually Leica does not farm out designs to Sigma and Panasonic, it is just the other way around: they clone and rebrand Sigma and Panasonic designs. 

Obviously, they do modify them, at least the mechanical part. I always consider Leica's version a better one.

[pgh]

51 minutes ago, JNK100 said:

Agreed. Blackstone own 44% and are just an investor. They have no expertise nor experience in high-end photo-optical products as far as I am aware.

Speaking generally here - a lack of expertise in a field doesn’t tend to stop private equity from asserting their views about what they think is best in the their investments - and that tends to be in the service of short term profit and pretty much nothing else. 

[IkarusJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 minutes ago, pgh said:

Speaking generally here - a lack of expertise in a field doesn’t tend to stop private equity from asserting their views about what they think is best in the their investments - and that tends to be in the service of short term profit and pretty much nothing else. 

Yes, but the role of a shareholder and that of a management board, down to the role of the chief executive and the staff of a firm varies considerably, particularly in a German company like Leica Camera AG.  I’m not saying that Blackstone doesn’t assert itself, I’m just doubtful about the level of detail suggested; particularly in the context of Dr Kaufmann’s management …

Edited August 21 by IkarusJohn

[jaapv]

I don’t. It depends on the lens. For instance Leica stripped the 70-200 of its very useful aperture ring and function and OIS switches, eliminating the OIS function and EVF stabilization. Optical quality is equal on the Sigma and AF is faster. Build quality and weathersealing equal. So why should I pay more for less, even if I like Leicas styling and being a bit of a camera snob, the status. 

 

35 minutes ago, SrMi said:

Obviously, they do modify them, at least the mechanical part. I always consider Leica's version a better one.

 

[SrMi]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

I don’t. It depends on the lens. For instance Leica stripped the 70-200 of its very useful aperture ring and function and OIS switches, eliminating the OIS function and EVF stabilization. Optical quality is equal on the Sigma and AF is faster. Build quality and weathersealing equal. So why should I pay more for less, even if I like Leicas styling and being a bit of a camera snob, the status. 

With Leica, we always pay more for less because less is more :).

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

Build quality and weathersealing equal. 

 

 

Leica versions typically have better weather sealing with simpler design (fewer switches and rings), more robust build, albeit heavier. We’ve discussed before, with videos demonstrating Leica’s superior weather resistance (e.g., Sigma 28-70 fogging). Leica is the only company I know that provides IP ratings for its cameras (SL, Q), and it seems only logical that this level of design detail extends to their compatible lenses). 

Sometimes you get what you pay for.

[jaapv]

The 28-70 Sigma, is not weathersealed. It is a lens from the Contemporary series and thus simple. Only one switch AF-MF. 
The 70-200 on the other hand, is on a different level and from the Sports series. As weathersealed as Leica, an aperture ring which can be declicked for video use and locked in A, switches to control the various OIS functions which Leica lacks, a specific Function switch which I have set to EVF stabilization which Leica lacks and twin AF motors which I think Leica lacks. And built like the proverbial tank. Oh yes, the same optics   I cannot imagine why Leica did not implement these highly practical features unless it is a clear case of form over function. If anything the Sigma should be more expensive than the Leica, which naturally is the other way around. The only plus of the Leica is the decent lens hood over the fragile Sigma offering 

[Jeff S]

But the Leica looks more expensive. Less is more is nothing new for Leica. 😉

Also fewer places to weather seal ….switches, rings, etc.

[jaapv]

So you are saying that Leica is less capable at sealing rings and switches than Sigma? 😱 Surely not 🤪

[BernardC]

Leica and Sigma have different UI preferences. Sigma have more controls on their lenses, while Leica places these controls in the camera menu. Users can decide which one they like better.

17 hours ago, lencap said:

Given their actions so far if I were Blackstone I'd keep doing what has been working until it doesn't work any longer.  Why kill an iconic product when your catalog has EVF in Q and SL versions?  That makes the M even more unique - continuing the heritage/nostalgia demand willing to pay ever increasing prices.

There's a new genre of writing about the photo industry that is obsessed with company financials. It's not limited to Leica, you'll read dozens of speculative essays when Japanese quarterly reports are published. Reading the tea leaves, as it were.

Why would any Leica's investors want to weaken the brand? Contrary to popular opinionating, the SL line seems to be doing very well. It is much more widely available than the R line ever was, lots of people write about it, and lots of people shoot with it. Besides, the M, Q, and SL are built on the same foundations. Getting rid of one would reduce Leica's return on investment.

[SrMi]

6 hours ago, jaapv said:

So you are saying that Leica is less capable at sealing rings and switches than Sigma? 😱 Surely not 🤪

It is not a matter of capabilities but a matter of cost. Sigma is more pressed to keep the price as low as possible.

[jaapv]

By offering more? 

[Jeff S]

Less is more; the essentials. 😎

[jaapv]

The things Leica omits are pretty essential - quite useful least.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[mpauliks]

I think, this article is worth to mention here and the compare of AF speed on Leica bodies... https://petapixel.com/2021/06/11/leica-24-70mm-f-2-8-versus-sigma-24-70mm-f-2-8-is-there-a-difference/

[Jeff S]

20 hours ago, jaapv said:

The only plus of the Leica is the decent lens hood over the fragile Sigma offering 

For you. More elegant design; preferred by those who appreciate aluminum all-metal construction; possibly better coatings; and probably better resale percentage. And, like some other Leica products, lack of video-centric add-ons is considered more of a plus than a minus for many.  To each his/her own. (I wish the SL line omitted video altogether, like the X2D.) Individual preferences.  I think Leica will sell a few, even to those who enjoy practical photography.