Update from PMA

[marknorton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes, it's bizarre. What we don't know is how much the price of the camera will rise but as JM suggested, it should be less than the upgrade cost. In that case, I can imagine potential buyers being put off buying an M8 unless Leica announce, for example that for buyers since 01/01/2008, the upgrade costs the same as the price rise.

 

Confusion reigns, they don't appear to have thought this through. IMHO, they should have kept their powder dry until Photokina.

[jedisdl]

I keep hearing comments about the M8 rangefinder not working/not focusing well.

 

I've had problems with lenses on my M8 - after testing I send them in to Leica to correct the back focus issue and theu are all focuing just fine.

 

BUT - this is not confined just to Leica. I have also had similair problems with Nikon prime lenses which Nikon is now fixing.

 

Leica owners may just be more demanding or perhaps just more aware of such issues.

 

I still find the M8's issues to be more than balanced by it's functionality and small size.

 

Steve

[Advertisement]

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

[marknorton]

Not sure what problems you've had with Nikon lenses but it's very rare for a Leica lens to be optically "off". The issue is that the focussing mechanism relies on precise calibration of the body and lenses to make it work, whereas the SLR focussing is based on sensing the actual image projected by the lens.

[monza]

With regards to future upgrades I vote for the same size sensor, but better ISO along the lines of the D300 - or better, of course. This would be a cheaper upgrade and have no issues fitting into the current body.

 

The M8 gets iffy at ISO 1250; the D300 is still very clean at 3200.

 

I can handhold the M8 to lower shutter speeds than the D300 but have to do it at ISO 640 or less.

[ho_co]

Confusion reigns, they don't appear to have thought this through. IMHO, they should have kept their powder dry until Photokina.

Consider one other point. We Leica owners know what the camera can do and can debate the merits of upgrading.

 

But from the viewpoint of someone outside the Leica community, what kind of message will it send to sell a camera with an available "upgrade"?

--What, is this version defective or trouble-prone? I heard they had some problems with the first ones.

--What, are they just selling through stock before they announce discontinuance of this one?

--What, they want me to pay that much for an outdated camera and then send them more money to bring it up-to-date?

--What, they want me to pay them to get a slower shutter? Something must be seriously wrong with this camera for them to think I'd want to do that.

 

Same questions we've asked, and it will raise big questions in the mind of a would-be first-time purchaser.

 

Just as bad is what it would mean to mediocre Leica dealers. What does the counter salesman say to a customer to explain that, "Yes, this is $5500 or if you want it with a quieter shutter, we can send it in for you for an additional $2000 (or whatever)?"

 

By offering a version with a quieter shutter and harder LCD cover, Leica raises the question in the purchaser's mind that maybe this camera isn't good enough.

 

It has always been hard for some dealerships to explain the advantages of owning Leica. Look how much exploring *we've* had to do on the forum to start to understand the upgrade idea. Even in this thread there are some people asking the same questions that I think have already been answered. That's no criticism, I'm just saying this isn't an easy concept to get across. "Confusion reigns" indeed!

 

Others have said that this will be a hard sell for the customer; but it will be even harder for a dealer to make a Leica sale, because the explanations just got that much deeper. Leica has never been an easy sale for some dealers, and for them the camera has just got that much harder to peddle.

 

This may end up being a fiasco and not a great idea.

 

Unless, of course, the "oh, it's okay if we come out with an improved version, because you can get yours upgraded" message is meant solely for those who already have the camera.

 

Seems to me they need to do a serious differentiation of the two versions: a) the all-round M8, basically with greater advantage for most people; plus the more expensive version for event and corporate photographers. Just saying, "Yeah, it's a good camera and you can pay to get a different shutter" may be enough for us who own the camera, but I don't think it'll cut it for people thinking about a first Leica M purchase.

 

Straighten me out on this if you will!

 

--HC

[Hakku]

With regards to future upgrades I vote for the same size sensor, but better ISO along the lines of the D300 - or better, of course.

 

I fully agree, crop 1.33 is allright (smaller lenses, less weight). As sensor technology improves, resolution and dynamic range of present size sensors might soon reach the level of today's FF sensors. How much more is really needed? That would also allow to keep electronic hardware and viewfinder (frame lines) unchanged, thus keeping the upgrade (new sensor only) affordable. If FF sensor is still required and demanded then, leave that for a future M9 model.

 

Generally, what we expect from Leica is quality performance, not specific parts or design data. I am not particularly keen on a certain size of built-in parts as long as the product performs well. Let the Leica (and Kodak) people do their job, I'm optimistic.

 

Horst

[simon_hughes]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think there's a lot more to getting D300/D3 type ISO performance than just the sensor. Firmware is going to be a big issue as well and Leica is going to have to do some heavy investment in that area to compete properly. So far, after being out for well over a year, only now have they started to come to grips with fairly fundamental firmware issues in the M8. Even with the latest release, I still see the mad scrolling menus! Look at the history Nikon (as well as Canon and others) have in firmware development. Leica is "late to the party".

 

And to be clear, despite the foibles, I adore my M8s, and I find them to be the best cameras I've used. I fervently hope that Leica can continue to grow their expertise in digital.

[marknorton]

HC, I agree the message is going to get pretty diluted by the time it filters down to the dealers and someone considering a Leica. "I'd like to buy one but I heard they're trouble".

 

To my mind, they should have waited until they were able to introduce a new camera, the M9, and said this:

 

- Ladies and Gentlemen, here is our brand new camera with this, this and this benefit.

- We want you to protect your investment in our cameras and have designed it to allow users of the existing M8 to upgrade - for a single charge, we collect your camera, upgrade it, return it to you with a fresh 2 year warranty.

- Leica is pioneering this principle of value retention and expect to be able to keep your camera up to date indefinitely.

 

How good would that have been?

 

- A new highly desirable camera with worthwhile updates.

- An existing user base delighted they can upgrade (albeit for a price).

- Reassurance for new buyers that their investment will be protected.

- Plaudits for Leica all round.

 

Instead of which, Leica were desperate to have something to shout about at PMA and what we got was ho-hum updates, loss of function, way in the future, pay us early to get in the queue, huge uncertainty. There's a subtle pyschological difference between being able to upgrade to a new model (hurrah!) and being able able to retrofit individual updates (boo! - we're paying for Leica to fix the camera!). The loss of 1/8000 was a no-no too in my opinion. Leica need to understand their customers' mind-set. They need the new model transition to cement the principle in place and so reassure both current and prospective users. You prove the concept by having done it, not saying you're going to.

 

12 months ago, Leica's handling of the M8 introduction was cited as a good Business School case study. They seem intent on creating another one...

[charlesphoto99]

Im a bit late to this thread but what I find a bit concerning Is whether the upgrades will always be two or three items without the ability to choose one or another. Like you can get more accurate framelines but only with a new $2.5k sensor. And you have to pay for it 3 months in advance. Some of us freelancers just aren't that set up! I could say pay for a $350 framelines upgrade and leave the new sensor till later.

 

I think this is a good idea on Leicas part but ultimately the camera could end up costing lots of $ and months away at a time. I think I'll wait for the next gen of Nikons - a FF the size of the D300 for $2250 (just guessing here folks) unless Leica can offer a true menu of upgrades at realistic prices.

[marknorton]

I'm sure they've considered new framelines but it's a tough sell that the new framelines are not a warranty issue and should be done free of charge. If there is an FF upgrade, new viewfinder optics and framelines will be required and the inaccurate framing will come out in the wash.

[Hakku]

Agree with ho_co, there is confusion about the upgrade policy which could be a good programm as such. IMHO, there are several reasons for it:

 

First, Upgrade # 1 is not just a good start as it is basically kind of factory recall to fix poor performance (shutter noise) and quality (LCD cover) which should have (and could have, as we see now) been better right from the beginning. It does not really bring additional functionality. Would it cover e. g. modification of the viewfinder to better adopt to Super-WW or tele lenses (as the 0.58/0.72/0.85 variations in film-M's), the additional value would be obvious to potential customers (and present owners).

 

Second, it can hardly make sense to first build the complete "basic model" camera and immediately after rip of some new parts from it to put in other/better ones. If that is going to be a running programm it (a) explains the cost level of Leica M and ( looks like a mere price increase. Latest messages now say that the improved parts will be delivered as standard production as of autumn 2008, no prices known as yet - confusion again.

 

Third, price announcement for the upgrade policy requires clarification. New buyers are expected to pay twice for parts (LCD cover, shutter) as well as for services (quality check. warranty, shipping), and again when they order two or more upgrades at a later time.

 

If Leica sets up a module system, then they will have to set up the corresponding modul pricing system accordingly. Let's hope for it.

 

Horst

[lct]

...First and foremost the Leica M8 will always be a leica M8 and be built exactly like it is today period...

Has this been confirmed officially by Leica? Difficult to believe that they could sell the M8 as is for the same price or a quieter one for $7K.

[Hakku]

All it means, as I read it, is as long as the M8 is built it will be built as is today . . . .

Horst

[giordano]

I fully agree, crop 1.33 is allright (smaller lenses, less weight).

This is true for lenses that give standard and "tele" fields of view (say 35mm and longer on M8 vs 50mm and longer on film).

 

For wider fields of view and equal maximum apertures and image quality, the lenses you need on the M8 are without exception either bigger and heavier than the ones that give the same field of view on film - or do not exist. A 21mm f/2.8 is much bigger and heavier than a 28mm f/2.8 - and if it was possible to build a 21mm f/2 that delivered Leica image quality it would be huge (never mind the cost ).

 

The only way to perhaps achieve smaller, wider lenses seems to be to build them specifically for the cropped sensor. In that case (a) illumination and corrections don't have to be maintained to the corners of the full 36x24 frame and ( by treating the lens and camera electronics as a single system some optical corrections can be relaxed to make it easier to achieve very high standards in others. For example, allow some distortion (which can easily be corrected in the image processing) in order to reduce curvature of field and focus shift (which can't). A and b together allow lenses with fewer, smaller pieces of glass.

 

As sensor technology improves, resolution and dynamic range of present size sensors might soon reach the level of today's FF sensors. How much more is really needed? That would also allow to keep electronic hardware and viewfinder (frame lines) unchanged, thus keeping the upgrade (new sensor only) affordable. If FF sensor is still required and demanded then, leave that for a future M9 model.

 

Ideally (setting aside mundane considerations like photons, processing power and storage) the resolution of the sensor should be several times greater than the resolving power of the lens. AFAIK that's the only way to capture the full performance of the lens without encountering aliasing, moiré and the like. Another five or more stops (>=15dB) dynamic range wouldn't do any harm - match or exceed the DR of color neg film while still being able to use PP to get the contrast and snap of reversal.

[waterlenz]

I wonder if they were motivated to announce the FF M8 so early to because someone else is expected to announce a FF dRF this year?

[Hakku]

thank you, giordano, I agree as far as wide angle lenses are concerned.

 

As for sensor size, my question was, what more is really needed, and at what price (technically and commercially), leaving the extremes to be covered by a "super" M9.

 

regards, Horst

[luigi bertolotti]

I wonder if they were motivated to announce the FF M8 so early to because someone else is expected to announce a FF dRF this year?

 

Me too made this speculation... M8 is today still a unique in the market... but a FF DRF from another (top brand) vendor, maybe at Photokina (.. ...) would be a hard attack; but, sincerely, I don't think it will happen; just as another pure speculation, given the bulky dimensions of professional DSLRs, I think that someone will announce something in the area of MF DRF... even if the Mamiya tentative seems to haven't enjoied much success till now.

[luigi bertolotti]

<quote>

Same questions we've asked, and it will raise big questions in the mind of a would-be first-time purchaser.

 

Just as bad is what it would mean to mediocre Leica dealers. What does the counter salesman say to a customer to explain that, "Yes, this is $5500 or if you want it with a quieter shutter, we can send it in for you for an additional $2000 (or whatever)?"

 

 

Agree : this issue of the upgrade can surely pose some problems in SELLING the M8 from now... 2 components of the 1200 Euro package (CLA and ext. warranty) are "no value" for a new buyer : I think they'll reccomend the dealers not to publicize too much the issue... and maybe they'll see the sales data in next months and shall decide something: after all, given the above "service content" that has no cost for a new camera, and the absence of logistic-delivery-scheduling problems, I think they could end up with offering sapphire LCD and quieter shutter as an optional package for new users, priced in the range of 600 to 800 Euros.

[ho_co]

Let me come at this from another side, viz the point of view of the current M8 owner.

 

Simply for sake of argument I'm pulling two numbers out of a hat: Let's assume that 1) the M8-2 (with the announced upgrade #1) comes to market new in a box from Solms for $6500, and that 2) the upgrade price is $1800.

 

What can a dealer give me for my current M8 as trade-in for the M8-2?

 

First, how much can he sell it for? That is, how much will a customer looking for an M8 be willing to pay? The customer has to consider the $1800 cost of bringing it up to the top model. So taking $1800 from $6500, we get $4700 out-of-pocket max. That would give the customer a 2-year guarantee on the camera just like new; but few customers would be tempted at that price, because it's identical to the price of one they could take home today, without the hassle of registering and waiting for an upgrade. The customer probably wouldn't consider paying more than $4300 for the used camera (bringing his outlay for a camera with new guarantee to $6100.) My guess is the customer probably wouldn't go over $4000, but he might be tempted to go for $4300 because it will carry the same guarantee as the $6500 model and save about 1/3 the cost of a Summarit(!??!)

 

So let's assume the dealer can sell the used camera for $4300. How much can he give me for it if I trade it in? The dealer has to make a profit on the camera when he sells it. Few dealers would settle for as little as 10% on a used piece of equipment. 20% or more would be more like it. (I know a dealer who takes a 22% commission on *consignment* sales.) Let's say I'm a good customer and the dealer will allow himself a margin of 15% on my trade-in. In that case, he could give me $3739 for my camera as trade-in toward the M8-2. ($3739 x 1.15 = $4299.85)

 

Am I an idiot?

 

Reducing the M8-2 price by $3739 means I'm paying $2761 for immediate gratification.

 

If I need the M8-2 this weekend, I take him up on the offer.

 

Otherwise, I save almost $1000 by getting in line for the upgrade program.

 

I think these numbers are very conservative. I think the additional out-of-pocket expense to trade in a current M8 against the new model will be quite a bit higher.

 

(I can't speak for the current market, which has been muddied by eBay, but when I was in the business, a dealer had to make 40% or more on used equipment because margins on new product were so slim.)

 

But there is one other fact to keep in mind, and this could end today's used-equipment pricing practices:

 

Because ALL M8's can be upgraded and returned with 2-year warranty, ALL M8's can be considered NEW. Yes, it will cost something to make them "new," but every M8 is potentially new again. In other words, conceptually, there is no such thing as a used M8!

 

And the obverse is, you and I likely now own our M8's for life. No wonder Leica wants to protect our investment!

 

--HC

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[waterlenz]

L

What can a dealer give me for my current M8 as trade-in for the M8-2?

 

 

--HC

 

If a dealer thinks they can sell it for X$, they will give you X/2 $ for it as trade-in.