Erwin Puts on Leicas future

[Ivar B]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

Did you read Erwins piece published today:

 

The question no one dares to pose (February 27, 2008) | Photography and image capture: the Leica technique and philosophy by Erwin Puts | Erwin Puts

 

Very well argued, I find, and one cannot dismiss what he is saying even if the conclutions are grim?

[Advertisement]

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

[Kasimir]

I guess he's got a point there.

Outside this forum I don't know anybody who's using a Leica M. I know one person who's fascinated by the M, but he thinks it's too expensive for it's value and won't buy it.

I also think that it are not the Pros who keep Leica alive and I'd really like to have a Poll on that topic at least here in this forum.

 

Hilsen fra Vesterålen!

 

Kasimir

[k_g_wolf ✝]

And this on my birthday.

 

Why didn´t he write this tomorrow ?

 

 

 

Best

[stephan_w]

To be honest, I'm always a little bit skeptical when people express an opinion that is not based on their own business. Erwin Puts may be a good photographer and his revues are probably interesting to read, but does this make him a good economist also? How will he judge the potential of a company on only one annual result (that isn't bad at all?)

 

To be honest, I disagree in almost all of his speculations about Leica. What he describes as the decline of a concept, is in my eyes a logical result of two major tendencies: The dramatical slowing down of the world economic that affects other luxury goods as well, and the saturation of the market. In my opinion, those two points will affect sooner or later also all the other concurrents and the consumer market as a whole.

 

And he is wrong about the rangefinder-system itself. When the M8 came, there were already a lot of very good camera-systems on the market, as well for professionals and for the "expert" amateur. With Auto-focus, bridges, compact cameras, all with excellent image quality and easy to use. Nevertheless, the M8 made it's way as you can see. So there is a place for a manual rangefinder camera, and this doesn't change by the simple fact that other concurrents improve their products.Unless the image quality is up-to-date (and it is), and the camara stays compact, the advantages of RF-cameras are obvious.

 

What has to come now are some more lenses that fulfill highest expectations, and maybe somekind of a digital CL that fit the new lenses to reach another group of customers.

 

But to come back to my initial statement: Only Leica itself has all informations about sales, customers, market research ad so on. This should be a good base for decisions.

 

No offence, but Erwin Puts should continue to write about cameras, instead of economics.

 

Regards

 

Stephan

[stunsworth]

I'm confused - and I'm not an economist or accountant so I'm probably just plain wrong - but, wouldn't you expect Q4 sales to be lower than Q1 when Q1 was when Leica were trying their damnedest to satisfy all the back orders that had been taken prior to the M8 being released?

 

As for the rangefinder being dead, maybe Erwin's right, maybe he's not, but I'm sure people were saying exactly the same thing in the 60s when the Japanese selling SLRs in large numbers.

 

If you're reading this Erwin, I'd expect him to be a 'sleeper' on many of the forums, it's nothing personal.

[jlancasterd]

Just one man's opinion - no more valid than mine or any one of the many hundreds of others expressed on this forum since Lee departed.

 

I don't think the M range is any more 'dead' now than it was in the 1970s when they ceased production of the M4 and M5. M8 sales may be tailing off, but I don't expect an M9 at Photokina this year. Maybe an M8.2 with the new shutter and rear screen as a stop-gap, but nothing more. It's far more important for Leica to get the R10 out to revive the other half of its high-end range.

[wattsy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It's far more important for Leica to get the R10 out to revive the other half of its high-end range.

 

I can't say that I agree. The R line has been effectively 'dead' for years. Talk to any dealer about how much R stuff they used to sell compared with M equipment.

 

Even when film was still in the ascendancy Leica managed to spend vast amounts of money (for a company of Leica's size) developing an R8 that relatively few ended up wanting. You would think Leica would have learned something from that experience.

[thrid]

I agree that the rangefinder concept is no longer popular with the mainstream, but that switch occurred back in the 1960's, with the introduction of the Nikon F. I think Leica's main problem is that they have a specialty product that is priced way out the reach of the majority of customers in their tiny market. I would bet that for every person that actually purchased an M8, there are 5 others who would like one, but can't afford one.

 

IMO, what eventually will kill Leica is the pricing of their products. The M8 is simply too expensive, for what it is. A body and lens will run you anywhere between $7000 and $9000. You can easily break the $10,000 barrier, if you go for an M8 and Noctilux. Look at those numbers and think about it. How many people do you know, who can drop that sort of cash on their hobby? Even for the majority of professionals (wedding shooters etc) that is a huge investment and even more so, since they need two bodies (backup).

 

The pricing of the camera and lenses has reached the point where they exceed their perceived value to the customer. And as Puts points out this is just exacerbated by the fact that to most people, the M8 is represents ancient, outdated technology.

 

Being priced similar to something like the Nikon D3 doens't help either. Leica are opening themselves up to a tech comparison that they can't really win. People will buy a camera with slightly lower performance if the price is right, but they will waver when it costs as much or more than competing products that deliver higher performance.

 

Leica needs to lower the cost of the camera substantially and introduce a tiered pricing system, like every other manufacturer in the market. No more than $3999-4999 for the top of the line model and then two lower cost bodies at about $2999 and $1800.

 

Frankly, I don't know how they are going to do this, without moving the production of at least the entry level models out of Germany. Production costs in Germany are simply too high, unless they can perform a minor miracle and devise an assembly line that allows them to do so and remain in Solms / Wetzlar.

 

They should dump 4/3rds. I predict that this format will not survive the next 3-4 years. It's is a developmental dead end. As the megapixel count climbs, the relative size of the receptors will continue shrink. Noise and dynamic range are highly dependent on the size of the receptor and in this case bigger is better.

 

Leica also needs to make at least one major technical advancement. They need to increase the framing accuracy of the camera and the best way to do so is with electronic framelines that adjust as you focus. Aside from the fact that the current markings are way off the mark, the instant feedback doesn't help things either. Most people, who are accustomed to using an SLR or P&S with a LCD screen, have a true WTF? moment when they chimp the M8 results.

 

After pricing this is the single biggest complaint and deal breaker I hear from people. I have one friend, who was a diehard Leica shooter, and got so frustrated by this issue that he ended up selling the camera after more than a year.

[wattsy]

IMO, what eventually will kill Leica is the pricing of their products. The M8 is simply too expensive, for what it is.

 

I agree that this is a real problem for Leica. Leica has always been expensive but there comes a point when a product crosses over from 'you get what you pay for' territory into the 'more money than sense' category. I get the feeling that Leica is beginning to reach that point (and I'm not really referring to the M8 which, I think, was reasonably priced when it was first released).

[rosuna]

Erwin Puts has "insider" information.

 

He is right pointing to the demise of the rangefinder cameras. Reflex cameras relegated rangefinders to reportage, artist and aficionados 40 years ago. Now, superfast and sophisticated AF reflex digital cameras are eroding the last practical appeal of rangefinders, except for artists and aficionados, or a bit of professional reportage. Rangefinders cannot be the base for an expansion of Leica, which is the plan of Mr. Kaufmann.

 

Leica faces several problems, and they need a reestructuring before any expansion plan is implemented.

 

Leica is a very small company, and the offer 3 lines of cameras: the R system, M system and 4/3 system, plus compact cameras.

 

The M line offers several 50mm, 35mm and 75mm models of lenses. The R system needs a copious offer of lenses. The 4/3 offering are a rebranded set of products, but distribution has many costs. And people want more: a new Noctilux, a new 75mm Summilux, new AF R lenses, new zooms, new and cheaper wide angles for M, etc. All this is irrational. These handmade products are very costly to produce and distribute worldwide, and sales are minimal. The M system cannot expand to a broader audience. It is a niche product. The R system must be competitive, but how? Leica hasn't the technology for supersonic motors, sophisticated AF, CMOS sensors and specifically designed electronics and processors...

 

I think this needed reestructuring and rationalization and the expansion plan of Mr. Kaufmann is the base of the conflict that lead to Lee's dismisal.

 

I don't know what was the plan of Mr. Lee. I know he decided to freeze investments in several directions and concentrate on others. Maybe he decided to reduce investment in the M line, slowing the development pace, and concentrate on the R system. I don't know the details and none want to tell.

 

In my opinion, the M system needs a slower product development cycle, an adaptation to slow sales and good service to clients (the upgrade program is a good idea too) and a simplification of the lens catalogue. The M8 problems (focus accuracy and noise at high ISOs) must be solved soon. It is a too expensive camera for that subpar performance.

 

The R system should concentrate the investment of Leica, and maybe Panasonic could be a good partner here, if they accept to cooperate. Leica cannot develop the 100% of the technology they need, and Jenoptik or Imacon aren't the solution.

 

I don't have detailed information, so I cannot be more specific. Just speculation. But Erwin's comments are reasonable and don't surprised me.

[gravastar]

If the rangefinder concept really is on it's last legs as he implies why do Cosina and Zeiss continue to develop and manufacture new lenses?

 

 

Bob.

[zapp]

I have to completely disagree with Erwin here. 30 years ago we needed SLR cameras to have 100% viewfinders that allowed the use telephoto lenses. The RF cameras have several advantages that result in better image quality compared to SLR cameras - no retrofocus (little distortion, better contrast), smaller lenses, less noise, no mirror slap... In my opinion the RF camera or let's say the non mirror-in-the-way cameras like RF camera are the future. Replace the finder with a digital viewfinder and there is no need for the SLR designs anymore and you can benefit from all advantages of your M camera with all focal length lenses. If the Leica M system survives 5 more years such a finder solution should be on the market and be able to really replace traditional viewfinders. Time to merge M and R systems. If you think the M lenses are too close to the sensor check out the 24 mm Schneider lens in front of a 36x48 mm2 sensor - it works, it is small, result are excellent and NO digital camera with a mirror in the way can match the results.

While the rangefinder is out, the rangefinder camera concept as opposed to the SLR concept is far superior.

[stunsworth]

Replace the finder with a digital viewfinder and there is no need for the SLR designs anymore and you can benefit from all advantages of your M camera

 

Including the advantage of everything in the viewfinder being in focus? Including being able to see outside of the frame? These are two of the things that separates the rangefinder system from the SLR, and IMHO should be retained in any future camera.

[ClaudioJ]

And this on my birthday.

 

Why didn´t he write this tomorrow ?

 

 

 

Best

 

happy birthday, anyway !

 

Bests,

cJ.

[mhoersch]

E. Puts writes: "Leica needs new customers and this is acknowledged by Mr Kaufmann. New customers do not want nostalgic products, however surrounded by magic, but they want products that are competitive in today’s market."

 

I'm afraid that this is not the solution but the problem. Mr. Lee seems to have followed exactly this line of thought - and got fired because inexpensive (at least by Leica standards) lenses and a silly trendy website can only alienate members of the small but loyal customer base. Leica will surely die when they even try to compete with either the latest technological trends which are clearly dominated by the gobal giants like Canon, Nikon, and Sony; and/or with entry level mass market gadgets from Casio and the like.

 

What Leica stands for is the exact opposite!

 

Which Leica customer has ever cared whether his camera or lens meets the latest technological trends? Which Leica customer has ever wanted the lowest price?

 

I'm absolutely convinced that Leica's only chance of survival is to cultivate their (somewhat dilapidated, of late) image of providing products of the highest possible quality and longevity on the planet, exclusively for customers who are able and willing to pay the highest prices on the market - and who know very well what they are paying for.

 

To try and compete with everybody else means certain death.

[stuny]

Steve -

 

One of your objections to the new merging of rangefinder and SLR proposed above is covered in the DMR: A new focusing screen comes with the DMR which has the frameline indicating picture area, thereby showing what is out of frame. At first I was skeptical about its value, but after using it for a couple of years I finally get this aspect of RF design advantage. I don’t know if the designers can do this with an electronic viewfinder.

[Speenth]

I think Irwin has nailed it with this article. I am sad to be saying this, but he's stating hard facts that must surely be crossing the boardroom table in Solms.

 

The world no longer respects craftsmanship and longevity. I'm 55 and I suspect I am at the lower end of the demographic that still values these attributes. No one much younger than me expects to keep a functional tool as a family heirloom (be it Grandad's teak-handled chisel, or my Leica M8). That kind of nostalgia is out of fashion in the digital era, where everything is old as soon as it is announced on enGadget or PCPro.

 

Today, technical excellence is a fact. Reliability is a given. These are not things to shout about. They're not special, they're basic to the buying proposition. Leica must learn that it can no longer demand a premium for these qualities. Where excellence and reliability are concerned, Nikon and Canon can match Leica every step of the way (so can Casio for that matter).

 

So what can Leica truly offer that's different? The portability of the camera and its lenses? Maybe. The imaging excellence - I regret to say, probably not. Aficionados know of the Leica magic, but, when selling to the throwaway generation, this is too difficult to differentiate from the Canonikon offerings.

 

I'm the wrong side of fifty to be suggesting a new direction for Leica, but surely there is a market for a camera alongside the Nikocanon dSLRs which is not a dSLR. Something with uncompromised and peerless imaging excellence, something smaller than any dSLR, deceptively 'simpler' in operation, but in reality as versatile in performance, something more discreet and with that magic ingredient - desirability.

 

Leica can deliver these attributes - if they have the time and the angels ready to invest .

[stephan_w]

To reduce prices to get a bigger part of the market is a typical american reaction, that leads directly to bancrupthy. If someone doesn't know this economic rule, he may study the history of american car builders, and where they are today with this strategy. The market leader on this planet is the company who raised the quality of the products instead of giving discounts: Toyota.

 

Of course, this is not exactly the best comparison, but imagine a M8 + 35 lens for about 3000 us$. It is still inferior from a technologial point of view (pixels, AF, live-view etc.) compared to a Niko D300. So why should there be a reason to buy it?

 

The Leicas are bought for their unique and valuable technical concept and first class customer support, not for the results in photographic reproduction. And this has always been so.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[thrid]

>I'm absolutely convinced that Leica's only chance of survival is to cultivate their >(somewhat dilapidated, of late) image of providing products of the highest possible quality >and longevity on the planet, exclusively for customers who are able and willing to pay the >highest prices on the market - and who know very well what they are paying for.

 

 

That is the same strategy that nearly killed Apple in the 1990's. History is littered with the corpse of companies that followed that model.

 

Leica needs to offer high quality goods at a fair or realistic price. That's what they used to do and they were very successful. Take a look at Porsche. They got it right.

[rosuna]

Well, Leica has problems even for offering the basics: two complete lines of cameras and lenses (M and R), good image quality, accuracy, reliability, customer service and reasonable prices. Leica hasn't problems because they cannot offer clean ISO 6400 files and 10 pictures per second. They have problems because they are asking 4800 dollars for a camera that cannot give you clear ISO 1250 files and with focus problems (all M had focus limitations, but the M8 is much worse). More than that, even if you are able to solve all that for the M cameras, rangefinders cannot sustain Leica, and they cannot sustain an expansion plan for the company.

 

Now, the R system... you must to offer some basics, asking highs price in exchange of something you can touch and see. I don't want the fastest AF system, clean ISO 6400 or batteries that last 1000 shots... but nobody will pay 2 times the price of a Nikon D3 for something similar to the DMR in 2009.