Erwin Puts on Leicas future

[mgcd]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

For once I agree with Puts.

 

Once the new R comes out kill the M line and let it rest in peace.... and concentrate on a vibrant re-invigorated R line. That should get many talking on this thread...

[Guest finofoto]

 

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?

 

..hello folks,

 

dont be confused by the confusing of the "chiefs" - let them be inside or "outside" Leica.

The Leica m concept is still as valid as it ever was: fast (in a double sense: shooting and focusing), accurate, "special" by the rf, and very very sturdy. Ever tried to take a picture in winter, when the accus are going empty and the mechanics dont work (and additionally as E . Puts i beleive some months ago wrote: we dont know so much about the behaviour of silicon in extreme climate conditions)...

 

but the most importan arguments are those two: every DSLR with a smaller sensor does produce an "unnatural field of depth", where you cannot isolate object and much more important: the safety of the storage is rather unknown: For thsoe who dont speak german: it is the story about the damages grwoing silently during only 2-5 years, so that especially the self storaged media data are totally defect!!!

( ComputerBild 4/2008:

Titelthema:

Daten, Musik, Filme und Bilder retten

Die Bilder vom Urlaub, die schönsten Fotos der Kinder und Enkel, die liebsten Musikstücke, wichtige Briefe und Dokumente, vielleicht der Film von der Hochzeit – solche Daten sind unersetzlich. Und werden deshalb für die Ewigkeit auf CD, DVD und Festplatte gespeichert. Doch die Sicherheit ist trügerisch: Der Verfall kommt schleichend, schon nach wenigen Jahren können die Datenträger Speicherlücken aufweisen oder ganz kaputt sein. Der Zahn der Zeit nagt an CDs, DVDs, USB-Stiften und Festplatten! )

 

so: dont panic, the times that people will re-discover the over all qualities (beside emotional and sensual aspect of the Leica m especially) of "material" photography will come as they did come with all that Rolex and Omegas etc.

 

and all will be angry about themselves who sold their equipment and invested in "newnew" digital formats.

 

regards to all, tom:)

[Advertisement]

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

[Iron Flatline]

I've not had a chance to read most of the comments. Sorry if I'm about to be redundant...

 

my question is: why is it impossible for them to create a digital RF that sells for around $2,000?

[Guest Cordell]

My take is that Leica should dump the R line and concentrate on the M line.

 

That might be a bit extreme. But given the amount of praise heaped on the DMR by those who own them, I would recommend Leica either do whatever is necessary to produce some more of them, or at least use as much of its components (which they already paid for R&D) along with as much of the R9 (likewise, R&D paid in full) to create a one-piece digital-only version. Coming up with a FF, AF Canikon-killer is a lofty aspiration but hardly worth going into deep red ink. Users of Canikon who don't buy into Leica brand-snobbery are going to be tough if not impossible to convince that the Leica product is a) superior, and more importantly, far enough superior to convince them to dump their system at a loss and pay three times more for the Leica equivalent. And the rest, the usual suspects as they say, will automatically say it's better than Canikon no matter what.

[Guest Cordell]

I've not had a chance to read most of the comments. Sorry if I'm about to be redundant...

 

my question is: why is it impossible for them to create a digital RF that sells for around $2,000?

 

I heard an unsubstantiated report that someone at Leica headquarters last week heard a dark-haired Asian-looking guy screaming that question in English over and over last week as a couple of burly security guards carried him out the front door

[Theodor Heinrichsohn]

I used 4 Leicas and > 20 lenses for 25 years without giving a dime to the company (used all)... this year I bought a M8 NEW, a Summarit 75 NEW (+ a used 21 asph...):

I don't think to be the one in such a situation... and that's good for them

 

The comparision / possible inspiration to Hasselblad, for me doesn't fit Leica co. : Hasselblad maintained a stable significant share of the pro market in the film era... Leica lost most of it in the (about) '70-'80 decade ... too much time passed... "generation effect" ... very difficult to catch it again (and, let's admit, DSLR are a lot better for many pro tasks, in my op.)

 

Luigi,

I am in the same boat. After using Leicas II, IIIg, M2,M3, M4, M5, M6, M7 and many lenses dating from 1932 to the 90ties, I purchased two M8's, one in Jan. '07 and one in summer '07 and also a 50/1.4 asph., the 28/2.8 asph., the 90/2 asph, the 135/3.4, batteries, SD 24 and, and, and.

I also have a Hass. 903SWC and a 203FE with a selection of Zeiss lenses and a converted Mamiya shift.

The new Hasselblads are of a different breed and too expensive for me. The company is owned, as far as I know, by Shriro Trading in HongKong and the products are made in the Far East.

I am distressed by the goings on at Leica AG - not for the first time indeed - and ponder what Mark Norton has stated in various posts. To summarize: The time proven rangefinder of the Leica is not accurate enough for the M8 and the suggestion Mark put on the table is an electronic focus confirmation system as is possible when using old/MF lenses on the Nikon D3.

I have a D3 and can focus the 58/1.2 Noct Nikkor more easily than when using the Noctilux 50/1.2 or the Noctilux 50/1.0 which I both own.

If the M8 could be made with an electronically assisted RF system and improve the bright line frame accuracy, that would be a dream design for my purposes.

I hope I do not get flamed for this.

Teddy

[macos]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just want to add my 2 cents. This is my personal impression, therefore I hope noone is offended.

 

The interesting thing is that in the reviews concerning the M most testers were very pleased that the concept of the M8 brings them closer to the topic again, which is dealing with the subject and having an idea of the image prior to pushing the release button.

 

The M8 is up to now the only digital camera which has this maybe old fashioned, but simple and efficient concept. If an R10 offers the same features for an SLR, namely the brilliant ergonomics of an R8/R9, there is some USP. However, a serious obstacle migth be the pricing.

 

An old friend of mine, who is a die-hard Nikon user, recently came to me and said he was fed up with al the AF and nifty stuff he has to deal with his D200. Well, I do not have an M8 because I do not want to spend the money, but he knows my M5 and he is in doubt whether he will buy a D3 or an M8.

 

I am no rangefinder fan at all, but as compact camera with a 'puristic' handling concept I think it is still valuable. I would love to have one for travels and the R10 with said concept for everything else.

 

 

The question why Zeiss and Voigtlander/Cosina have not launched a digital rangefinder (except the Epson) is an interesting one. Are they not capable of producing one technologically? Sure they are. Is the reason that this is not seen as a viable product commercially? I don`t know.

 

At least on their webpage they indicate that they are waiting for a full frame sensor

The manual focus primes for Nikon, Pentax and Sony cameras are also meant for digital SLRs, and in some D3 tests the guys loved to use the ZFs. Therefore there might be a niche market for high end MF optics even in the digital age. And if there is that niche market, there is a reason for modernised but still full control handling concepts.

[sdai]

my question is: why is it impossible for them to create a digital RF that sells for around $2,000?

 

my question is: how can they charge 5000+ for a digital RF that costs less than $2000?

[Ivar B]

This is turning into one of the most interesting discussions I have seen in the Forum for a long time. I hope Leica pays attention.

[Irek]

The new product can have:

1. FF (to end the race for FF at all; new versions can have more pixels and tweaks);

2. electronic rangefinder with rigid "sport" frame for all lens to allow good framing (to lower workmanship and other costs of manufacturing);

3. possibility to use existing lens for M system (to allow acceptance by actual users and secure investments in lens at all);

4. new zoom lens (used with new electronic rangefinder system; to lower bulk of lens during trips);

5. lightweight as M system camera;

6. simplicity of use as M system camera;

7. price camera with a few lens lower than for Harley bike ;-)

 

That's all.

 

Regards

Irek

[rosuna]

I think EP makes some very valid points.

 

Leica has a very loyal customer base, very strong brand and image.

 

However, their lower end digital products don't have mainstream appeal to the traditional customers, and aren't unique enought to attract new customers, whilst their flagship digital product has a niche market - and mostly existing/previous Leica users.

 

The R system is effectively discontinued at present - we all wait to see what an R10 system looks like. What it needs to be IMO is a Full Frame (or larger?!) DSLR with AF.

 

That is the point.

[Michael Hiles]

This all causes me angst and indigestion (or maybe that was lunch...)

 

Seems to me:

 

1. The range/viewfinder concept is not dead or old fashioned - it is just much less popular and marketable than the SLR setup, which is somewhat more intuitive (see what you get etc.). This has major economic consequences.

 

2. Autofocus is important, since it produces, in even really cheap cameras, acceptably sharp images almost all the time - and you don't have to think. That's a winner concept that sells cameras.

 

3. No-think Auto exposure also sells cameras. Makes me think Leica would argue for no automatic transmission or cruise control.

 

4. Digital sells cameras. No one but me (OK, 2-3 others) will accept waiting for 1 hr, not to mention kodachrome to Kansas (I wait, blessings on Kodachrome).

 

5. The number of people who care about the extra lens quality and pay for it is marginal and considering the cost, is not a basis for profitability.

 

 

So. Leica should keep the viewfinder (i.e. the M line), which is its first crowning glory. But somehow get AF into the M line. They need to take auto exposure further than it is now - it has to compete.

 

So my advice - build on the M line, but do whatever it takes to give it modern specs, and specs that sell. The viewfinder concept works beautifully - it is the ancilliary things that need updating.

 

And the price - well gadzooks and yukky. I am not rich, but certainly not poor, and they are never going to sell me anything directly. I can afford $5.5k, but I have much better things to do with the money. I might think about $2k, i.e.a $1.3k premium over my daughter's EXCELLENT Olympus Evolt something. My eye, mind and pictures are just as good with my M2 and M3 in hand than they are with an M8. So Leica loses a sale.

 

And the profit that makes the business viable.

 

If they continue they way they are, they should get the client list and marketing strategy from Patek Philippe, because that will be the market.

[Goldie]

Puts has expressed an opinion with regards to rangefinders: I disagree with him but whether the market place does is anybody's guess.

A strange irony of the modern world is that, as we have more and more technology the less people in general understand it but the more we come to expect of it; perhaps it is not an irony, but just familiarity breeds contempt. This attitude leads us to have high expectations of products. This is where Leica have tripped up with the M8, certainly as far as expanding their customer base is concerned; people are not inclined to go wow,perhaps because they have come across items on this forum, which say there are flies in the ointment. People are used to plug and play and Leica have not met that challenge. There should have been no issues about manic scrolling, dodgy AWB and back focus(with this Leica should have just said there are issues with XYZ lenses, use them at your peril!)

How they are going to address these pitfalls in the future so that they can grow their market and make a sensible profit, we can only guess, however they have got to slay some sacred cows.

For example I do wonder whether the current form of the body is fit for 21st century production; I was amazed to find they were shimming the sensor to the body, in Mark Norton's anatomy exercise. With modern CNC mills and grinders this can be done away with and a cost avoided. There are all sorts of ways the camera can remain intrinsically the same, and yet be engineered so that it could be made with much less labour input and so preserve a realistic price and profit margin. The design should be such that it can be made anywhere. Production capabilities no longer have geographic boundaries.

[fielden]

One thing is for sure - that Leica know the camera market and their marketing strategy better than anyone on this forum.

 

I own an engineering company here in the UK and work very closely with two German companies and I learned very quickly that german businesses don't think like UK or US companies do.

 

For example, I escorted a buyer from one of the UK water companies to a german company called Aerzen which is a family owned business based in Aerzen in Germany.

 

The Water company buyer said to the German MD " You know I can put you in touch with a foundry in China that can make your castings for a fraction of the cost and you could then sell me your product much cheaper" to which the German MD replied with some scorn " And why would we want to do that?"

 

Audi, BMW, Porsche, Miele and scores of other German companies follow the high price, high quality model very successfully.

 

If I want a new Audi TT (Which I do) I have to wait 4 months. Why is this different to Leica. Don't leica have a market where demand is greater than supply for certain products?

 

Aren't Leica moving to new purpose built premises back in Wetzlar?

 

Haven't Leica aquired local specialised companies in the supply chain to enhance R&D in certain technologies?

 

Are Leica lenses and binoculars not the best(or certainly one of the best) in the world.

 

This doesn't sound like a company in trouble to me.

 

I am a new Leica customer of only 12 months when as a canon 20d user I went in the camera store for a P & S to carry in my pocket. I intended to spend no more than £150 but as soon as I saw and handled the D-lux 2, I knew I had to have it. I have since aquired a digilux 3, an M8 and 3 M lenses.

 

The M8 and the return to real photography has been a delight. And to have awesome photographs straight out of the camera is wonderful. I hate working on images in photoshop - which I had to do loads of with the Canon stuff.

 

I am a true convert and consider myself very fortunate to be able to afford Leica equipment but as I stated above, I have worked all my working life with german companies and I am also a convert to their philosophies.

 

Here is another one which maybe difficult for some to understand. One German friend once said in a conversation "Why would I want to pay less tax?" which when you compare germany towns, public facilities, railways etc. to the UK, maybe this is clear.

[Kasimir]

Nice to hear that

[Goldie]

Graeme I understand and appreciate your points, but consider these points;

 

Leica is not in rude financial health; its only financial strength is that it is in a form of private equity protection.

 

The likes of Audi and Miele have a much higher public profile and their perceived advantages are widely appreciated, so people are willing to spend that extra money.

 

Certainly Audi also embraces the extremes of production technologies and cost reducing placement of their factories; they can, they are a volume producer. On the other hand Miele are finding things tougher, they are the only appliance manufacturer left in the old West Germany and have a systematic job shedding programme in progress.

 

Leica has lost much of its high profile among the wider public, I also guess that people fuss more about reliable cars and washing machines.

 

There are indeed ideas about a Leica technopark, how far it has got I have no idea. It would be great if it could become a reality and allow Leica to shift up a few gears.

[luigi bertolotti]

I've just finished to read Puts article, and to rethink it a little... well maybe, as someone said here, he's not a master of business economics (the revenue figure by itself is not so dramatic) but he has very good points, imho, about the problem of RF strategy in itself. I think that after his necessary conversion to digital, something real new must be envisioned, engineered and put on the market by Leica... I love my M8, but I am a Leica addict... a breed on which Leica cannot survive given that, and this is the REAL problem, electronics REQUIRES shorter lifecycles for products: maybe a company could survive, in some form, making products made for lasting 25 years or so... people know this, some of them accepts the cost... and (maybe, repeat) a working business model can be built on this: but with electonics at the core, this today is simply impossible. I think RF concept is not definetely to be thrown away... but something NEW must be designed around it: Leica, for obvious reasons, could be the right company to invent something about... will they succeed in ? If not, really their survival as a manufacturer can be at risk... a lens design facility located in Wetzlar plus an organization that licenses a glorious brand name for some photo gear is not the end I hope for them.

... and for the moment I simply enjoy my beloved M8, of course... ... that's another thing...

[waileong]

Puts is far more incisive than those who said his departure was due to the M8 upgrade program, or his hinting of a full-frame M8, etc.... He also criticised Leica for not being able to innovate in the same vein as the M3 was an innovation over the screwmount.

 

But the best part of his article is to question whether rangefinders still have any relevance to the modern photographic world. Which is a startling reversal from a few years ago when he was praising the MP and M7. But nevertheless, a very valid question that must be keeping Leica management up every night.

 

All very serious questions which the Board and the new CEO must deal with. I believe there is a niche market for rangefinders, that people will pay more for luxury. If Porsche and Bentley and Ferrari can survive in a world dominated by Toyotas and Hyundais, Leica can too. And there is no reason why a Leica should compete with a DSLR, just like there is no reason why a Bentley should compete with a Toyota. Bentleys and Leicas will never dominate the market, but there will always be a market for those who appreciate the finer things in life.

[stunsworth]

Which is a startling reversal from a few years ago when he was praising the MP and M7

 

I seem to remember that he lost a few friends at Leica when he released some images of the M8 on his website before the camera was officially released by Leica. Perhaps he's still smarting over being cut out of the loop. For a long time he was accused of being in the pocket of Leica, I'm guessing that isn't the case now.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Thomas Edwards]

One thing is for sure - that Leica know the camera market and their marketing strategy better than anyone on this forum.

 

I own an engineering company here in the UK and work very closely with two German companies and I learned very quickly that german businesses don't think like UK or US companies do.

 

For example, I escorted a buyer from one of the UK water companies to a german company called Aerzen which is a family owned business based in Aerzen in Germany.

 

The Water company buyer said to the German MD " You know I can put you in touch with a foundry in China that can make your castings for a fraction of the cost and you could then sell me your product much cheaper" to which the German MD replied with some scorn " And why would we want to do that?"

 

Audi, BMW, Porsche, Miele and scores of other German companies follow the high price, high quality model very successfully.

 

If I want a new Audi TT (Which I do) I have to wait 4 months. Why is this different to Leica. Don't leica have a market where demand is greater than supply for certain products?

 

Aren't Leica moving to new purpose built premises back in Wetzlar?

 

Haven't Leica aquired local specialised companies in the supply chain to enhance R&D in certain technologies?

 

Are Leica lenses and binoculars not the best(or certainly one of the best) in the world.

 

This doesn't sound like a company in trouble to me.

 

I am a new Leica customer of only 12 months when as a canon 20d user I went in the camera store for a P & S to carry in my pocket. I intended to spend no more than £150 but as soon as I saw and handled the D-lux 2, I knew I had to have it. I have since aquired a digilux 3, an M8 and 3 M lenses.

 

The M8 and the return to real photography has been a delight. And to have awesome photographs straight out of the camera is wonderful. I hate working on images in photoshop - which I had to do loads of with the Canon stuff.

 

I am a true convert and consider myself very fortunate to be able to afford Leica equipment but as I stated above, I have worked all my working life with german companies and I am also a convert to their philosophies.

 

Here is another one which maybe difficult for some to understand. One German friend once said in a conversation "Why would I want to pay less tax?" which when you compare germany towns, public facilities, railways etc. to the UK, maybe this is clear.

 

 

...right...perhaps leica can learn from its fellow brethren such as bmw...bmw faced a similar problem with its enthusiast-focused but manual-geared uber saloons the m3 and m5...trouble was that most people with the funds to purchase the cars (a larger market than the enthusiasts market) lacked the skills to drive the cars...so bmw introduced smg 'automatic' transmissions for 'no thinking driving'...they expanded the market (and sales) but lost a portion of the enthusiasts...but, in the end, they prospered as a company...many similar analogies exist in the market segment leica plays in..