Erwin Puts on Leicas future

[AlanG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If you go to the Leica Microsystems web site you'll see this:

 

"...Leica Microsystems’ business serves completely different markets and customers to Leica Camera AG and Leica Geosystems AG. The reported financial difficulties of Leica Camera are in no way connected to the financial position of Leica Microsystems GmbH, which is pleased to confirm that its own financial position remains solid with strong current trading results."

 

Consider that Canon, Zeiss and Nikon got out of the interchangeable lens rangefinder business in the 60s. I think they saw the handwriting on the wall and went in other directions with great success. Did they know something that Leica didn't? It left Leica to be the sole provider to this market and they did well for a while. I just read this history of Leica, and it seems that they made several missteps the past few decades.

 

Leica Camera AG: Information and Much More from Answers.com

 

Although it also looks like they were at least trying to find a way.

 

And it seems to me that maybe there simply are limits to how many rangefinder cameras can now be sold worldwide and that makes it difficult to have the means to do all of the things that everyone is asking from Leica. Consider that the world has grown a lot richer in recent years and the demand for quality and luxury goods has increased. There surely must be new markets open to Leica (Asia, the middle east, etc.) So what's the problem?

 

I remember the movie "Other People's Money" where a corporate raider, played by Danny DeVito, said (paraphrased), "You don't want to be one of the last companies increasing market share in a diminishing market." And, "I'm sure that the last buggy whip company in America made the best damn buggy whips in the world."

[Guest stnami]

There surely must be new markets open to Leica (Asia, the middle east, etc.) So what's the problem?

They want a hassle free camera both in operation ad reliability, there seems to be other manufacturers that can fill these requirements already.

[Advertisement]

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

[Michael Hiles]

They want a hassle free camera both in operation ad reliability, there seems to be other manufacturers that can fill these requirements already.

 

Right to the point! Leica's value proposition is powerful but very limited in scope. It is very narrow and VERY risky. One of the normal business requirements is to manage (usually means minimize) risk, and they do it very badly. Their actual and potential client base at the moment is so small that one serious mistake and that's it, that's all. Time to smarten up. They need to replicate the M3 miracle - retain the good conceptual basics, and develop something that accepts the 21st century market. Pretending that digital, SLRs, autofocus etc is a passing fad and not worthy of consideration is a recipe for disaster, and to then hope that any serious number of customers will pay mortgageable prices is suicidal.

[WSO]

long time lurker, first poster.

 

Leica needs to fix their pricing, period dot.

 

I consider myself a typical "well-heeled" target leica customer, but the prices of new equipment (especially in the last few years) has become difficult for me to justify, even on a personal level.

[Guest Cordell]

long time lurker, first poster.

 

Leica needs to fix their pricing, period dot.

 

First post isn't a love poem to Leica? Hope you have your flame-retardant suit on.

[ruiespanhol]

I agree whit Mr.Puts but how he explain that the M system survive more then 50 years and continue to sell more then other Leica product?

I think is time to Leica put on the market the new R10 whit autofocus lenses but whit the same R mount to permit still using the R lenses whitout autofocus.

Whit this kind of camera whit FF sensor whit 16Mp or evem more and AF Leica cam be more atractive to new costumers and sell more even for the pro´s.

Leica nead to be more competitive in pro market if want to survive.

it´s a shame when Leica have the best optics in world and other good things and the pro´s still go outside the company and still buy and using Canon or Nikon.

That is the problem in my opinion.

 

Best,

[Leica(at)Palatinate]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I would hope Leica doesn't follow in Hasselblad's foot steps by creating a closed system.

 

Having understood now what a closed system is I would not mind Leica creating a new closed system, e.g. based on the M system provided it finally delivers formidable quality. In your definition, the existing M (and R) system already is a closed system, well almost.

 

Hermann

[thrid]

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...

 

I don't think that would be a good idea. With the M system has a unique product (for the moment) and no competition. If you want a digital RF, you have to go Leica, unless you're willing to buy a used Epson RD-1.

 

If they restrict themselves to the DSLR market they are suddenly competing head to head with Nikon, Canon and the other smaller players; all of which have far more resources than Leica and will eat them for breakfast.

 

I think the R10 can succeed if it offers exceptional performance at the high end of the market in terms of price, where it would only have one or two competitors from Canon or Nikon. If Leica could move a few ten thousand units they would be giddy and could survive.

[Jack MacDonough]

I bought the M8 for compactness and huge IQ thanks to lenses and maybe no AA. No longer for "quiet", as a digital P&S has no shutter and so is totally silent. If ithere were no M, and just a DSLR sized camera I would probably stay Canon or even now go Nikon, so a Leica DSLR is not on my shopping list.

On a RF,I don't care about the finder "seeing" beyond the frame as sometimes I will shoot without even using the finder, merely pointing. I do care about setting manual focus, but wish it were more precise on medioum lenses.. So a focus confirmation would be delightful for the next camera. I need the lenses to be as small as they are now, or I might as well use a DSLR.

Regarding the question" is a RF a gone concept"? No. I say all the P&Ss are actually range finders in that they don't use a mirror to allow you to see what you are shooting or shot. It's the mirror in an SLR that will be considered antique in 5 years.

If one were inventing a camera for the next generation, I would figure out how to have a "live view", focus confirmation, and the current viewfinder with electronic finder lines, but no "range finder" window. Dropping the RF window and mechanism has to save space and cost.

Eventually, probably soon, an electronic viewfinder will be high enough quality and cost effective to replace the optical viewfinder. Then it will be the DSLR's having a choice as to keeping the expensive mirror and penta-prism.

Will this be an effective business model? maybe not. But in any case I'm delighted they introduced the M8 as it sure has displaced the need for a giant DSLR on everything but long telephoto shots. And I sure hope they figure out how to keep alive.

[DTD]

Apologies for posting some rambling thoughts again…

 

I think Erwin Puts has a point about the relevance of the rangefinder to most photographers. When I think of Leica I think 'rangefinder'. I wouldn't dispute the quality of their SLRs, but I would be unlikely to buy into the R series over what other manufacturers have on offer. Rangefinders are what makes Leica different, but it's a difference that after the acceptance of autofocus and electronics in the professional world, is probably irrelevant to most photographers. I've used Olympus for a long time – they effectively gave up being a brand with a professional presence when they didn't/couldn't develop a quality autofocus SLR. By the time the E-1 came along I think many professional Oly users had had to jump ship.

 

In the mainstream market, most amateurs couldn't justify spending what Ms and Rs cost. At the compact end of the range I can't see much reason to pay the 'red-dot' premium over Panasonic's prices. I think most professionals look at costs and returns and there doesn't seem an advantage for them in buying into the R or M system either. It seems the company lost the professional market years ago. Does anyone know any research of Leica's customers are pro/amateur/dentist etc?

 

The point about made about rental equipment is a good one. I know a couple of professional photographers and they use Hassleblad/Mamiya or Nikon/Canon partly because there's a support infrastructure.

 

I understand Leica try to position themselves as a 'luxury brand'. But there's a difference between sticking a Rolex on one's wrist and learning to operate a non-auto camera. Any rich so-and-so can pootle around London at 10 mph in a Porsche. I wonder how firms like Alpa and Ebony keep going? I suppose their R&D budgets and the whole scale of business are tiny.

 

One thing I find a bit worrying about Leica is the attitude that "the MP is perfection and can't be improved upon". Can you imagine a Japanese company saying they can't develop a product? They'd soon be keeping Mr Lee company.

 

I'm afraid I don't know what Leica should do – I just hope they manage to continue. But I think they should perhaps develop a new type of camera. I like the form of the old C2 compact. It looked like a 'Leica' and I wonder if this might be a starting point for a digital, autofocus camera? If there's demand for cameras such as the Sigma DP-1 and Ricoh GR-D, surely Leica could sell something that in spirit is probably closer to the original Barnack ideas than what's currently on offer. If so, I'm not sure there's the demand to shift it in sufficient quantities.

[mjh]

No, it's closed because it will only take back made by Hasselblad for the H3 not allowing existing system users to migrate their older backs. nor will new lenses work with H1 and H2 system.

If that’s what you mean by “closed”, then Leica’s M or R systems are closed already. The mix-and-match style of combining a body from one vendor and a digiback from another is a medium-format phenomenon; with the exception of the DMR (and there was never an alternative to the DMR from another vendor), in the world of DSLRs derived from 35 mm systems the sensor has always been an integral part of the camera.

 

BTW, it’s not true that new lenses cannot be used with H and H2 bodies; it just happens that one new lens is for the H3D (II) only.

[mjh]

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.

The H-System bodies are manufactured by Hasselblad in Gothenburg, Sweden, the digibacks by Hasselblad in Copenhagen, Denmark, and the lenses by Fujinon in Japan (except the shutter and aperture assembly which is manufactured by Hasselblad in Gothenburg, where the lens design is done).

[lct]

...I think Erwin Puts has a point about the relevance of the rangefinder to most photographers. When I think of Leica I think 'rangefinder'. I wouldn't dispute the quality of their SLRs, but I would be unlikely to buy into the R series over what other manufacturers have on offer....

Matter of tastes and experience i guess. I use both RFs and DSLRs personally so when i think of Leica i don't think 'rangefinder' but 'lenses' and whatever qualities my Nikon DSLRs may have, most of their lenses are inferior to Leica's so to retrieve the IQ i like i will buy into the R series provided the R10 is better than the M8 hopefully.

[brunom]

Leica needs to rationalize its product line, and for me a sensible line up would include :

 

An updated and cutting edge [ for the type ] C Lux

 

A digital CL with focus confirmation with 4/3rd sensor built to M standards, including a proper viewfinder.

 

The MP M7 models available to order

 

The M8 line

 

The R10

 

and a new, larger than FF sensor camera, to replace Hasselblad's XPAN - but digital, which could make use of all past Leica lenses in the 35mm format and a new line of lens to cover the full format.

 

Just my thoughts.

 

Bruno

[giordano]

If one were inventing a camera for the next generation, I would figure out how to have a "live view", focus confirmation, and the current viewfinder with electronic finder lines, but no "range finder" window. Dropping the RF window and mechanism has to save space and cost.

Eventually, probably soon, an electronic viewfinder will be high enough quality and cost effective to replace the optical viewfinder. Then it will be the DSLR's having a choice as to keeping the expensive mirror and penta-prism.

Will this be an effective business model? maybe not. But in any case I'm delighted they introduced the M8 as it sure has displaced the need for a giant DSLR on everything but long telephoto shots. And I sure hope they figure out how to keep alive.

 

Let's hope so. I'm less sanguine than you are about electronic viewfinders, mainly because of the time-lag between the image of an event's hitting the sensor and its showing up on the display. The electronic finders and live views I've seen so far seem to refresh just a few times a second, which is like doing 'decisive moment' photography with a Thornton Pickard reflex. They'd need to push the frame rate up to 50 or 100 per second to reduce the lag to insignificance: what will this do to battery life and low-light VF performance?

 

Also, focusing aids on reflex cameras don't seem to work at apertures below about f/5.6, especially in bad light. Does electronic focus measurement at the sensor do any better? If not, the 'electronic RF' will want auto-diaphragm lenses...

[wildlightphoto]

... focusing aids on reflex cameras don't seem to work at apertures below about f/5.6, especially in bad light. Does electronic focus measurement at the sensor do any better? If not, the 'electronic RF' will want auto-diaphragm lenses...

 

Electronic focus measurement at the sensor shouldn't depend on a particular lens aperture, only on microcontrast at the sensor. This implies better lens = snappier focus.