Yes or No, Black or White is Leica going to make the R10?

[paulmoore]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Re-reading my rather doom & gloom post, one much more logical ray of sunshine would be a simple (as mentioned earlier) DMR II.

 

Tweak the R9 to end the #$% film scratching with a simple $5 film roller bearing like everyone else, but no other substantive mods. No AF, say 4-5 fps max, LiO battery.

 

Back with FF 16MP or so sensor (don't go nuts - keep nice fat light buckets), no AA filter, lets say 5D-esque ISO performance (a very clean ISO 800 and usable ISO 1600). Focus confirm and LV would be nice - but only if the $$$ required to implement warranted it. Ensure R8-9 backward compatibility.

 

Better idea re: LiveView might be a typical small screen and an LV 'tap' socket so user could plug something like an iPod Touch into the camera to get that view camera functionality with the 'pod (or what have you) on an adjustable cold shoe mount. Lots of great small screens out there - no need to build one into every body.

 

Partner properly to get and keep the price of the back and R9+ down.

 

Much less investment, much lower risk, not targeted at the mass market pro DSLR user but keeps the brand in the game and leverages all that great glass.

 

For the preceding, I'd get back my 180/2, 80 Lux, 90AA, etc., etc.

 

I could take or leave the live view, and while I love my r9, I am hoping for a new camera..

I think the ergonomics would be helped greatly - I do like the ipod plug in idea.. that would be cool -

[R10dreamer]

Re-reading my rather doom & gloom post, one much more logical ray of sunshine would be a simple (as mentioned earlier) DMR II.

 

Tweak the R9 to end the #$% film scratching with a simple $5 film roller bearing like everyone else, but no other substantive mods. No AF, say 4-5 fps max, LiO battery.

 

Back with FF 16MP or so sensor (don't go nuts - keep nice fat light buckets), no AA filter, lets say 5D-esque ISO performance (a very clean ISO 800 and usable ISO 1600). Focus confirm and LV would be nice - but only if the $$$ required to implement warranted it. Ensure R8-9 backward compatibility.

 

Better idea re: LiveView might be a typical small screen and an LV 'tap' socket so user could plug something like an iPod Touch into the camera to get that view camera functionality with the 'pod (or what have you) on an adjustable cold shoe mount. Lots of great small screens out there - no need to build one into every body.

 

Partner properly to get and keep the price of the back and R9+ down.

 

Much less investment, much lower risk, not targeted at the mass market pro DSLR user but keeps the brand in the game and leverages all that great glass.

 

For the preceding, I'd get back my 180/2, 80 Lux, 90AA, etc., etc.

 

For the life of me I don't know why they discontinued the DMR in the first place. I understand the issues they had but if you have to provide service for 10,000 units (est) what difference does it make if it is 20,000 units. Also, the DMR has great image quality. A little tweak here and there and you go do DMRII just as you suggested. Certainly better than nothing.

[adan]

For the life of me I don't know why they discontinued the DMR in the first place. I understand the issues they had but if you have to provide service for 10,000 units (est) what difference does it make if it is 20,000 units. Also, the DMR has great image quality.

 

I believe once Hasselblad bought Imacon, they more or less told Leica "So long - don't let the door slam on your way out!"

 

Hassy wasn't interested in sharing technology or resources (and long-term service liabilities) with an outside company anymore. Same reason they made the H3 digital camera 'proprietary' and incompatable with backs from other makers.

[adan]

The bodies are a vehicle to sell the GLASS...... I have 2 R8's (one DMR) but I own a 19mm, 28mm, 50mm, 100mm, 70-180mm, 280mm and 400mm; along with 1.2x, 2x and macro adapter. .....All I want is a body to use my glass with.

 

But if you ALREADY own all that glass - what good are you to Leica as a glass customer?! (wink!). I bought TWO M8s - but only ONE new Leica lens (net) - everything else I use I already had.

 

Just as you already have R lenses.

 

This is the problem Leica faces - a camera that uses their existing lenses has to be able to support itself financially, because there are a lot of lenses already in the marketplace. It may essentially be a one-shot deal - they will sell one batch to everyone already using R, and then the market dries up.

 

Unless the new R(whatever) can ALSO appeal to people not currently using a Leica SLR system.

 

The M8 is unique in being a digital RF, so its market has a bit better legs. People who left Leica M altogether for digital and came back. People who use Canikon SLRs (happily) but want something different on the side. People who have never tried RFs and were ready to see what the mystique was all about.

 

That market was big enough to suck the supply of used (AND new) lenses almost dry - but I don't know that yet another SLR will have that much drawing power - UNLESS Leica can really redefine the R system into something new. A semi-medium-format camera above and beyond the top-end "full-frame" 35mm-based SLRs. or something equally not in the same ballpark as the Canon/Nikon machines.

 

Understand I am sympathetic. I still haven't seen a digital SLR from anyone that really gets me interested, even as an add-on to my M8s.

[lct]

...I don't know that yet another SLR will have that much drawing power - UNLESS Leica can really redefine the R system into something new. A semi-medium-format camera above and beyond the top-end "full-frame" 35mm-based SLRs...

Yes it's the scenario in vogue. Not sure if it is a good one though. As clear as i recall the first Leicaflex and the R3 looked ridiculously outdated compared to the best Canikons 20 or 30 years ago. But people still bought them for one reason: the Leica glass didn't they. I don't think there is anything new in the market from this viewpoint. We already know, or at least we can guess, that Leica won't be able to offer what Sony and Nikon will do in the next month. I mean 25mpix in a full frame sensor. The curious idea to enlarge the next R sensor will have the consequence that people interested in FF only, ie. most R lenses owners so far, will only have how many pixels available? 15mpix? And at what price? $8K for the body plus $300 per lens to make them fit the new mount? And the few pro photogs who could be interested in a more-than-FF-less-than-MF body won't find out the many AF lenses they need before several months anyway. When i see what a D3 or a mere D300 can do with some good Zeiss glass i begin to wonder if Nikon or Sony won't replace Leica on my DSLR shelves soon or late...

[mjh]

For the life of me I don't know why they discontinued the DMR in the first place. I understand the issues they had but if you have to provide service for 10,000 units (est) what difference does it make if it is 20,000 units. Also, the DMR has great image quality. A little tweak here and there and you go do DMRII just as you suggested. Certainly better than nothing.

I doubt the market potential justifying another production run did exist. The DMR was targeted at existing owners of an R8 or R9, and when the DMR was officially discontinued, I believe a vast majority of all the photographers having at one time contemplated getting a DMR had either got one at that point, or had decided against it – and those still sitting on the fence had ample time to buy one even then, as there was still some stock on the dealers’ shelves.

 

The partnership between Leica and Imacon was quickly falling apart; evidently, Imacon’s heart wasn’t in it anymore. I don’t know whether Leica could have pressured Imacon into doing another batch, but even then – once you’ve realized a relationship doesn’t really work out, it’s best to call it quits and be friends.

[R10dreamer]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

All I keep hearing is sad news. Hopefully, ala Apple their will come up with something that transcends the market and brings back the financial energy needed. Maybe larger than FF. Maybe something else. Regardless the Leica name still has tremendous optical respect in the business and I just can't see it going down the drain. Maybe I'm dreaming, thus my moniker.

 

Cheers everyone.

[wildlightphoto]

All I keep hearing is sad news.

 

I believe your cup is half-empty. Mine has 4 ounces in it

[RobMac]

As mentioned above, THE greatest barrier to Leica making ANY new R10-esque DSLR or DMR II a success is the fact that their market for that product is so !@#$%^ small that it takes a mere handful of units (relative to the size of the overall market) to fill it. After the market is fed, what (as Leica) do you do? You've poured hundreds of millions into developing a new uber-camera and lenses to feed it, yet you've saturated your market after a 'mere' 10,000 units (pick a number) over say 2 yrs.

 

If under some sad logic you're happy with that volume, you also have a pricing problem. To be a business vs. a charity, you need to price the product to recoup all associated costs plus a profit margin over those units. However, if you go too high (aka high enough to do the job right) that 10,000 unit volume becomes 8,000, or 6,000 or 5,000 because at (say) $10,000 a head you're in the 1Ds3, D3x and entry-level MFDB snack bracket - and likely to eat your own foot.

 

What about lenses? If you require users to buy new AF glass, being Leica, they will be VERY costly vs. what you can get for used manual focus R glass to bolt on a Cankon DSLR, an existing DMR Mod I or used Hasselblad/Mamiya glass on a 503CWD, 645AFDII + ZD., etc.

 

So what are your options?

-------------------------------

1. Go KISS*: Minimize the costs a la the DMRII, forget the AF, etc., BS. PO some high-expectation customers, but feed off an existing R lens base and keep your hand in the DSLR game. That said, the price has got to be LOW (none of this $5000+ back only BS, not in todays market) and the back has to be backwards compatible.

 

2. The Hell With It. Drop R, PO all existing users, sink used R prices, but focus on feeding M into more hands by having say two model lines, Summarit glass, getting costs down by partnering with someone (at least on lower-end model) who isn't hand-assembling and paying German 'saintly elves in the Black Forest' labor costs. Butch-up your service and repair system.

 

2a. Stick Fishnets On It & Kick It To The Corner: Do #2 but also license (or outright sell) the R line to someone like Sony (yeah, I know Zeiss, but business is business). I would BET that many an investment bank has visited Solms with some PowerPoints on this option. Sony (?) gets a premium 'red dot' line of glass for the A900(?) overnight, etc, -- helping them go against Cankon at the high-end with a proven and broad top-notch glass line out of the gate.

 

3. Mini Me The Sucker. You turn the R line upside by making it a PanaLeica SLR.

Small, decent ISO performance, AF with its' own lenses, but takes existing R glass. Maybe FF and large VF. Your partner carries the mfg and marketing load, etc - you maybe craft some hand-make some premium units. Great cash flow for the R&D required, very low risk. PO many, but keep some content enough. Stop all effective R glass R&D. Line effectively vanishes into partner over 3-5 yrs.

 

4. The Optimists Whimp Out : You (Leica CEO) know something like #1-2a is the right business decision, but you/the Board can't man-up to actually pull the trigger.

 

As a result, you keep an optimistic toe in the market by having a talked-up concept R camera under glass as you focus on M and keep your fingers crossed you come up with the $$$/partner/divine intervention required to take the product fwd profitably. PO many, keep many others hoping, and in the end achieve squat. Maybe up your purchase valuation by demonstrating with some innovative tech.

 

5. Here's My MBA Back, The Spartans Had the Right Idea: You think "...screw-it Hans, the R10 uber camera will live!"

 

You go to market with a $10,000+ AF uber DSLR/mini-MF line and call out the 1DS3, the D3_, the Sony A900 (assuming we ever see it), the Hasselblad 503CWD, the ZD back and the $3500 used 16MP 1DS2 and $5000+ 16-22MP MFDB segment. It's time to settle some hash. Think 300 Spartans with flabbier abs (all those great beers), glasses, German accents, M8s around their necks (some great low-light shots) -- and a MUCH shorter battle.

 

You thus gloriously blow your financial brains out in a balls-to-the-wall show of German engineering mastery vs. business sense. Oh, you screw-up M line expansion as take critical eyeballs and $$$ away from it when it was "....all troops fwd..." when the R10 hit the wall.

 

None of the above are a great position to be in as CEO.

 

 

* For those not familiar with it: KISS - Keep It Simple Stupid

[R10dreamer]

"You've poured hundreds of millions into developing a new uber-camera"

 

You lost me here with this drama.

[EH21]

Yeah agreed, their budget for this project is probably not even on the order of 10's of millions and probably only a few million. But however much it is, I sure hope that my existing R glass will work with it. If not I doubt I'll buy one.

[marknorton]

None of the option RobMac suggests seems to be particularly palatable.

 

Any view as to what the market would be for Canon and Nikon fit manual focus Leica R lenses?

 

Maybe the whole business of making cameras is not playing to Leica's core strengths and it's not a business they should be in.

[sdai]

Any view as to what the market would be for Canon and Nikon fit manual focus Leica R lenses?

 

You're probably right, Mark. Leica will only need to build a EOS version of WATE ... that'll bring them more cash than from all their existing products combined.

[RobMac]

If Leica can design, develop, prototype, take to manufacture, sell and market a FF 20MP+ AF camera body and AF lens line for '..a few million..' starting, from all intensive purposes, from scratch - all the power to them - they'll own the DSLR market in 5 years.

 

This isn't Canon modifying the 1Ds2 into the 1Ds3. That's '...a few million...' -- and then some.

 

A KISS DMR II - that would be there lowest cost option and that would EASILY bump into or enter the tens of millions snack bracket - and that's IF they kept a tight lid on feature creep.

 

As for EOS mount Leica glass - I wish, I REALLY wish. They would see an enormous influx of very low-risk cash while milking their R glass expertise. Should have included that option.

 

Nice to have fun with speculation.

[RobMac]

Wanted to edit above, but took too long...

 

This 'debate' over costs required highlights a basic issue for Leica - critical mass required to target and hold a profitable foothold in that pro DSLR market.

 

For a company with (Leica Camera Group Dec '07) latest QUARTERLY Sales of 38M Euros and R&D of 3.8M Euros and break-even (actually just above) earnings expectations for the year , what can they afford to pour into an R10-style product?

 

Will doing so allow them to maintain the development cycles behind the sales-engines that have been the digital M and compact camera lines?

 

Lets say the magic number is $10M - the equivalent of 6 months total R&D spending at the annualized quarterly rate. $20M - a full years R&D. What are you willing to risk? Is that risk worth it vs. the alternatives?

 

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE Leica's M and R products, loved my R8 and now use R glass on my 1Ds2. That being said, not every camera/lens maker can afford to be everything to everyone - not in the digital age.

 

I'd rather have Leica as we know it around today as the result of them sticking to their knitting and farming out/milking their SLR lens expertise vs. risking everything on a noble but futile gesture.

 

In short, the boys who OWN the DSLR market and now Sony (?) make very, very good DSLRs. However, they don't, nor does anyone else save Zeiss and Schneider make glass comparable to that of a Leica (IMHO) - or even (though that is changing with the likes of the 14-24G) lenses that in MOST cases can live up to their own sensors. Nikon is starting to change in that regard - Canon not so much. There is a nice window here.

 

Oh well, if you're going to speculate, might as well have some fun doing it.

[paulmoore]

Wanted to edit above, but took too long...

 

 

In short, the boys who OWN the DSLR market and now Sony (?) make very, very good DSLRs. However, they don't, nor does anyone else save Zeiss and Schneider make glass comparable to that of a Leica (IMHO) - or even (though that is changing with the likes of the 14-24G) lenses that in MOST cases can live up to their own sensors. Nikon is starting to change in that regard - Canon not so much. There is a nice window here.

 

Oh well, if you're going to speculate, might as well have some fun doing it.

 

Yes the above mentioned boys do make good products, and yes, they have the lions' share of the market.. dell makes a good product too, mr. coffee makes a good cup of coffee and many others that own their market, but they don't interest me.. schneider doesn't own their market, I use schneider on my larger cameras, apple doesn't own the pc market, I use apple..I am having a hard time finding products that get me excited that own the market. I don't want a very good slr.. I want the best slr.. not best as in trophy best, put it on your shelf and show it off best.. but superior quality, quantitative quality, palpable quality, leica quality.. call me what you will, but I am using the best dslr for me and it's a leica. If they come out with something better than my current dmr r9 combo, then I will jump the hoops needed to get my hands on it. I am an slr and view camera guy, so I don't have to budget buying both rangefinder and slr small camera systems..

I can put all my pennies on one pony. ( btw, didn't leica put up to have a custom sensor made for the M, I don't know how they financed that I, just like I don't know how they finance any of their R&D but they somehow did it)

I don't have to have a new and improved camera tomorrow, what I have is still better than I am and until they tempt me with the next piece of genius I will remain happy...speculating on the next r

[AlanG]

... but I am using the best dslr for me and it's a leica.

 

Best for you may not be what is "best" for others. Some need faster frame rates, AF, IS, a full frame sensor with a variety of tilt/shift lenses (including 24mm) and other features that are not found on your combo.

[RobMac]

I should also note that the preceding just talks about R&D costs, there are also the associated S&M., etc expenditures that can't be classified as R&D.

 

Does/would the aggregate multiple-year "R10" R&D, S&M, etc figure fall into the 'hundreds' as my dramatic (I'll give you that) and satirical scenario states? Maybe, maybe not. Is it 'a few', not by a long shot.

 

Does/would it fall into the multiple 8 figure+ range ? Without guestion. The final amount of that 'multiple' to be determined purely by how far they want to re-invent the wheel - for

a product line that they, by their own admission, do not consider their flagship.

 

As a photographer, Paul, I hope your right. However as a businessperson, when I look at it, developing an "R10" as many would hope for (AF, etc, etc) makes no sense from anything resembling a business perspective and would thus be a potentially terminal mistake.

 

Would a KISS DMR Mod II make more sense? Maybe, but if and only if they followed the KISS principle with sufficient diligence to make a notable profit margin (at a realistic price) within the limited market share attainable .

 

Sometimes a Board/CEO just has to put aside the emotion and hyperbole and admit to themselves that:

 

' We had a great run in X, but the market, our firm and the competitive landscape have changed. For whatever reason, we didn't /couldn't keep up the momentum to fully exploit X. It's time to focus on our bread and butter - and see what we can do to maximize the value of that (now defunct) asset we created.'

 

No harm, no foul. Happens daily. That being said, I don't recall Leica ever asking for my opinion (must have lost that email...) - which is of no greater or lesser value/importance than anyone else's at this juncture, so we shall see what the next 12-18 months brings.

[lct]

...Some need faster frame rates, AF, IS, a full frame sensor with a variety of tilt/shift lenses (including 24mm) and other features that are not found on your combo.

Question is to know if those 'some' are that many actually. If they are like me, most Leica users want to keep their current lenses more than they need AF, IS, VR and other gadgets.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[arpey]

most Leica users want to keep their current lenses more than they need AF, IS, VR and other gadgets.

 

You got that right!