Should Leica Abandon The M8?

[Mauribix]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Maurizio, even if I didn't run a series of formal tests I do own and use for my work both the D3 and the D300, together with the M8 and film Ms as well. While Leica lenses (and M lenses in general) are great, and probably "better" (whatever that means for each of us, of course) than the Nikkors, if we examine the overall combination Nikon camera + Nikon lens vs Leica M8 + Leica lenses I don't find the Nikkors to be lacking in the comparison. The D3's sensor, IMO, works much better than the Kodak sensor in the M8 on all levels except, perhaps, sharpness; colors are better (the M8's skin tones' accuracy lacks to say the least), noise is so much better is not even funny; if you consider the D300, even sharpness is in the same ballpark (still the M8 is sharper though). I don't agree with people saying that the M8's files look better than everything else, though I don't agree with people saying the M8 is rubbish. The M8 is a great camera for what is designed for, as is the D3 & the D300. Is the M8 the best camera ever? Is is perfect? No, IMHO. Can it be improved? Definitely. Will ti be improved? ...I surely hope so, but the answer only Leica knows

 

Yep, we came to the same conclusion, the combination D3+nikkor lenses (some of them) doesn't have any lack into the comparison with M8.

I guess the quality comparison may be similar because of the good sensor (in the D3) and the good lenses (in the M8) that balances each other.

Anyway Nikon's introducing some new outstanding lenses too (usually zoom!) and this is interesting to see.

Ciao Vieri!

[fingerprinz]

barjohn, from a pure marketing perspective, your thoughts certainly sound interesting. In fact, I think your proposed strategy could be a winner. That is, if you have the resources - both financial and in know-how.

 

But I doubt that Leica has the resources. Let's face it, we are dealing with a very, very small company, which successfully carved a niche in one of the most potential and competitive markets currently alive, digital photography.

 

And even so, if Leica had the resources (ie through Panasonic or the likes) the company has virtually no time to execute the strategy, because the big players most likely are already working on it.

 

If I were Leica, I would further focus on building the finest RF cameras and lenses in the market - both for film and digital capture. That's my niche.

 

To do so, I would carve some strong partnerships with technology and software providers, because that's where I need help.

 

And I would invest in educating aspiring photographers on why Leica has the best tool for fine art photography. Tools that grow with you and your art over time, and make it a worthwhile investment.

 

And because we are a very, very small company, we have to focus to accomplish this all. Therefore let us quickly abandon an R10 or any similar plans if they are really in the pipeline. Simply because we have to acknowledge, that we don't have the resources to build two different top quality body and lens lines.

 

So to answer your question, no I would not abandon the M8, I would work and build on it, so that over time, it can receive the same evolutionary steps the Nikon D1 - D3 line experienced.

 

And in the meantime, I would actively spread this, and this link to show my current and future customers, what great pictures you can take with Leica RF body's and lenses TODAY.

[Advertisement]

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

[Saloti]

barjohn, from a pure marketing perspective, your thoughts certainly sound interesting. In fact, I think your proposed strategy could be a winner. That is, if you have the resources - both financial and in know-how.

 

But I doubt that Leica has the resources. Let's face it, we are dealing with a very, very small company, which successfully carved a niche in one of the most potential and competitive markets currently alive, digital photography.

 

And even so, if Leica had the resources (ie through Panasonic or the likes) the company has virtually no time to execute the strategy, because the big players most likely are already working on it.

 

If I were Leica, I would further focus on building the finest RF cameras and lenses in the market - both for film and digital capture. That's my niche.

 

To do so, I would carve some strong partnerships with technology and software providers, because that's where I need help.

 

And I would invest in educating aspiring photographers on why Leica has the best tool for fine art photography. Tools that grow with you and your art over time, and make it a worthwhile investment.

 

And because we are a very, very small company, we have to focus to accomplish this all. Therefore let us quickly abandon an R10 or any similar plans if they are really in the pipeline. Simply because we have to acknowledge, that we don't have the resources to build two different top quality body and lens lines.

 

So to answer your question, no I would not abandon the M8, I would work and build on it, so that over time, it can receive the same evolutionary steps the Nikon D1 - D3 line experienced.

 

And in the meantime, I would actively spread this, and this link to show my current and future customers, what great pictures you can take with Leica RF body's and lenses TODAY.

 

If Leica gave up the DSLR-project, they could directly go and see the receiver...

 

I (M8-man) am deepy convinced that there is no survival for Leica without DSLR!

[jaapv]

Well, Lothar, it is but a very small percentage of their tunover...

[SJP]

One thing I can't figure out is why everyone here seems to assume that Leica is in major difficulty, see Leica Camera AG - Investor Relations - Financial Reports

 

Bottom line: they are making more profit that the year before and have more financial reserves (which are being invested to introduce new products at Photokina 2008).

 

See some quotes below:

"Fiscal 2007/2008 closed with 7.3 % sales growth and Group net income of € 3.0 million"

Note this was from sales of € 156.2 million - so relative net income is not brilliant but OK.

 

"The increase in annual sales was mainly due to the sales of compact cameras increasing by € 10.1 million to € 49.5 million and the sales of system cameras increasing by € 3.6 million to € 57.2 million. In the compact cameras product line, the D-Lux 3, C-Lux 2 and V-Lux 1 models were particularly successful. The rise in sales of system cameras resulted from the sales of the LEICA M8 and the lenses appertaining thereto."

 

"The equity basis and the liquidity position of the Leica Group have been improved as compared to the previous year. The equity ratio increased from 18.1 % as at March 31, 2007 to 20.8 % as at March 31, 2008."

 

"For the fiscal year 2008/2009 the Board of Management expects a Group net loss in the higher one-digit € million range, resulting from research and development expenditure, selling costs and delayed market introduction of new products. The same applies to the single-entity financial statements of Leica Camera AG. Provided innovative products be successfully introduced to the market at the 2008 photokina trade fair the Board of Management deems probable a breakeven or slightly positive result in fiscal year 2009/2010."

[imported_reinierv]

For the fiscal year 2008/2009 the Board of Management expects a Group net loss in the higher one-digit € million range, resulting from research and development expenditure, selling costs and delayed market introduction of new products. The same applies to the single-entity financial statements of Leica Camera AG. Provided innovative products be successfully introduced to the market at the 2008 photokina trade fair the Board of Management deems probable a breakeven or slightly positive result in fiscal year 2009/2010."

 

 

I wonder what Leica will bring at the Kina, when such a statement is made. They have a loss because of the investment in new products and expect them to bring profit back in a short time. It raises expectations.

I think Leica will seriously be in trouble if they can't match these expectations and just introduce a few new compacts

 

I see Leica is pushing the M8 a bit at the moment, trying to get rid of stock????

[Saloti]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well, Lothar, it is but a very small percentage of their tunover...

 

Jaap, this is valid for the status. In this status quo they do not produce

sustainable (!) profits.

 

If they want to do so, they have to enter the digital SLR world, as they

have finally entered the digital RF world, and - besides, the digital compact

world.

 

I do not believe that this company will survive while concentrating on the compact-,

RF- and sport optics segments.

 

They know this, and this is why they will launch a R10.....

[Saloti]

imported_reinierv :

 

"I think Leica will seriously be in trouble if they can't match these expectations and just introduce a few new compacts"

 

Nothing to add. Their apparently huge investment will concern both R-line and M-line.

 

I wish them all the best for this investment, if they do not meet market requirements,

they will be in deepest trouble.

 

However, I am confident.

[markgay]

Barjohn: "A company is always trying to understand the obstacles to entry that must be overcome to sell a product."

 

I raised this question in the spring, http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/47665-would-you-give-leica-free-hand-m9-design.html essentially asking what is more important:

 

1/ to make the best small rangefinder

2/ to keep the M-body shape

3/ to maintain backward compatibility with almost all lenses.

 

Here's the argument:

- We know the M8 design is compromised BECAUSE it was a compromise to keep the M look, size and shape AND make digital camera with deep-set rangefinder lenses.

- People say they want more features but if you give them what they demand, you may upset them. Evidence: M5

- So I jumped into the hornets' nest and asked if people would buy a radically redesigned M Digital.

 

From their responses many people thought the question unnecessary (several people said Leica would make what it wanted and it was pointless to address this question to the buyers).

 

Others were split, mainly along these lines:

 

1/ Make the best small rangefinder giving priority to good ergonomics, size, optics. Depart from M shape if necessary.

2/ The M lenses ARE the system. Backward compatibility is number one.

3/ Keep the M shape and size at all costs.

 

But the discussion largely ignored the central point of the question: that demands for a full frame M Digital and for faster wide lenses could more easily be met by abandoning the M design.

 

Arguments for making the best possible digital rangefinder AND for keeping the traditional M body may be contradictory.

 

Many posters demand both, which is possibly why they were uncomfortable with my question.

 

 

 

Mark

[lct]

...the discussion largely ignored the central point of the question that demands for a full frame M Digital and for faster wide lenses could more easily be met by abandoning the M design...

Did nobody responded that this would be the end for Leica?

[fingerprinz]

Nope Lothar, i don't buy into your "me-too" strategy. And I hope for Leica they don't either.

 

Lets face it, Leica's compacts are nothing else but rebranded Panasonics. If they enter the DSLR market in the same fashion - let's say with a repackaged Panasonic DSLR that excepts R lenses - that will not make anybody happy, but the "Label-Fetischist".

 

What's more, it will keep their tiny organisation busy, because that will be the product line that scales in numbers, and will result in higher operational and service requirements. Read: Resources not available for RF body's and lenses.

 

If they need a "me-too" streategy because it pays, then license the Leica lable to Panasonic, and let them handle the entire value-chain, and just collect the license fees.

 

But Leica themselves should focus their resources on what they are most qualified - building awesome RF cameras and lenses. I am convinced that they can become even better at that, if they only focus and don't mess-up with "me-too".

[jaapv]

Jaap, this is valid for the status. In this status quo they do not produce

sustainable (!) profits.

 

If they want to do so, they have to enter the digital SLR world, as they

have finally entered the digital RF world, and - besides, the digital compact

world.

 

I do not believe that this company will survive while concentrating on the compact-,

RF- and sport optics segments.

 

They know this, and this is why they will launch a R10.....

 

Lothar,

This is true, but there has always been a doubtful flavor to the R line, from a business point of view. The SL nearly sunk the company,the Minolta connection saved the day. When the R7 sales petered out, the R8 came to the rescue with the help of Porsche design. The R9 was not a new model at all, the DMR, well it is great, but a could-have-been because the partner pulled out. Now the whole R production is comatose. When is the last time any of us saw an R camera in real use? Leica will need to produce something very,very special (to match the lenses...)to make this story a succes. Time is not a factor, so they can take their time to get it right.

[fotografr]

I am currently in charge of R&D for the U.S. Navy in the area of measurement science.

 

Ha! So YOU'RE the one responsible for screwing up the dolphins. You can just take that ELF radiation and....( kidding)

[Saloti]

Jaap,

 

I fully agree. My understanding with regard to apparently very high current product

development investments is, that a good share of them concern a digital R 10.

 

With regard to current sales nobody would seriously expect the R-series sales share

playing any role at all, for well know reasons...

[barjohn]

Lothar,

 

Assuming you are correct and Leica builds an R10, whose sensor will it have and will that sensor compete with the FF Nikon or Canon offering? If it can't compete with it, and I assume the body will be as or more expensive than the Nikon or Canon offering, why would anyone want to buy it? I think it needs more than the red dot. I know the R lenses are good but so are the Zeiss lenses for the Nikon. In other word, what features and capabilities must it have to compete in the marketplace?

[Shootist]

Jaap,

 

I fully agree. My understanding with regard to apparently very high current product

development investments is, that a good share of them concern a digital R 10.

 

With regard to current sales nobody would seriously expect the R-series sales share

playing any role at all, for well know reasons...

 

I agree with the BOLD above.

The Leica SLR has never been a big seller, any model.

If I, and most other people interested in photograph, was looking for a SLR there are many makes and models out there, as we all know. But there is only one DRF camera in production at this time.

If Leica did come out with a M9, or M8 II, with better sensor, faster write times, faster shooting in continuous mode, better frame lines, IR blocking built in and longer battery life along with other basic and feature improvements, as has been dicussed many time on this forum, I would seriously think about getting one.

"IF" "I" were thinking about buying a DSLR, I presently don't own one but I have in the past, I certainly wouldn't even think about a R from Leica.

So I think the time and money spent on R&D for the R10, if there even is one in the works, is waisted. Unless Leica can bring it in for under $5000.00. Which is doubtful.

[fotografr]

I have put my money where my mouth is by selling the M8 at a loss. I will observe the market for M8s and used M8s for a while and see if I am right or wrong.

 

I'm curious why you would care one way or the other if you made the "right" decision. It's done and you have moved on to another system that you're happy with. A few years ago, after using Nikon SLRs for a couple of decades, I switched to Canon because I thought they had better products. Not once did I have a need or desire to go back to the Nikon forum and try to raise questions and concerns about how Nikon had lost its lead to Canon. Some people seem to have difficulty moving on after making a decision and this is not a healthy state of affairs.

 

 

It seems to me your initial question here should not have been whether Leica should abandon the M8, but whether they should abandon the digital M concept altogether. Obviously, the M8 will evolve into the M9, then M10 and so on. That's the nature of this business and always has been. Each new iteration will hopefully be a significant improvement on its predecessor. Clearly, the M8 has some problems, but they are not insurmountable and in the opinion of many users it is a damn fine start.

[fingerprinz]

Assuming you are correct and Leica builds an R10, whose sensor will it have and will that sensor compete with the FF Nikon or Canon offering? If it can't compete with it, and I assume the body will be as or more expensive than the Nikon or Canon offering, why would anyone want to buy it? I think it needs more than the red dot. I know the R lenses are good but so are the Zeiss lenses for the Nikon. In other word, what features and capabilities must it have to compete in the marketplace?

 

Well, albeit my earlier suggestions, I would buy an R10, if it had the same puristic design/size as my R7 (no AF) but with a digital FF sensor. And the price should not be higher than US$ 4000 (body only).

 

Yet, what I learn from the technical acclaimed in this forum, current state of technology don't allow for a FF sensor in such a small body.

 

To bad, so let's stick to RF.

[Shootist]

I have put my money where my mouth is by selling the M8 at a loss. I will observe the market for M8s and used M8s for a while and see if I am right or wrong.

 

Right or wrong about what? Whether the M8 is for you? It seems that it clearly isn't.

I personally don't care whether the M8 goes up in price or not and what the market is for used M8's.

In the M8 and the M mount glass I have, I have the camera and lenses I want to use for the photography I like doing.

The only problem I have with the M8 "IS IF" Leica folds as a company. As opposed to other Leica M cameras the M8 can only be fixed by Leica. With other M's any GOOD Leica repair person could/can repair them (as long as the right parts are available).

But that is true for all other digital, computerized, cameras.

 

As for putting your money where your mouth is, I don't know. You sold a perfectly good camera, and I guess all the lenses for it, at a loss and now have to reinvest in some other make/model that you probably won't be completely happy with.

Good Luck and Happy Snapping.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Shootist]

Well, albeit my earlier suggestions, I would buy an R10, if it had the same puristic design/size as my R7 (no AF) but with a digital FF sensor. And the price should not be higher than US$ 4000 (body only).

 

Yet, what I learn from the technical acclaimed in this forum, current state of technology don't allow for a FF sensor in such a small body.

 

To bad, so let's stick to RF.

The size of the body has nothing to do with it. It is the distance from the lens mount to the sensor/film plane and the angle the light hits the corners of the sensor at those short distances when using wide angle lenses. The body itself cna support a FF sensor. Although some of the electronics would need to be made smaller. Which is not a real problem.

 

Oh you are talking about the R series. But still it should support a FF sensor. They used FF film in the same size camera.