Gentleman Villain Posted January 5, 2009 Share #81 Posted January 5, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) As a professional photographer who has not only used digital for over 14 years, but was involved with some of the R/D use back in the mid 90's, I actually despise what it has done to this craft, especially the perception of what makes a good photograph, but I still use it. The eye altering, alters all....Poorly crafted digital images are cranked out by the millions through flickr, model mayhem, onemodelplace & deviantart accounts until the public becomes conditioned to lower standards. Slowly, over time... poor image quality just becomes normal and acceptable. It's a similar concept to "defining deviancy down"...if crime is ignored by a complacent population for too long then it eventually becomes acceptable...and the level of crime and seriousness of it's nature will only continue to increase over time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 5, 2009 Posted January 5, 2009 Hi Gentleman Villain, Take a look here Leica fire sales coming?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
adan Posted January 5, 2009 Share #82 Posted January 5, 2009 So the 5DII is more than reasonable. The 5D had a list price of $3299 three years ago. The 5DII has a list of $2699. True, but the 5D classic was down to $2,200 a year ago. Even so - yes, I'd count the 5DII as reasonable - unless it suffers the same noise/color issues I saw in the Sony (a camera I really wanted to like since my R-1 had nice color rendition). As for extended warranties, I don't generally believe in them. Not sure how EXTENDED third-party warranties crept into the discussion. I was referring to original manufacturers' warranties (as in - the 2 years you get with a new M8.2 from Leica, compared to the 90 days you'd get from a dealer for a used M8, or basically zip you'd get in a private party deal.) Almost every camera I have owned since 1990 has needed repairs under original warranty for something or other. Certainly a percentage high enough that I would never buy a body used except for the old pre-electronic ones (Leica M, Nikon F, Nikon FM). Contax was the worst - EVERY camera I bought went in for some problem or other within the 3-year warranty. I'd like another thread for the "Digital is ruining photography" theme. Not a bad subject. but the wrong place... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted January 5, 2009 Share #83 Posted January 5, 2009 ... We generally didn't push any brands unless a customer had no preference. It was considered a basic sales principle to show the brand or model of a camera that the customer asks about. ... You run the risk of losing the sale if you try to switch brands on them, unless you can present a really good reason. ... Alan, your points are accurate, but you confuse "pushing a brand" with "switching sales." Any good retailer knows to sell the product the customer asks for, just as you said. You do it straight and honestly, you don't confuse him by proposing another model or another brand. But then if he looks at you and asks, "Is this a good camera?", you answer something like, "Of course it is. It's an excellent camera for the money. Of course, it's not a Leica, but then it's not priced like a Leica. It's a very good piece of equipment." If you're a Leica specialty house (or any camera store, for that matter), customer education is part of the business. The customer needs to know he can come back to you when he's ready to trade up. Same thing in the jewelry business. I once walked into a jewelry shop where one of the sales ladies remarked as I entered, "Oh, I like your Rolex." I smiled and we got into a brief conversation during which she remarked, "Rolex is an excellent mass-produced watch." Not an offensive remark, an obvious one, and one which said she could help me move up when I was ready. She had complimented me on my taste and at the same time reminded me that I could do better. If I had been hiring for a high-end store, that's the lady I'd have been seeking. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted January 5, 2009 Share #84 Posted January 5, 2009 But then if he looks at you and asks, "Is this a good camera?", you answer something like, "Of course it is. It's an excellent camera for the money. Of course, it's not a Leica, but then it's not priced like a Leica. It's a very good piece of equipment." The problem with this technique is the salesperson has to believe in it. (Or lie.) I wouldn't be surprised if that is part of the problem. When I worked in camera sales, we had a lot of well to do customers. So when anyone asked about a movie camera, I pushed them towards the high end Beaulieu. I sold a lot of them one summer thinking they were great cameras. (I worked during college breaks.) The next summer all of the other salesmen got on my case for selling so many Beaulieus because they had to deal with all of the angry customers who came back with broken ones needing repairs. As for steering anyone, I ALWAYS, directed them to a Nikon F and later the F2, honestly believing that was the best choice they could make in a 35mm camera at the time. Both for functionality and durability. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted January 5, 2009 Share #85 Posted January 5, 2009 Not sure how EXTENDED third-party warranties crept into the discussion. I was referring to original manufacturers' warranties (as in - the 2 years you get with a new M8.2 from Leica, compared to the 90 days you'd get from a dealer for a used M8, or basically zip you'd get in a private party deal.) It's the same principle. One way or another you are spending a lot more for a longer warranty. If repairs on an M8 would be reasonably priced, there wouldn't be much reason to spend thousands extra on a similar new model for a 2 year warranty. A friend of mine recently bought a clean M8 body from a dealer for $2600. (Best I recall.) He had sold his two M8s about 6 months ago. (Each for more than $2600) He had a specific project that he thought the camera would be good for and he already had a number of lenses. He had looked at the M8.2, but he couldn't justify the cost difference for the few changes it offered. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KM-25 Posted January 5, 2009 Share #86 Posted January 5, 2009 I'd like another thread for the "Digital is ruining photography" theme. Not a bad subject. but the wrong place... I would like to find a venue for that, maybe we can even touch upon losing the Rocky, a paper we both did freelance work for, it would seem. But to be back on topic, another tell-tale sign of the luxury goods sector taking a "royal" beating: Crystal, china maker Waterford Wedgwood collapses - Yahoo! News Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
delander † Posted January 5, 2009 Share #87 Posted January 5, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Yes I saw that and it made me think. Or as the man from the BBC wrote: "Almost everything that it manufactures is a nice-to-have rather than a must-have. And most of us are thinking twice about shelling out on nice-to-haves." Waterford-Wedgewood. Historic names, a couple of 1000 workers, remind you of any other similar company? Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mongrelnomad Posted January 5, 2009 Share #88 Posted January 5, 2009 Yes I saw that and it made me think. Or as the man from the BBC wrote: "Almost everything that it manufactures is a nice-to-have rather than a must-have. And most of us are thinking twice about shelling out on nice-to-haves." Waterford-Wedgewood. Historic names, a couple of 1000 workers, remind you of any other similar company? Jeff Not just that... it's another [mostly] privately funded company. I really hope Leica's finances are more secure. The S2 has given me renewed hope for the direction of the company. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted January 5, 2009 Share #89 Posted January 5, 2009 ...The S2 has given me renewed hope for the direction of the company. I'd like to have this hope but i fail to comprehend how significant money can be made with a crop camera like that. Is it able to use Zeiss and Mamiya lenses at least? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted January 5, 2009 Share #90 Posted January 5, 2009 ....maybe we can even touch upon losing the Rocky, a paper we both did freelance work for, it would seem. Actually, I'm a full-time employee of the Rocky as a designer - for as long as it lasts. They have also occasionally run my pictures over the years. (For those not in the the know, the Rocky (Rocky Mountain News) is Denver's largest and oldest (150 years, if we make it to April) newspaper, recently put up for sale with little prospect of a buyer as an element of a dinosaur industry (newspapers) during a collapsed economy (lost $15 million in 2008), and thus likely to close in 1-3 months. BTW the Rocky won Pulitzer prizes for photography in 1999, 2002 and 2005, which just goes to show that excellence is not always synonymous with success.) Back to the original question of a fire sale: the issue that crashed the financial firms has now become a universal business issue - no one knows exactly what anything is worth. Just look at currencies alone (Pound at par (1.05) with the Euro (for the moment), Dollar all over the place). I don't even know (within 20%) what my home is worth, although fortunately it is likely still more than what I paid or the mortgage balance! M8 discounted to $3,000, the same camera with modest changes at $6,000, Leica rebates (discounts) extended a month, while upgrade prices go up 30%. Leica can't seem to decide whether it is pricing for a deflationary or inflationary environment. Hard times strip away the fantasies and leave companies faced with the cold reality: you must a) produce something people want to buy at a price people are willing to pay in c) volumes large enough to cover the overhead and operating expenses - or fail. Private ownership or no, Dr. Kauffman and all the others who make up Leica have to face those hard facts and make some realistic decisions about pricing, about what costs that pricing can support, and about whether there is a sustainable market for what they make (and if not, what they CAN make that does have a sustainable market). Or else they'll follow the path of the Rocky and Waterford-Wedgewood. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted January 5, 2009 Share #91 Posted January 5, 2009 Adan, I couldn't have said it better myself. Leica, like the newspaper industry has been loath and slow to accept and adapt to new technologies. Had the newspapers embraced new technology early on they might be leading the way into the future instead of toward their graves. It seems to me that newspapers have fogotten how to investigate or tell a story. We now look to bloggers for the truth and investigative work that used to be the hallmark of fine reporting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
offshore Posted January 7, 2009 Share #92 Posted January 7, 2009 Actually, I'm a full-time employee of the Rocky as a designer - for as long as it lasts. They have also occasionally run my pictures over the years. (For those not in the the know, the Rocky (Rocky Mountain News) is Denver's largest and oldest (150 years, if we make it to April) newspaper, recently put up for sale with little prospect of a buyer as an element of a dinosaur industry (newspapers) during a collapsed economy (lost $15 million in 2008), and thus likely to close in 1-3 months. BTW the Rocky won Pulitzer prizes for photography in 1999, 2002 and 2005, which just goes to show that excellence is not always synonymous with success.) Back to the original question of a fire sale: the issue that crashed the financial firms has now become a universal business issue - no one knows exactly what anything is worth. Just look at currencies alone (Pound at par (1.05) with the Euro (for the moment), Dollar all over the place). I don't even know (within 20%) what my home is worth, although fortunately it is likely still more than what I paid or the mortgage balance! M8 discounted to $3,000, the same camera with modest changes at $6,000, Leica rebates (discounts) extended a month, while upgrade prices go up 30%. Leica can't seem to decide whether it is pricing for a deflationary or inflationary environment. Hard times strip away the fantasies and leave companies faced with the cold reality: you must a) produce something people want to buy at a price people are willing to pay in c) volumes large enough to cover the overhead and operating expenses - or fail. Private ownership or no, Dr. Kauffman and all the others who make up Leica have to face those hard facts and make some realistic decisions about pricing, about what costs that pricing can support, and about whether there is a sustainable market for what they make (and if not, what they CAN make that does have a sustainable market). Or else they'll follow the path of the Rocky and Waterford-Wedgewood. And I would like to suggest, if they haven't already, that they do some overhead cost cutting of their own such as doing away with eight weeks of paid vacation, cutting back on employee benefits and perhaps even (dare I say it) cutting back on salaries starting at the top. Reduce your overhead and reduce your cost of doing business you can start reducing prices of end product. Collaborate and build a solid excellent camera that is affordable for the mass market, but hey, I promised myself that I wouldn't try to tell Leica how to run their company this year so I'll go away now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted January 7, 2009 Share #93 Posted January 7, 2009 Viyella went today. Drip, drip, drip. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted January 8, 2009 Share #94 Posted January 8, 2009 Andy, The problem is of course even worse than the direct impact on the company's employees. Their ad agency, the photographers that prepare their catalogs and ads, the media that places the ads and the printers that print the catalogs and so on. When the photographers lose work they don't buy new expensive cameras and lenses so ultimately it effects the camera business too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted January 8, 2009 Share #95 Posted January 8, 2009 AndyB: Whew, for a moment there I thought you meant Nutella As for the rest, I guess we're living in interesting times (which, BTW, is NOT ancient Chinese, but may well be a curse!) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tollie Posted January 10, 2009 Share #96 Posted January 10, 2009 Today in the NYTimes is a fascinating op-ed on the Wedgwood Bankruptcy. Its about the innovative selling and marketing that the founder pioneered and how the modern incarnation fell away from these early principles. You can read it here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Baker Posted January 10, 2009 Share #97 Posted January 10, 2009 Andy, Spot on mate, free market economy, us Brits seem to think alike ! BTW with regard to the dealer who was laughed at I'm guessing that was "H***.sons of Sheffield", well some may have laughed at them but their "early advertising" of £650 M8 rebate meant I bought it with them and not another dealer, sounds like good business sense to me, " The early bird catches the worm ! " Simon:) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted January 11, 2009 Share #98 Posted January 11, 2009 If Leica were smart they would offer an extended factory warranty for a reasonable fee. Say $250 per year. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.