R10 RIP, but...

[mjh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

And maybe if the DMR continued this would all be a moot point.

 

Leica doesn't have the resources to keep coming up with new products. Their products need to have a long service life. The DMR sure seemed to be like a flash in the pan. Was it the sensor they could no longer get?

The partnership with Imacon was disintegrating, which must have been a big factor. It would have been difficult to get Imacon to make another batch, and then it was doubtful whether those units would ever be sold; the market was mostly saturated after all. The DMR was a great concept at its time, but there was nowhere to go from there. Any DMR II would still have a crop sensor due to the mechanical constraints imposed by the body, and it couldn’t be much lighter or smaller. A faster processor and a bigger LCD maybe, but not enough to make it worthwhile to pursue this path any further. The logical next step would have been a thoroughly modernized digital R, but that was still not within Leica’s reach. At that point, if not earlier, they must have realized they would have to get up to speed in areas such as image processing and autofocus eventually, and the new S system was chosen as the vehicle – which despite my earlier misgivings does make sense, as the medium-format market is actually the easier target. For example, a DSLR with a reliable single-point cross-type AF sensor could be competitive in the medium-format market, whereas in the FF DSLR market, you would be expected to offer 30+ focus points, subject tracking, and what not.

[rosuna]

So Leica's expecting a significant margin on some 10,000 S2 if i understand well. As an Economist, how much would you evaluate such a margin if any? Just curious.

 

It must be quite large. And you cannot have those margins in compact cameras...

 

The total cost isn't the total cost of the camera... consider the cost of distribution and technical assistance (repairing, replacing units...). That's is quite expensive.

 

A camera for the professional market is far more expensive than the SAME camera aimed at the amateur market. The "pro" camera cannot give you a "two months" minimum term for a repairing or adjusting service. That is costly.

 

The question is not "Can you buy a "professional" camera?". The right question is "Can you market a "pro" camera?". Any manufacturer can design a "pro" body, because they did in the past, including Pentax or Olympus. But they cannot come into a price war, and they cannot invest in a worldwide assistance services system for professionals. I don't know how Leica will do it. They signed an agreement with Phase One for distribution... but the technical service isn't ready. In Europe we send the equipment to Solms, but in USA or Australia... To New Jersey? They cannot do many repairs... Solms is the only complete repair service for Leica products. And that must change... Logistics must be fast too...

 

People think "professional" equipment means design and manufacture of "pro" bodies and lenses... but it is not. It is far more complex than that: it is distribution at a world scale, services, logistics, insurance services, technical service in different factories placed in at least three continents (Europa, Asia, America)...

 

It is not a job for engineers... isn't?

.

[mjh]

The question is not "Can you buy a "professional" camera?". The right question is "Can you market a "pro" camera?". Any manufacturer can design a "pro" body, because they did in the past, including Pentax or Olympus. But they cannot come into a price war, and they cannot invest in a worldwide assistance services system for professionals.

Yep, that’s the biggest obstacle to entering the FF DSLR pro market. It’s probably the reason why Sony doesn’t market their FF model as a professional DSLR. But then, Leica doesn’t have to be present at, say, international sports events, as few S2 owners would go there. Canon and Nikon have to. Entering the medium-format rather than the 35 mm FF market is easier in many respects, including this one.

[rosuna]

Yep, that’s the biggest obstacle to entering the FF DSLR pro market. It’s probably the reason why Sony doesn’t market their FF model as a professional DSLR. But then, Leica doesn’t have to be present at, say, international sports events, as few S2 owners would go there. Canon and Nikon have to. Entering the medium-format rather than the 35 mm FF market is easier in many respects, including this one.

 

That is right.

 

I also think that is the reason of a MF system instead of a 24x36 pro system.

 

.

[Riley]

Without getting into whether EVFs are "good" or not, they are certainly easier and cheaper to build than full SLR mechanisms - much more in line with a company the size of Leica. I was actually rather surprised that Leica tried building their own again (R8/9) after the experience of the SL2, where Leica lost money on every camera. All those cranks and levers and sub-mirrors and metering cells are costly in small volumes. You need the volume of a Canon or Nikon or Minolta to spread them out.

 

Maybe old weird Frank's idea of a "new Visoflex" is not that far off the mark - except that it would just be an EVF "prism" that slides into an M9 (with Live View) hotshoe, plus an R-M adapter (incorporating electrical-motor aperture stopdown). No need to worry about whether there is room for a mirror behind the R lenses - no mirror needed.

 

Or - to avoid strokes among M purists - it could be a free-standing body that IN EFFECT is a Live View M9, sans RF, with an EVF hump on top. At any rate, more or less as easy (or easier - no RF to calibrate) to assemble as an M. Commonality of parts would cut costs for both M and "whatever-the-EVF-camera-is-called".

 

Just blue-skying ideas here.

 

I will say the Panny G1/GH1 EVF is a revelation - huge and clear and bright in comparison to the screens of "cropped" traditional SLRs as well as previous EVFs. Not perfect, but it redefines the genre.

 

i think this piece shows flickers of extraordinary insight

a modular FF body, particularly one without the complications of AF, could support both M and R lenses, even if that meant cropping the sensor incamera for M lenses, much as Nikon do on FF with Dx lenses.

 

For a viewfinder from there, just 2 options, b/se a moving mirror wont fit behind M mounts

Either an EVF, for which we havent seen the best of EVF innovations, which could be as simple as a large LCD face up onto a glass matt screen, with a reducer prism assembly on top.

 

The only other way is a beam splitter like E10.

[lct]

...The only other way is a beam splitter like E10.

Meaning 50% of the light for the viewfinder right?

[Riley]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

thats more like the transmission from a half silvered mirror

a beamsplitter, even a lousy one, should exceed 90%

[AlanG]

And they would have been as large as Canon. Maybe they should move their whole company to Tokyo and start producing printers as well:rolleyes:

 

The microscope division did ok in Germany and grew. Porsche stayed in Germany and grew. Leica simply either never saw and/or never did what was necessary to be a top dog in the industry. And if you are not one of the top dogs, it will be very hard to do the R&D and have sales in high enough volume to be competitive with a top of the line DSLR system. (Do you think the Nikon or Canon pro models would be possible without the sales numbers and income generated by the lower end models and lenses?)

 

The bottom line is that there was a series of long term decisions (or mistakes) that led to the lack of viability of the R system and its eventual demise. There is no quick fix at this point and Leica has to look for ways to be profitable around the margins. Teaming up with Panasonic or someone else to make some kind of forward looking system may be one of the few possibilities they have at this point.

[jaapv]

Alan, we hardly disagree on that. The R system, despite the optimism they had when they tried to get away from rangefinders altogether (another brilliant one) has been a downhill struggle all the way. I really think, much as I would liked to have a real R10, that Friday's decision was the best one made in the whole Leica R saga.

Btw the bestselling Leica microscopes did not stay in Germany - they are made by Leica, China.

[AlanG]

Btw the bestselling Leica microscopes did not stay in Germany - they are made by Leica, China.

 

I understand how Leica microscopes stayed ahead. A lot of mergers. Then the acquisition by Danaher Corp. of the US and the consolidation of several companies under the Leica banner to the point that Leica is now one of the preeminent microscope suppliers in all price ranges and categories. It is my understanding that Danaher is a very hard core tightly managed bottom line company - for better or for worse. (Danaher has a lot of other divisions too, and they have deep pockets.) Perhaps this same strategy could have been applied to the camera division many years ago.

 

Then maybe Leica would now have a large range of products including low end Chinese made cameras and high end MF digital pro cameras along with a variety of DSLRs and AF lenses. Along with who knows what else? - maybe printers. At one time Leica made more than cameras and sport optics - enlargers, copy stands, projectors, etc.

 

And of course the microscopes and cameras were from the same company. At some point they perhaps just gave up on the camera end. I'm not knowledgeable of the development and spin off of Leica Geosystems, but I know that Danaher tried to acquire it a few years ago.

 

I think these paragraphs from the Leica.com site is a sad testimony of how the camera division is viewed:

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

The use of the Leica brand is the only remaining connection between the three companies, on account of the long history and heritage of these now independent companies. Leica Microsystems is the owner of the Leica trade name and trademark and has granted licenses for their use by the other companies.

 

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.

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

 

In any case it is up to the current management to make new products to support the camera company in the future. I think the M8 and its new lenses were a good start as there was an existing user base. (The camera needs more development at this point to carry it into the future.) The S2 camera system represents looking at the market, assessing Leica's strengths and weaknesses, and taking a good shot. I think a FF EVF camera system could be the foundation for Leica's future.

 

All of this represents challenges but also demonstrates a new vision to look forward and not backwards. If they have the resources, financing, and management skill to pull all of this off in today's market with today's competition is anyone's guess.

[sdai]

So, to sum up the history of "Leica Camera", 2 words should be enough:

 

if and but.

[zapp]

Everybody knows by now. There will be no R10, no DSLR. Need we despair? No, there is something coming that is as good, maybe even better. A full-format EVF camera, fully compatible with R lenses, and probably with a full range of new AF lenses.

How do I know? Simple. Stephan Daniel told me (with exception of the lens bit, but that seems to be inevitable) with 100% conviction in a private converation. And no, I am not under NDA:)

 

Will Leica build the camera?

EVF is the SLR killer, no need for a mirror when you have live view. Why burry the R-system to come back EVF when you already have a system that has no mirror. It's called the M system. Add live view and be happy. Leica has not yet learned how to make a full frame M sensor however. Do it, add live view and you can put almost ANY glass infront of this camera. Or have any other manufacterer do it first and put your R glass on it. The R system is dead. Lenses may fit future systems, but a future system will not be build around the SLR ® concept. NIce move to make the SLR sensor in the new line of cameras bigger and keep the M as the 24x36 system.

A very nice move, but do you really think Leica will do it first?

[jaapv]

Everybody would be very surprised if Leica attempted to build it themselves.

[zapp]

 

- Projected S2 sales in 2009-2010 ? Hereby "10.000 units" has appeared as a Leica target (I do not know if it's a real Company figure) : to me it seems a large number... but does anyone have an idea of the MF Digital market (units/year) in recent years ?

I think they are sitting on 10.000 sensor they need to sell.

No company has sold 10.000 medium format cameras or digital backs in 2 years lately. The 35mm guys have to grow into the S2 concept to make it work.

[jaapv]

The 10.000 number is not clear. My guess is Mr. Daniel meant the total production run.

[Riley]

sensors are key cost components, and usually quite a customised buy

a 10,000 unit run provides a more reasonable buy price,

a 1,000 unit run might be 10-20x the price, thats how its structured

[J Mitchum]

Actually, if it would be a Digilux-2 like camera, that would not be a bad thing. It is -allowingfor technology changes- one of the best digital cameras ever built. Btw, Stefan finally admitted tonight that the Digilux 2 is the only Panaleica that is fully developed by Leica - not Panasonic.

 

I think it's pretty clear that of all the Panaleicas the Digilux 2 has had the most input from Leica. I hope they realize what a wonderful camera it was (still is) and that they need a true followup to it. The Digilux 3 was something entirely different.

[steich]

YES!

 

A "Digilux 2 reloaded" !

 

Stefan

[manolo]

Maybe old weird Frank's idea of a "new Visoflex" is not that far off the mark - except that it would just be an EVF "prism" that slides into an M9 (with Live View) hotshoe, plus an R-M adapter (incorporating electrical-motor aperture stopdown). No need to worry about whether there is room for a mirror behind the R lenses - no mirror needed.

 

 

this would work for me as I have both M & R lenses; I would have two cameras and coud use two M's or an M & an "R".

 

If so they should anounce it so that we can plan; in the meantime I still have the DMR & the M8

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Jamie Roberts]

{snipped}

I will say the Panny G1/GH1 EVF is a revelation - huge and clear and bright in comparison to the screens of "cropped" traditional SLRs as well as previous EVFs. Not perfect, but it redefines the genre.

 

Yeah, it's definitely much better than crummy SLRs and toy EVFs I've seen to date. That being said, it's pretty craptastic compared with an R9. Or a D3. Or even a 5d, which is hardly world-beating in terms of views...

 

In other words, for the first time in a long time, my standards are apparently higher than Leica's, since I don't think the Panny EVF is nearly good enough.

 

So I have to admit my feeling is with Conrad's. Unless Leica is proposing something revolutionary in quality with an EVF, I don't know why they can't just make a mini-S2 that's compatible with R glass.

 

Or just come up with a suitable replacement with a great optical mechanism. Leica is good at that stuff; I don't know why they'd mess it up.

 

But by the time they do this anyway, I'll probably have done something else with my R glass anyway. The R system--as a system--really is dead, and Leica killed it.