80mm Summilux R

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As far as i seem to recall, Leica has never been competitive with its R bodies. The point was not to make better gadgets than nicanopus. Why should a R cam have more gadgets than a M? The point was to build good solid cameras fitting R lenses that's all. Why do many Canonists still use Leica lenses in manual mode? For the glass. Why do many R users still use their 'Crons or Telyts on Canon or Nikon bodies in manual mode again? For the glass. There were customers for the Leica glass. Leica has lost them for the sake or reaching new clients the number of which will be smaller than legacy R users anyway.

[rosuna]

As far as i seem to recall, Leica has never been competitive with its R bodies. The point was not to make better gadgets than nicanopus. Why should a R cam have more gadgets than a M? The point was to build good solid cameras fitting R lenses that's all. Why do many Canonists still use Leica lenses in manual mode? For the glass. Why do many R users still use their 'Crons or Telyts on Canon or Nikon bodies in manual mode again? For the glass. There were customers for the Leica glass. Leica has lost them for the sake or reaching new clients the number of which will be smaller than legacy R users anyway.

 

That doesn't work anymore, in the digital age. Now "basic" features are multipoint AF, fast frame rates, low noise, large image sizes, etc. In the film age the film was a strong shared element for all manufacturers. Now Canon, Nikon and Sony manufacture their own "film" (electronics, processors, software). They are also free for experimentation and for new formats, shapes and features (Panasonic and Samsung are taking advantage of this). That is the market now.

 

Leica can be competitive only if they offer something perceived as "better" for enough people to make a profit, even if more expensive (maybe with lenses, not cameras); or if the can offer the same for a lower price.

 

It is very difficult to be price-competitive against Canon/Nikon/Sony (Sony tries), and impossible to be a technology leader in this playground. Leica R lenses are from very good to outstanding, but very expensive. Canon lenses are not worse. Sony have Zeiss on board. Nikon's are great as well. It is very difficult to be perceived as "better" than those brands...

 

The M camera is different because it is a different tool, with no direct competition. But even considering that, and the amazing M lenses, the M8 is clearly "outdated" in terms of image quality, and the gap is growing, and getting worse due to prices differences and time. The consequence? You cannot attrack new customers to the M system. It is unique, and that allows a IQ/price "fee", but you cannot sell enough M8 cameras for supporting a complete system, or a company. The R system didn't have at least that protection.

Edited August 22, 2009 by rosuna

[lct]

Ruben, would you advise Rolex to change their production because they cannot compete vs Seiko? Who cares if Seiko potential customers cannot afford or don't like Rolex watches? It is not the same market here and there IMHO.

[rosuna]

It is not the same market here and there IMHO.

 

It is not. The problem is how to sell enough cameras for make a profit, after an full investment recovery. In the reflex market it is impossible for Leica.

 

Rolex and Seiko can manufacture watches with the same precision, the same fuctionality, but Rolex sells prestige. Leica cannot offer the same fuctionality. That is the point.

[lct]

...Rolex and Seiko can manufacture watches with the same precision, the same fuctionality, but Rolex sells prestige. Leica cannot offer the same fuctionality. That is the point.

Rolex does not offer the same precision nor the same functionality, Ruben. My Seiko is far more precise than my Rolex and it has a fantastic gadget: it is an automatic electric watch which does not need any battery and works like a quartz watch otherwise. But it is not a Rolex. As you said it yourself, Rolex (as well as Leica) sells prestige, a certain idea of perfection. Not the same market again.

[lct]

Oops looks like i'm hijacking Wilfredo here. Sorry Padre. I give up anyway. The R10 debacle is history yet. Both of us would have been happy to buy one though. Our response has been to purchase a Canon. Two clients gone. Just facts.

[Guest Posto 6]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I cannot agree.

Leica shouldn't support two classical reflex systems.

Surely you mean one of each- rangefinder and reflex system

 

Anyway, I believe that overall the R glass is significantly superior to M-glass, and Leica's strong point is in lens manufacture, not bodies

[rosuna]

Leica stopped the R10 project before any debacle happened.

 

A M9 camera with, say, 18MP may be a sales success at 7,000 dollars or more (I have my doubts), but it wouldn't have been the case of a R10 camera, sure.

[rosuna]

Surely you mean one of each- rangefinder and reflex system

 

Anyway, I believe that overall the R glass is significantly superior to M-glass, and Leica's strong point is in lens manufacture, not bodies

 

No, I mean two reflex systems, S and R.

 

And I don't think the R glass is superior. M system has not tele lenses, zooms, etc, but comparing similar lenses (focal, speed) I think the M system has more innovative designs, or was updated first. Almost all M lenses are ASPH designs now. Many R lenses were older designs.

[rick_dykstra]

Leica's production costs prevents any camera in that class for less than 5,000 dollars, perhaps more. How many people would have bought it?

 

Lots. I just paid around $4500 for a five year old Leica DMR. 10MP, tiny screen, no live view, no TTL, 1.37 crop, etc, etc. But completely compatible with the Leica R lenses I choose to use, fantastic imaging quality, no AA filter, whilst retaining the superb Human-Machine-Interface represented by the R8/9.

 

Lots of people would have bought an R10.

 

Leica is hoping many of those will now buy an S2 system. Having now used a DMR, I'm tempted. If an R10 was known to be coming, many wouldn't buy an S2. So the R10 is officially (temporarily?) cancelled - absorbed in the womb in the interests of it's bigger sibling.

[rick_dykstra]

Canon lenses are not worse. Nikon's are great as well. It is very difficult to be perceived as "better" than those brands... .

 

Hello rosuna (Do you have a name? )

 

I agree with some of your points, but not these ones. Sorry. IME, many Canon lenses are bloody awful. Some are really good. Bad luck for the unsuspecting photog I guess. I was one of them once and that put me off Canon. Not all Leica lenses are equally fantastic but I haven't come across a bad one.

 

Nikon also has some dodgy lenses. Bad on them - they have a rep worth maintaining.

 

Leica have achieved what you correctly describe as being difficult - being perceived as better. I've never met a photog who's said, "Why don't you just use C or N?" Their sentiment has always been along the lines of "I see you've decided to forego some convenience and the latest gadgetry in the interest of better imaging. Good for you."

[rosuna]

The R system had not-so-good lenses (zooms, for instance). Canon has a wide and diverse offer, from "bread and butter" zooms to top class primes.

 

Lots of people would have bought s R10 camera. Maybe. It depends on the specifications and price. The S2 is being perceived as a expensive camera with conservative specifications, and it is a MF camera after all! The R10 would have been very expensive and the especifications would have been even more conservative, considering the 35mm market. That negative initial perception of the S2 would have been much worse in the case of the R10. The S2 and the current situation of the 35mm market give you an idea of the problem.

 

Rubén Osuna

[Guest Posto 6]

I still maintain that it was stupid to kill off the existing R-range in order to replace it with something as spurious and unconvincing as the S2-line, which offers a far narrower and less desireable range of lenses, as well as requiring a huge (and risky, as well as unproven and untested) initial investment compared to an R10.

 

The whole exercise would appear as well thought-out and rigorous as a first-year undergraduate's business plan dissertation.

 

I believe the market will award the S2 range a big F- not a healthy development for loyal Leica customers.

[wilfredo]

The R system had not-so-good lenses (zooms, for instance). Canon has a wide and diverse offer, from "bread and butter" zooms to top class primes.

 

Lots of people would have bought s R10 camera. Maybe. It depends on the specifications and price. The S2 is being perceived as a expensive camera with conservative specifications, and it is a MF camera after all! The R10 would have been very expensive and the especifications would have been even more conservative, considering the 35mm market. That negative initial perception of the S2 would have been much worse in the case of the R10. The S2 and the current situation of the 35mm market give you an idea of the problem.

 

Rubén Osuna

 

Perhaps it is time for Leica to practice a bit of humility and do something about its crazy pricing??? Everything Leica is expensive just because... it's Leica. Time to tame the beast IMHO.

 

On another note, I was ready to take the plunge on a used 80mm R Summilux but then the second runner-up moved into first place after I saw these people pictures http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/805090. I already own a Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 Planar for use on Canon and I love it (it satisfies my personal taste). The cost of the new 85mm Planar with auto-focus confirm and electronic aperture control was the same as a used 80mm Summilux, so I went in the direction of the Planar. As I have already mentioned, I was hoping to ditch my Canon DSLR's for an R10 system but with the recent decision not to continue the R line, Leica pushed this customer further away. I still have my M cameras (for now).

Edited August 24, 2009 by wilfredo

[NB23]

Perhaps it is time for Leica to practice a bit of humility and do something about its crazy pricing??? Everything Leica is expensive just because... it's Leica. Time to tame the beast IMHO.

 

On another note, I was ready to take the plunge on a used 80mm R Summilux but then the second runner-up moved into first place after I saw these people pictures Zeiss vs Canon 50mm 1.4? - FM Forums. I already own a Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 Planar for use on Canon and I love it (it satisfies my personal taste). The cost of the new 85mm Planar with auto-focus confirm and electronic aperture control was the same as a used 80mm Summilux, so I went in the direction of the Planar. As I have already mentioned, I was hoping to ditch my Canon DSLR's for an R10 system but with the recent decision not to continue the R line, Leica pushed this customer further away. I still have my M cameras (for now).

 

How does it feel to rant publically like this?

 

How come you still haven't switched to Bessas and voigtlander lenses after all these years? Quite easy and no need for approval: Just do it.

[wilfredo]

NB23,

 

If I decide I really need a new fast lens for my M8, I will go for the Voiglander f/1.1. Voigtlander 50/1.1 Nokton I have no idea what ever gave you the impression I was seeking approval for my decisions?

 

I'll be signing off this thread now. I'll catch you gentlemen on another occasion on a future enlightening Leica Camera Forum discussion.

 

Hasta Luego...

[Jamie Roberts]

{snipped}

 

On another note, I was ready to take the plunge on a used 80mm R Summilux but then the second runner-up moved into first place after I saw these people pictures Zeiss vs Canon 50mm 1.4? - FM Forums. I already own a Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 Planar for use on Canon and I love it (it satisfies my personal taste). The cost of the new 85mm Planar with auto-focus confirm and electronic aperture control was the same as a used 80mm Summilux, so I went in the direction of the Planar. {snipped}

 

Hey Wilfredo--you'll love the Zeiss if you love those shots, so enjoy it! Nothing I see in the thread really looks like very much like the 80 R Lux, but it's hard to tell on the Web.

 

If you're able, I'd still consider getting an R Lux just for people shots, while you still can. They won't be around forever

 

I have to say too, that there are a lot of perfectly serviceable 85mm lenses from many vendors (the Nikkor 1.4 is very nice, one of the best primes they make and both Canons --the L and the non L--are very nice as well). But none of them quite look like the Lux from 1.4 to 2.0 though.

[jc_braconi]

Maybe one should try the Summilux 80 on the DMR and the Summilux 75 on the M8... The edge ray aberrations are of course the spice of the image...

 

It is what I have... and the difference comes with the quality of different sensors.

never tried yet on films.

[rosuna]

Perhaps it is time for Leica to practice a bit of humility and do something about its crazy pricing??? Everything Leica is expensive just because... it's Leica. Time to tame the beast IMHO.

 

It is a serious problem.

 

For 10.000 euros the S2 would have been a huge success.

 

The RED camera did this for digital cinema equipment, and it is a high quality camera built by a company with no previous experience ! This combination of price and features explain the revolution of this product. The same goes for Apple and the iPhone. They designed it with no previous experience in this kind of devices, by combining components.

 

The S2 is a very innovative and interesting camera, but Leica placed it as a competitor of Hasselblad H cameras... Does it make any sense?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[batmobile]

How does it feel to rant publically like this?

 

How come you still haven't switched to Bessas and voigtlander lenses after all these years? Quite easy and no need for approval: Just do it.

 

If this was a rant, it was a very calm and reasonable one! The 85 planar 1.4 looks very interesting as an option for Canon bodies. My initial impressions, which could be very wrong, is that a few stops down it becomes sharper and higher in contrast than the Leica 80 lux and is perhaps never quite as 'airy'.

 

I have a Canon 85 1.8 on the way and I hope I like it. Sounds like one of the better non-L lenses. I was blown away by the 135 f2.