The Digital Solution for R mount lenses

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Could very well be that Leica ha to decide where to put their (research) money. And there's a huge market for the M compared to the R which is more exotic and - I think - with less streamlines customers. I think it's coincidence which photographers use R, and what they use if for. The M market is much more predictable. But mainly it's the one that would pay back the most on the research money.

 

 

I'm no engineer, but couldn't the already funded S2 research dollars be used to create a downsized R? I thought that was the original intent.

 

FWIW, the Leica rep at my local dealer, who was displaying the M9 today, commented that he could sell "many, many R10s," and that he thought it was a big mistake for Leica to not eventually go that route.

 

I hope sales from new products are successful and that Leica reconsider...they've surely shown that they're not averse to changing direction.

 

I don't have the Stefan Daniel quote handy, but if he said Leica wouldn't produce the R10, maybe that leaves the door open for an R11.

 

Jeff

[storybrown]

+1

[adan]

"....couldn't the already funded S2 research dollars be used to create a downsized R?"

 

Well, not if they were spent creating the S2. You can't spend the same money twice (NO POLITICS!!). But yes, some of the already-paid-for research could have trickled down to a "cropped" S2.

 

I think something escapes some people. An S2 is not that much more complicated than a Nikon or Canon $7,000 DSLR (or $500 DSLR). Mirror, AF system, ground glass, processors. Yes, Leica sweats the details more, and the oddball-size sensor costs more, but in reality, if Leica builds an SLR, with their hand-made approach, it costs them $15,000. The R cameras were huge loss leaders, built and sold at far below actual cost, and subsidized by lens sales. Whereas big automated Nikon and Canon can crank out snap-together SLRs of the same general complexity for under $500 each.

 

As more and more people demanded more technology, the loss per camera would have expanded to the point that lens sales could no longer support it. And no one would pay $20,000 to cover the real cost of a hand-made Leica "35mm" camera (plus profit), so Leica had to find a market where there was some justification for the cost. - namely "middle format"

 

A "cropped S2" would still cost well over $12,000 each to hand-build, and if aimed at your legacy lenses (with a shorter mount), would not be supported in any way by new lens sales. What are you willing to pay for an unsubsidized, cropped S2 Leica-built SLR. $15,000 each?

 

I expect Leica may build (more realistically, have built for them) a camera that accepts R lenses for digital photography, at a cost that can support itself without being outrageous and without lens subsidies. Eventually. In Leica's way, it will probably be somewhat oddball and innovative, and therefore not a traditional mirror-and-pentaprism-and-levers SLR, but also not necessarily an EVIL. It will be something they can buy, market, and make a small profit on in the $2500-$4000 range. It will not be the basis for a new system because Leica - is - out - of - the "35mm"-sized SLR business, for good. That ratrace is over.

[Jeff S]

Thanks, Andy.

 

Of course I'm not suggesting spending money twice...only the application of learnings passed down from the S2 development experience.

 

I was not familiar with the cost figures and losses you quoted...not a good business model. I trust you have good information. Out of curiosity, what's your estimate on comparable build costs for the M9 and S2?

 

To answer your question on what I'd be willing to pay for an R10, if it were a hand built DSLR, that's obviously difficult to answer without known specs and performance...but my gut says $10k US would be near there. Despite the Canikon-type competition, I think people would be willing to pay premium dollars to be able to use a Leica R/ Leica glass combo. And, top end Canikons aren't cheap..up to $8k or so, I think. What others would be willing to pay, I have no idea.

 

I also have no idea where some additional cost reductions could be realized to build an R10. Didn't the M9 accomplish exactly this by taking out the top display and sapphire glass of the M8.2? Most people on the forum seem surprised by the reasonable, albeit still high, price. I also don't see people over in the M9 forum screaming about the omitted features...and I also wouldn't be surprised to see Leica offer upgrades on various features at some point with some profit margin built in, and of course a higher priced M9.2, etc.

 

Anyway, all this speculation means squat...but it's fun nonetheless.

 

Jeff

[adan]

Well, the thing with the M cameras is that they are far less complex than modern SLRs - no sub-mirrors for metering or AF (with hinges that have to move together), just a little paint on the shutter; no levers and drive mechanisms for aperture operation; no AF sensors and drive mechanisms. A whole lot less fiddly, wage-consuming assembly (and even less in the digitals than in the film-winders - no moving parts below the RF except the shutter and cocking motor) - and 99% of the digital RF market to draw on.

 

I'll confess my cost figures for Leica SLRs are reverse-engineered from the S2 price. So someone can quibble with the absolute amounts. But the relative amounts remain the same, I submit. In general function and operation, an S2 is just a big Nikon D40 (just as a Maybach is just a big Mercedes "A"). The 40x difference in price is partly due to diligence and better materials, but mostly due to hand-assembly and low volume. If you took the S2 and reduced the sensor size, it would take just as many man-hours to put together, and the mirrors and prisms and such would cost only slightly less.

 

Either Leica is making a massive profit on every S2 (and good for them if true) or they were eating a lot of labor expenses to build R9s, which likely took nearly as many resources as an S2 (absent R&D) to "make" but only produced 1/6th the income.

 

As an expectant M9 owner, I really do hope Leica can come up with something of high quality that will sit behind R lenses and make M9-quality (or better) digital images. But a classic mirror/prism DSLR is going to cost far closer to an S2 than to the last of the R9s. A "monster GH-1" with EVIL and a 24 x 36 sensor, farmed out to Panasonic for a run of, say, 12,000, would be a cost-effective and obvious approach (but yes, some would still hate it). But Leica doesn't always do the obvious, and I'll be very interested to see what they do come up with.

[jgmb]

A "monster GH-1" with EVIL and a 24 x 36 sensor, farmed out to Panasonic for a run of, say, 12,000, would be a cost-effective and obvious approach (but yes, some would still hate it). But Leica doesn't always do the obvious, and I'll be very interested to see what they do come up with.

 

I think you hit the nail on the head here Andy. This seems to be the most likely "solution" for our R lenses and very close to what was implied by Stefan Daniel. In your opinion, how difficult would it be for Leica to make a version of the M9 body that has an R mount? Use a different 24 x 36 Kodak sensor (without the need for custom microlenses), and replace the rangefinder optics with a state-of-the-art high-resolution EVF (million dot OLED?). Include focus confirmation, maybe add IS to the body and keep all the controls minimalist like in the X1. Couldn't such a body be done for the same (or maybe even less) cost of the M9?

 

Or for that matter, what if they put a full-size sensor in the Digilux-3 body, give it the R mount, a high-res EVF... and call it the Digilux-R?

[mgcd]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The S2 is a direct evolution from the R8/9. The family lineage is striking. The S is, in fact, the new R in Leica's strategy. However, Andy, your costs are overstated. I, and many others, would have payed $8,000 or even (grudgingly) close to $10,000 for the R10. It would have been worthwhile. Speaking of subsidies, with 10 R lenses and 6 R bodies and a DMR later I've done my bit for King and country. Clearly, I'm not the only one. We were promised an R10, no ifs or buts about it, my professional relationship with Leica started in 1981 with George Kovacs. Through the years I supported them with equipment purchase and brand promotion. I still do. They delivered the DMR with our input for which I am eternally grateful. I don't feel cheated by Leica, it's been a great partnership and they gave me what I needed in the past. I am only sorry that the brand offerings, at this time, don't appear to support my current needs. That said I think their current strategy is brilliant, it's just sad that R owners have been left behind. I would prefer that they leave things as they are than for some EVIL rubbish solution to be produced though.

[veraikon]

Die eigenen Spezialisten tüfteln einstweilen über ganz neuen, kleineren Gehäusen, an die man sowohl Optiken aus der eingestellten R-Reihe als auch vom M-System ansetzen kann. Aber erst einmal müssen die Neuheiten Einnahmen bringen - laut Händlern sind die Vorbestellungen vielversprechend, die Produktion läuft auf Hochtouren

Leica hofft auf Erfolg in der Nische - Nachrichten welt_print - Wirtschaft - WELT ONLINE

[adan]

Translation - edited to make sense of autotranslation gobbledegook:

 

Their own specialists play around meanwhile with new, smaller bodies to which one can attach optics from the R line as well as from the M system. But first of all the new products (M9, S2) must bring income - according to traders the advance orders are promising, the production runs at full speed.

[Angora]

Translation - edited to make sense of autotranslation gobbledegook:

 

Their own specialists play around meanwhile with new, smaller bodies to which one can attach optics from the R line as well as from the M system. But first of all the new products (M9, S2) must bring income - according to traders the advance orders are promising, the production runs at full speed.

 

Thanks for your translation, Andy.

There's a light of hope, but... given that it'd also be possible to attach M lenses on these "smaller bodies", I'm afraid we're speaking about X1 derivatives here. You know, the ones with awful EVILs.

[krabat]

I'm no engineer, but couldn't the already funded S2 research dollars be used to create a downsized R? I thought that was the original intent.

.....

Yes, that is exactly what we were told in September 2008 during the meeting of the forum members with Dr. Kaufmann and the other Leica people on the Photokina. Mrs. Harberts told me, while I was playing with the S2 prototype in my hands, that she and her colleagues were already working hard to let the R10 come true. I can imagine that the decision to abandon the R10 was very hard for her.

[adan]

I think Leica, or individuals at Leica, were speaking in good faith when they made certain predictions about the future (Lee's perpetual M8 upgrades, the R10). But I don't think that those predictions commit Leica to financial ruin if they prove economically unfeasible when the "future" finally arrives.

 

Yes, Maike Harberts and Stephan Daniel are no doubt always playing around (if only in their minds) with alternatives for both a cheaper M body, and the "R solution".

 

This forum could probably help - if it gets over its disappointed snit and starts making constructive and realistic suggestions (but get out a ruler and measure your R equipment before making suggestion that are off-the-wall). Suggestions in the M8 forum and from other sources all turned up in the M9.

[lct]

...A "monster GH-1" with EVIL and a 24 x 36 sensor, farmed out to Panasonic for a run of, say, 12,000, would be a cost-effective and obvious approach...

Don't know what you mean by this 12,000 figure, Andy, but an APS or FF EVIL looks like the only 'cheap' solution available apparently.

[sdai]

It's not worth the effort to build ANY SOLUTION for the R lenses, LCT. If such a thing would have a market, Leica has built the R10 already.

 

Trust me ...

 

It was ONLY AFTER I've handled with a working S2 then I realized that Leica has made a smart decision to kill the R10. First, it will bite into the sales of S2, second, a scaled down baby S2 won't be able to compete with the 1D series not the D series.

 

Enjoy what you already have and look further ... I promise this will be my last post on this topic. Best to all.

[lct]

I don't think the R10 or S2 will play the least role in Panasonic's decision to enter the APS/FF market or not. If they choose that move, they could well launch an EVIL on steroids and the latter could then become the famous Leica 'solution'.

[adan]

lct: 12,000 = 12,000 cameras: an educated guess at how large an initial production run Leica might order of a "big" GH-1-type camera from Panasonic for orphaned R users. If that's not enough, they can always order more...

[rsolomon]

It's not worth the effort to build ANY SOLUTION for the R lenses, LCT. If such a thing would have a market, Leica has built the R10 already......

 

I think you're right ......but i wish you weren't

[wildlightphoto]

It's not worth the effort to build ANY SOLUTION for the R lenses, LCT. If such a thing would have a market, Leica has built the R10 already.

 

I agree, if such a camera is Leica-R only. If it were possible to use a variety of lens mounts on the camera I could see a profitable market.

[manolo]

I agree, if such a camera is Leica-R only. If it were possible to use a variety of lens mounts on the camera I could see a profitable market.

 

Like Leica M?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[cwild]

I've had the same fantasy, as I expect others have too.

 

I'm beginning to think the DMR was a mistake because it set our expectations too high.

 

As a R9 owner with a bunch of nice Leica glass I was delighted when the DMR came out. I was just about to buy it when Leica discontinued it.

 

Since then I dilligently waited with baited breath for the R10. after the 9/9 press release I've given up all hope and bought a Canon EOS5D with an focus confirmation R adapter. I also bought some L glass.

 

I'm enjoying using the Canon so much I'm seriously considering selling my Leica lenses for more L glass.

 

I feel betrayed by Leica.