"Leica is saved!"

I'm not very consoled by the idea that Leica must save itself by producing goods that I cannot identify as being Leicas! Best regards, Bill

Leica Ms are excellent, practical, robust cameras made to a craftlike quality level that is quickly becomming rare. The rangefinder has for a long time now not really competed in the technology race - only just getting basic automation with the M7 - this may or not be its undoing. Its raison d'être is not about the latest technology, but about something that works simply and well. Obviously this only appeals to some people.

 

It strikes me as odd that a firm which produces such a camera, built to such an ethos, which is appreciated by so many here, is berated for not being at the cutting edge of new (digital) technology. Why would it be? Any management structure with the values of the former ethos must find it very hard to get in line with the latter, more disposable electronic goods ethos, with all its built in obsolesence and obsession with the new.

 

It will be interesting to see if Leica can really survive with its customers pulling in all directions and the ever increasing ruthlessness of the new computer camera digital markets.

If Leica could find someway to retrofit digital capability into screwmount or M bodies, using existing lenses, I would consider buying one (assuming it wouldn't require a second mortgage). Use the original lenses, forget autofocus, but auto exposure would be nice.

"Its raison d'être is not about the latest technology, but about something that works simply and well. Obviously this only appeals to some people."

 

Well said, Robert... That's the crux of the matter entirely.

 

But it's out of our control... market forces dictate that Leica must embrace digital technology in order to stay alive. Hopefully, though, that will enable them to keep producing fine film cameras too at least for a while longer. I'm thinking more and more about ordering an a la carte MP with "NOT DIGITAL" engraved on the top. ;>)

As I have said for a long time now, Leica needs a M body and lens kit for $2000. Even now

more than ever. If they don't want to switch to random unit sample testing to lower the

price, then perhaps high precision robotic assembly techniques or other technology can

help them achieve high quality while allowing them faster and less costly manufacturing

techniques. Bottom line is they need to change SOMETHING.

Not to state the obvious, but to promote sales Leica needs to get its price down on it's lenses and film bodies. Here in the states, many of these items are just getting too expensive. It takes a brave individual to invest so much money into a film based system at this time. I've been thinking about upgrading my lenses to the current models and obtaining another body for years now, but at these prices I never get quite beyond the thinking stage.

 

Leica needs to get a digital M on the market. Not I, but many M users would purchase such an item. Just look how readily that Epson camera sold.

 

I actually think the DMR -- from Leica's point of view -- is priced o'kay. It's really going to appeal to people now who already have an R system. If you have an R system, then $6k US to convert that system to digital for the forseeable future seems pretty good to me. Leica would be wise to incorporate some type of discount for the DMR for those folks who want to buy into the R system.

if 42 is not only the answer to the ultimate question about life, the universe and everything but the number of millions worth in unsold cameras this means Leica has some 20 to 30 thousand unsold cameras. Add to that the unsold stock of 10 year old M6ttls at the dealers and you know the market for expensive rangefinders is very small. Probably too small to sustain a company like Leica Camera AG.

 

The Digilux 2 for the price of a dSLR kit, insert manufacturer here, can't save the company either. Hey, a Pentax *istDS with a 40mm pancake lens is smaller and cheaper.

So I'll wait for the outcome

If Leica cut all old stock items still in inventory by 50%, this could help induce people buying new stock. Maybe, purchase an MP and get 50% of one non-apo lens? Or some such.

 

These items have to have enourmous profit margins. They just cannot cost as much to make as some dealers let on. They could not afford to do business with those kinds of margins.

"As I have said for a long time now, Leica needs a M body and lens kit for $2000."

 

Yep. I'd even do without a built in light meter and with fewer framelines... just a stripped down Leica with an uncluttered viewfinder. Great starter kit for someone who wants to learn about photography.

Daniel,

 

WHAT Canon rangefinder? Does it exist? Is it a M mount? I think we'd all be curious what with the Ikon coming in a couple months.

What info do you have?

no rumour. I simply don't understand this insistence that Leica is of such high-quality and so renown, that it should be allowed to survive even if market-forces shift or a competitor produces an equivalent product at less cost.

 

I used to have a beautifully made slide-rule in college. instead of listening to the lecture, I would marvel at the construction and quality of materials. the day the Hewlett-Packard HP35 was announced, I ordered one and never looked back. I don't know what happened to the slide-rule, and frankly, could care less.

"I simply don't understand this insistence that Leica is of such high-quality and so renown, that it should be allowed to survive even if market-forces shift or a competitor produces an equivalent product at less cost."

 

The fact is that Leica cameras and lenses are of high quality and they are renowned because of that. Competitors are producing cheaper, alternative rangefinder cameras and lenses but not of the same quality as Leica. Indeed, market forces will dictate whether Leica survives as a viable entity producing products of the same quality for which it garnered its reputation. But if market forces dictate Leica's demise that does not change the fact that Leica produced a high quality product that is still appreciated (and will continue to be appreciated) by many even if corporate Leica ceases to exist. It wouldn't be the first time a manufacturer of high quality goods was forced out of business or was forced to exercise a complete paradigm shift because of economic reasons. The reason people are struggling to see some positive outcome of the entire corporate Leica scenario is because they genuinely enjoy using the product. Personally, I can't envision ever using anything but a Leica film camera so long as film is available (which I am confident it will be). It suits my photographic needs perfectly, I enjoy using it and I see no reason to use anything else. Leica cameras, believe it or not, are not just museum pieces. They actually can take wonderful pictures and are fun to use. Of course many people are hoping Leica survives...

Dennis C,

 

Thank you, and well said..

Hey, I would love to have a plastic Leica digital M! Woohoo :) To be honest, a budget Leica is a necessity. They gotta think like that. Even Canon had the guts to release the Powershot Pro 1 as a pro camera. Now that's not dumb marketing because they did rather solid with that shebang.

> I enjoy using it and I see no reason to use anything else.

 

I can appreciate that Dennis, but it escapes me as to how this might save Leica.

DANIEL: Just today when I went to use my HP calculator it gave me answers that I knew were incorrect. Checked the batteries and they were OK. So, I had to rely on the old Picket slide rule. It may not have the HP's precision but it don't need batteries! Thank Heavens I still know how to extract a cube root!

Like Daniel, I was thrilled to get my first HP scientific calculator - first in my class. Professors

hated it cuz of the huge advantage it offered in solving engineering problems far quicker and

much more accurately than the slide rules everyone else used. Apparently not a good thing...

And jeez, unlike the slide rule, the HP could add and subtract too - way unfair!

 

The guys with the plaid pants accessorized with expensive Keuffel & Esser Log Log Dupli Trig

slide rules sheathed in fine black leather cases hanging from their belts, acting like the

BMOCs they thought they were, were terrified. Hmmm...

I concur that even 100 euros each from keen Leica fans worldwide would make a

difference to their cherished company...but perhaps there is a minimum amont of shares

to buy - $5,000? A good investment? Depends whether people sincerely believe a niche

company that concentrates on producing high-end photographic products deserves to

survive in the midst of the ever-changing high-tech C21 marketplace.

Who seriously thinks Leica is going to completely end production of film cameras? I

think they'll eventually bring it down to occasional small runs, at most. Does anyone

really care that they might make more money in digital cameras, or film cameras that

aren't of magnificent build quality? Come off it!

Those 42 million euros are the company's inmediate salvation, but offering them at 50% of the price could afect future sales (how would the custumers accept the return to normal prices).But Leica has always offeres conmemorative editios for everything. Why not offer now an special "help" edition at a special price to halve the company's inventory. Maybe an MP+35cronASPH basic pack and a MP+35+50+90 in the style of the 50 years (painted in a different way...). They could also add some stocks for another 100 euros to complete the pack

"I can appreciate that Dennis, but it escapes me as to how this might save Leica."

 

Daniel, I think what most people here are saying is that "Leica is saved" is a qualified statement... more like a repreive, actually. Leica gets to stay in business and presumably to implement its digital agenda. However, it remains to be seen whether Leica (if it does "succeed") will be the same company after this... whether it will still produce high quality mechanical cameras and lenses of great renown.

Leica owners are the problem themselves. Whenever Canon makes a new model it is not just the number of people who buy a Canon for the first time that make up the sales, but the owners of the previous model that buy a lot of it too. Leica will never be able to do that, unless they differentiate their products. If not, there is no need, you people have the same camera you had 50 years ago. Not bad as it works for you but bad for Leica. So if no sales are made to current Leica owners, how many new buyers will Leica get to make up the costs?

 

A Canon user who had a EOS 1, then bought a 1N, then a 1V, then the 1D, 1Ds, 1DsII. So all that in 15 years. So Canon makes a profit and the user gets something NEW: each newer model has faster AF, better metering, faster frame advance, etc etc. So the user does get something new for their money and there is a real (and quite significant sometimes) upgrade.

 

On the other hand, Leica produces the same product it did 50 years ago. A mechanical camera. Maybe it changes the colour and the size but in the end the functionality is exactly the same in a M3 and an M6 and and M7. So if you have a M3 why get the new one? For the feel? The look?

 

That's Leica's problem.

"The guys with the plaid pants accessorized with expensive Keuffel & Esser Log Log Dupli Trig slide rules sheathed in fine black leather cases hanging from their belts, acting like the BMOCs they thought they were, were terrified. Hmmm..."

 

Good for you, Brad... putting those pretenders in their place, with their expensive, fancy-smchamzy slide rules and their leather cases. I'll bet you still strike fear in the hearts of geeks... ;>)

Panos -- Good point. I always thought that Leica's biggest competition was used Leicas.

Steve York: the biggest reason its getting so expensive in the USA is the devaluation of the US dollar vs. the Euro. All countries that export to the USA are struggling with this. 4 years ago, it was heaven in the Canadian manufacturing sector raking in $1.50 CND or more for every US dollar received. Not so now.

 

Weak dollar favours products made at home, not abroad.