Leica's New Official Direction - Hot off the press

Here's the <a href="http://www.lfi-online.de/ceemes/base.php?page/show/575"

rel="nofollow" <b>link.</b></a>

I must be doing something right , Dr. Kaufmann and I wear the same brand, and style of glasses.

I hope Stephen K. Lee has a good lawyer -- Germans don't like litagation!

. . .that's "litigation."

Only thing that was a surprise was DSLR plans. All the rest especially a half price M digital I will believe when I see it.

He really didn't say much. I'll wait to see what they DO.

"From August on, Leica Customer Service will offer to replace the display glass for 750 euros and change the shutter for 800. Both services are available for 1120 euros, and with either upgrade the

M8 guarantee is extended by one year."

 

"I can easily use a digital M8 with an older M lens. Even professionals should find this interesting, because it gives them much

more investment security than with other camera systems."

 

Whenever I read ridiculous things like these I find myself rofl...

 

And the rest of the "interview": pure CEO gossip, friendly lies (Lee) and appeasement.

 

 

"But one thing is for sure: if the Japanese built it the way Leica

does, it would cost the same amount of money."

 

Never heard of the Zeiss-Cosina-cooperation, Mr. Kaufmann? Maybe someone should send him a Zeiss price list.

 

:-(

Completely devoid of any meaningful content...I wonder why he asked for the interview.

 

andy

'A half price digital M?'

 

In Germany the M8 with 3 (?) Summarits is 5000 euros. For 2500 euros I'd whip out my credit card for sure! Does not seem that realistic, sadly. But a digital M2 for less than 2000? Bring it on.

US $1500/- is a fair price for a fail safe DRF camera. No more. I don't need a sapphire LCD screen.

"But one thing is for sure: if the Japanese built it the way Leica does, it would cost the same amount of money."

 

Never heard of the Zeiss-Cosina-cooperation, Mr. Kaufmann? Maybe someone should send him a Zeiss price list.

 

Quite! well said that man.

 

It seems to me like the new CEO needs to get a grip on reality...I can only see more bad news for Leica If he does not....and those 'upgrades' for such crazy money....are those Leica guys on planet earth?

An affordable high quality DRF must be something impossible, thought.

 

I would pay $5000 for a M8 if -at least image quality- were on pair with top digital cameras, say D3 or EOS.

 

If a best-seller like the D300 cost $1700, a M8 with a policarbonate top cover must cost moreless the same. Well, add another $300 for the red dot. Whatever the jugglings they plan to do if they don`t produce a M8 type camera for something like $2000, I`m afraid we will have another new CEO soon...

 

I`m truly ignorant here, but I can`t believe that CV or Zeiss are on pair with Leica products. Zeiss lenses are cheaper that their Leica counterparts, but really overpriced in comparison to Voightlander.

"I`m truly ignorant here, but I can`t believe that CV or Zeiss are on pair with Leica products. Zeiss lenses are cheaper that their Leica counterparts, but really overpriced in comparison to Voightlander."

 

Jose

 

I don't think you will SEE a difference between Zeiss and Leica. I saw no relevant difference between the 21 mm, 28 mm and 50 mm from Zeiss and Leica in a side by side comparison. Though as a Leica fan with some excellent Leica glass I would have preferred to see a relevant difference...

;-)

 

Maybe Zeiss lenses are a bit overpriced in comparison to Voigtlaender but in comparison to Leica they are still bargain offers

"I`m truly ignorant here, but I can`t believe that CV or Zeiss are on pair with Leica products. Zeiss lenses are cheaper that their Leica counterparts, but really overpriced in comparison to Voightlander"

 

....I think Jose is talking about build quality, not IQ, bearing in mind the comments of the new Leica CEO.

 

Jose (and everyone else) should bear in mind that Leica DO charge LOTS extra just for having the Leica name on products. If anyone does not believe this, then compare the prices of the Leica/Panasonic cross-over products...they are identical in build and yet the ones with the Leica red dot on them are a LOT more....also check out the ridiculous prices for Leica body & camera caps and other accessories.

 

Do Leica make their lens caps 2-3 times better than Nikon, Pentax etc...I do not think so, but the prices are.

 

There are a lot of people who take it on faith that Leica products must be far better in build than any opposition products...they are mistaken and Leica take advantage of this. The attitude of the new CEO smacks of ignorance and arrogance IMO.

 

I recently had a new current Leica M 35/2 Summicron. They cost a LOT of money and the handling, 'feel' and build left something to be desired bearing in mind the frightening price. The aperture ring in particular felt sloppy and poorly assembled or engineered.

 

I have to say that both the Zeiss and VC lenses felt better. Maybe this is just a personal 'hands-on' test, but I felt the Leica M lenses are not as well made as they should be, or else Leica are really taking the mickey with pricing.

 

It is high time that Leica CEO's and their top managers came back to reality, then Leica might be saved.

 

cheers Steve.M.

Yes, it was a completely pointless interview, he even managed to imply that nothing can be expected on the R side for quite some time - not really the impression that his predecessor gave. The idea of the upgrade(s) seems completely ridiculous too. Why ever would you want to pay so much for so little? Even by Leica price standards it is foolish - it is not as though the M8 is a good deal initially.

 

I agree with those that imply Leica need a kick up the bottom: perhaps, I suggest, by the Cosina/VC President himself!

I don't see how everyone expects a digital M from Leica for $2000US when an analog MP

costs nearly $4000. The fact is that these are small-volume selling handmade cameras,

and they're going to cost more than a mass-produced d300, even if a version was

introduced with cheaper materials. And in that case, would anyone buy it, or would people

complain about the cheap materials?

 

I can't speak to the zeiss/CV comparison since I've never worked with their gear. But you

can't compare the build quality of leica to canon or Nikon. I've had my canon 50/1.4 stop

focusing due to a mechanical problem, my 70-200 literally loosened up once and seemed

like it could break in half. Then went back to the shop and within six months it totally

stopped zooming, my 16-35 had some sort of internal problem and wouldn't focus, and

I've had a bunch of cameras go bad for various reasons. So while the M8 might have some

reliability problems, the leica lenses and film cameras are tough and reliable and I trust

them way more than other cameras I've used.

 

I think the price point of the M8 is fine, if the camera was more reliable, had less noise and

maybe full frame, if possible.

 

I might be in the minority, but if leica made a digital MP, same size as the MP, full frame

or 1.1 crop, with a manual wind lever and traditional cloth shutter, no LCD screen on the

back and it shot in raw only which would reduce the need for some in-camera processing,

I'd pay $5500 for it and buy

it right away. I'd probably buy three. Of course if ziess or cv or canon made one that would

take my leica glass for $2000, I'd buy that too.

Yes, I was thinking on construction quality of the up to now Leica lenses designed for film, specially the APO latest ones. I`m with Noah on the Nikon or Canon to Leica comparison on film mechanical or AE cameras and manual focus lenses. Apples to apples.

 

I really can`t speak about Zeiss and Voigtlander lenses because never own neither (yet)... it calls my attention that a lens like the Zeiss ZM 21/4.5C is $970 whereas the Voiglander 21/4C that looks to be almost the same lens with different cosmetics is $419, both made by CV. Zeiss also charge for it.

 

The problem is that the digital era has changed everything, at all stages, like the relevance or value of cameras, even in the way of shooting, and people doesn`t want to pay the same plus for a M8 that was willing to pay on a M6 or MP in the past, thought (or can`t, because they are much more expensive).

"I recently had a new current Leica M 35/2 Summicron. They cost a LOT of money and the handling, 'feel' and build left something to be desired bearing in mind the frightening price."

 

Yes, well, I have the 35/1.4 and that had a wobbly aperture ring from new, as did all the others in the shop - apparently normal. Having said that, it has never affected it's performance in any way, has never got worse, and is a wonderful, wonderful lens.

 

I also thought the interview a complete waste of time - nothing was said other than inane 'positive speak'.

 

They're in trouble at Leica because with their manafacturing costs they have to sell at boutique prices. The problem is that until they sort the M8 issues out and have unquestionable reliability, few real photographers will opt for their camera, even if they like the concept and lust after the lenses.

 

Add to that, that most people willing to pay those sort of prices want something cutting edge - and that means the beautiful small body of the M, the superb lenses, excellent reliability and weather sealing, and Full Frame. A combination that Leica is not yet, unfortunately, in a position to offer - hence their tripping along with a string of daft ideas like the 800 euro upgrades for a quieter shutter, which should have been installed when they launched the camera.

 

Whether they survive long enough for Full Frame technology to be packed inside a small rangefinder is anybody's guess.

 

My suggestion would be to halve the price of the current M8, which might at least keep their lenses selling. Since their argument for their high prices is mechanical handbuilt precision, and their latest cameras - the M7 and the M8 are not, apart from the rangefider apparatus, mechanical, might there not be room for a price drop?

Leica really have to make a decision.

 

Do they want to cater for photographers or the boutique market? They made their name catering for the photographer. They have lost have their name catering for the boutique market....

 

A foot in both camps...methinks not. And how daft they were with the silly two thirds system that nobody wants.

 

They really need to get back to their roots. I would suspect the only money they are making is with their partnership with Panasonic and PS cams.

<i>The problem is that the digital era has changed everything</i><p>This is not the problem. This is the kind of thinking that got them where they are. There is a problem in that Leica hasn't been able to change its strategy in a long time to match the changing market. Where they are now was visible well before digital.<p>The bigger problem is shown in this interview, and in quite a few comments above. You don't fix a company in trouble, and three CEOs in a couple years is definitely an indicator of trouble, with a couple of products. You fix it by doing a real analysis of what the problems are and what has to be done to solve them. This is not as simple as bringing out a couple of new products or moving the price points with the kinds of problems that Leica has.<p>The kinds of problems the new CEO should be addressing are very obvious, for example:<p>1) Distribution is not matching current buying, at least in the US. More and more cameras are bought at big box stores. Pros tend to buy at "pro shops" or B&H/Adorama rather than the boutique shops Leica uses. While the boutique dealers seem very loyal, they aren't increasing the market. <p>2) Leica users are predominantly old, male, and well-off. This is out-of-sync with where the broad demand comes from, which is young to middle age, male and female, and with a median income that is probably closer to the median.<p>3) While the Leica brand is well-respected, it is identified with the past, not the future. "Leica" = "Life/HCB" and all that stuff from years ago.<p>4) Leica doesn't provide professional-quality service. I base this on what I read here on the forums. Canon can turn around a camera in a couple days, provides return shipment documentation and pre-paid mailing labels over email, five minutes after a phone call, and an online tracking mechanism. <p>I'm sure there are more problems, maybe these aren't the four most important, but something similar can be identified. The solution to these problems should include new products, but saying "this product or that product will help Leica" or "new pricing will fix things" is a recipe of repetition. What will help Leica is figuring out the solutions to problems like these. Reading that interview with the new CEO was like reading an obituary.

"Reading that interview with the new CEO was like reading an obituary."

 

PRECISELY!

 

The quicker this sort of sclerotic German mentality gets to grips with this, the better.

 

Getting Leica into the big pro dealerships and away from too much dependence on the made-to-measure snobbery and elitism of the Boutique dealers is also a very obvious idea. These places are so STUFFY and like to think they are selling to your fine discriminating taste, rather than selling you a reliable working tool.

 

Though, unlike Jeff, I do think that getting a RELIABLE full frame M body to market will transform Leica's potential.

Leica's 'potential' is tied to the limited, even shrinking, boutique market.

 

Its film bodies, alternately well-built and finicky, are in declining demand due not only to severely declining interest in film cameras but to a large resale market with which it competes.

 

Leica has no way (or plan) to produce really affordable, competitive gear, and it cannot reduce costs sufficiently to produce a 2000Euro M-body, as Kaufmann admits in his interview.

 

Any company could move into Leica's niche and produce a digital body with an M-mount it if thought there was a sufficiently large market. But no one is doing so. Does anyone really think that Nikon, which sold a low-volume SP reissue, would just leave money on the table if it thought it could sell an affordable M-mount digital? Or Cosina? Or Ricoh? Or Sigma? The fact that no competitors are moving into this area speaks volumes about the perceived market for digital rangefinders, and is reinforced by the rather limited success Leica itself has had.

What remains of Leica's competitive value comes from high quality glass that is superior wide open. Not from expensive film bodies, and not from even more expensive digital bodies (whose flaws emanate from the company's inexperience with the new market into which it is treading water). The problem is that even its lenses are not so drmatically better than the competition that it can use it as a foundation to grow.

Hm, I tend to think that if someone brought out a reliable, digital Full Frame m-body, with all the good qualities of the film bodies, and with IQ and high ISOs as good as the D3, professional photojournalists and well-heeled wannabees would flock to buy it. The small size, discreteness and great fast glass would sell it easily, IF the price was right.

Unfortunately, it seems Leica is just not there yet, and when they are, their price will be so high that they remain uncompetetive.

<i>I tend to think that if someone brought out a reliable, digital Full Frame m-body, with all the good qualities of the film bodies, and with IQ and high ISOs as good as the D3, professional photojournalists and well-heeled wannabees would flock to buy it. The small size, discreteness and great fast glass would sell it easily, IF the price was right.</i><p>Once again, one "point product" isn't going to solve any problems. If you understood how professional PJs work these days, it would be clear that the product you mention wouldn't do it anyway. Most PJs work in an environment with fewer and fewer photographers, and they have to do more and more. They might be shooting the San Francisco skyline out of a Blue Angel jet in the afternoon and ringside at a boxing match in the evening (I shot at the boxing match with someone who did just that.) Most PJs I know work with two bodies, one with a 24-70 and one with a 70-200. They have sophisticated flash systems. In fact, all the PJs I know work with that equipment, either Canon or Nikon. In the crush of things, cameras have to autofocus since they are may have to be held up in the air away from the body. They expect a professional support network. Go out and watch how they work, and you will understand how far off your one product idea is from the needs of the professional PJ.