The M8 and your fathers oldsmobile

[waltflanagan]

<i>

Im not the brand loyalty type. Its a tool and not a status symbol. Every camera I have purchased has met a certain need that my other cameras lacked. I certainly didnt purchase anything because of the brand name.</i><p>The standard joke is that Leica fans <b>ARE</b> buying it for the brand. Many people care about brands and are willing to pay to wear corporate logos or did you forget high school?<p>

<i>

Please lay off my back and discuss the idea of selling product to existing clients without a strong committment to obtaining new customers.</i><p>Leica makes cameras for a small niche that likes outstanding build quality. If you really do own all these cameras then you would know that rangefinders basically lost the battle to SLRs over 30 years ago. Leica is catering to a niche within a niche. I think it is highly difficult to convince people to buy a rangefinder over a P&S digital or SLR. The M8 is a camera for customers who want it, they are not going to convert people from P&S or SLR to the M8. The rebadged Panasonic cameras are Leica's effort to get more ordinary consumers to buy Leica. If Leica <b>doesn't</b> make the M8 then their existing rangefinder customers will slowly move to digital P&S or SLRs or perhaps a future Epson RD-1 or Cosina rangefinder.

[ray .]

I get the feeling some people chatting about DSLR's being too heavy and big have never actually handled one. I have a D70 and it's as easy in most ways to handle as the M7, in some ways easier.

[stephen_w.]

"I get the feeling some people chatting about DSLR's being too heavy and big have never actually handled one."

 

But, add the kit most people carry for all situations, the cumulative weight gets unrully. Guilty as charged. I carried a "full" M-kit, as well a Hassy kit, and a tripod I didn't use on a Northern Thai trek. I was back-in-the-pack because of the weight/bulk. STUPID

 

A photo in my folder is from that trek.

[piotr_panne]

<<<I pity the other board members who have to put up with the boorish spoiled-child way you try to ram your opinions down everyone\'s throat.>>>

 

Ya got him now Vinny! Waffle the bastard!

[eliot_rosen1]

"I certainly didnt see anything to compel me to upgrade and change brands."

 

So don't buy Leica. Who cares. I would think such an important person who sits on so many boards would have better things to do than troll on about the deficiencies of Leicas.

[john_shriver]

1.33X is a microscopic crop factor. Nikon's standard crop (on almost every DSLR) is 1.5X. The popular prices Canon DSLRs have 1.6X crop.

 

Buying a full-frame Kodak sensor, at today's prices, would probably add several thousand dollars to the cost of the camera.

 

I'm sure quite a few of the people griping about 1.33X crop are just trolling. (Baiting.)

[ray .]

<i>I happen to sit on a number of boards</i><p>

 

 

A doctor I went to once had a degree in medicine, I presume, but he couldn't situate

his mirror tool while attempting to examine my throat. Out of frustration he finally

just handed it to me and said "Here." Another doc made me wait an hour and a half

after my appointment to get in and then complained that I was "ruining his lunch." I

had an HMO at the time, so so much for the Hypocratic oath.<p>

 

Now, what was the topic?

[eliot_rosen1]

"I had an HMO at the time, so so much for the Hypocratic oath."

 

Don't blame me. I took the Oath of Maimonides, not the Hippocratic Oath. :-)

[piotr_panne]

I believe I could pull a maiming joke out of that hat but what the hell, you wouldn\'t get that one either.

[piotr_panne]

<<<I happen to sit on a number of boards so I may have an idea of how management works.>>>

 

Get yourself a bag of nails and you\'ll manage to get a couple of walls up tomorrow.

[icuneko]

<If Leica doesnt address the modern market, they might end up like Voigtlander.>

 

Ah, do you mean successful, earning revenue, selling lots and lots of RFs, SLRs, and lenses in a world where "film is dead"? And not having to resort to a-la-carte lizard-skinning them either for US $7,000 a pop. Voigtlander is dead. Long live Voigtlander! (NB: I've even seen some excellent photos taken with V/C gear--on the Leica Forum. Really!)

[john_h.1]

"you must wonder what the management team has been thinking. This camera will not attract any new consumers to the leica brand. They are selling to existing customers only."

 

That's who buys their quality expensive cameras. Why would marketing to that loyal fan base be a cause to question their management?

[fred_mueggelhopper]

My 1983 Oldsmobile Delta Royale is still running strong after 24 thirsty years. It might run forever. My 1984 M6 is still shooting strong after almost as long as the Olds. It will be passed along to my children and grandchildren. They will probably not be able to afford the gas for the Olds. I tired of waiting for the digital M and bought a Sony R1 with Zeiss lens and 10mp APS sized sensor. It performs so well that the M8 is out of the picture for me. It is just too late to the market. Oldsmobiles were very good cars by the way!

[james_elwing]

Voigtlander used to be a brand. It was bought by Zeiss Ikon & when their camera works went down the tube along with most West German camera production in the 1970s, became just a name to be bought and sold. It is nice that someone is keeping the name alive, but the products are Cosina.

Leitz / Leica managed to stay afloat, and currently are still doing so.

[chip l.]

From Al:

 

<I would suspect that there are a lot of pros out there shooting DSLR's because the market

demands digital output, but they still have their film Leica M bodies along with a set of

lenses for personal work. There never was a good reason to sell them because those

Leicas looked like mine, beat to crap, brass showing through chrome, with lenses to

match. Fondlers and collectors don't tend to buy them, even for cheap. They're already

paid for and written off as a business expense. When you already have the glass suddenly

the body doesn't look all that pricey>

 

Al, can always count on you.

 

Even some of us wanna be pros were bitten by the M8 bug. I have a M6TTL kit that sees

little use since moving towards digital. I do try and take it from time to time. The M8 gave

me hope on a new life for this kit.

 

I have given up on the idea of going towards the M8. I will keep the M6TTL kit for when I

want to travel "light". Why one might ask would I compromise by staying with the Nikon

DSLR kit over a Leica kit.

 

In the end guilt and common sense. To cover a 21 to close to 135 range in the M8, and to

benefit from the new T-E Wide (with the likes of original T-E, a 35/2, 50/2, and 90/2.8 , I

would be looking at a replacement cost of almost $20KUS +.

 

This can be compared to a similar range with my Nikons costing under $5kUS. I just

remember the hoops I had to jump through when I had $7kUS worth of gear stolen back in

2001.

 

I know that some will scoff at my comments. But for some of us that are not true pros, the

added costs of going Leica add up.

 

To the OP's comments. The M8 is gaining some interest from new users. I have had a

couple of customers express interest in the M8, only because of the lack luster support of

the Epson R-D1 here in the US by Epson.

 

They are waiting to see what the M8 can deliver with the lower cost CV lenses, before

making the jump.

 

To a certain degree I might agree with you. Just look at the Panasonic L-1. $2000US. This

compares to the Olympus E-330 with the 14-54/2.8-3.5 kit being $1400US. Yes, the

Panasonic/Leica lens offers MOIS, but is it worth $600US? We will have to wait to also see

how the Leica lens performs over the Olympus lens in the end.

 

In the end we need to look at cameras being tools. There are times that my Nikon kit is the

right choice. Other times my Leica kit.

 

For myself at this time I can not make the justification to go with the M8. Maybe down the

road.

[andrew robertson]

"I have had a couple of customers express interest in the M8, only because of the lack

luster support of the Epson R-D1 here in the US by Epson."

 

I have sent my R-D1 back to Epson twice now. The first time for vertical alignment, and

the second time after my shutter button went sticky after being up a 12,000 foot

mountain. They had a brand new R-D1 into my hands in four days each time. In fact,

because Epson explicitly instructs you to pack only the camera, you get a free battery each

time the camera is in for service.

 

I can't think of another camera company with service that prompt or practical. My third R-

D1 has been golden so far, but because it has the mechanical guts of a Bessa there are

several independent repair people as well as Epson who will service the camera.

 

A rangefinder and an SLR serve quite different functions, so there is no reason to ditch one

for the other. They compliment each other.

[._._z]

<small><i><blockquote>

 

I would suspect that there are a lot of pros out there shooting DSLR's because the market demands digital output, but they still have their film Leica M bodies along with a set of lenses for personal work.

 

</blockquote> </i> </small><p>

 

Given the nosedive in film sales in the last 5 years (perhaps 70-90% decline) this wither seems unlikely, or those 'personal' user of film hardly used any film at all.