Next step of Leica?

[Brad_]

>>> So you're only interested in jpg files?

 

Who said anything about JPEG? No, image quality in the same way that a film negative shows the image quality coming out of a

film camera. That doesn't mean jpeg.

 

Somebody brought up lens quality being great. No doubt about that as I pointed out above. But decoupling that from the camera

means little. It's what comes off the card that counts, not what makes it through the lens mount. There's a sensor and a lot of

electronics in between.

[blakley]

I think your description above is pretty accurate, Brad, though I'd argue with the "far" in your statement that

other choices provide "far better quality". Certainly at high ISOs, both Canon and Nikon perform better. Build

quality is not as robust as prosumer DSLRs either, and ergonomics, while "very good" to my taste are decidedly

"manual" compared to today's DSLRs. And customer support from Leica is frankly pretty bad right now.

 

The image I get has qualities I don't get out of DSLRs I've tried; in particular in light which is low but

contrasty I prefer the look of the M8 files, and the lack of AA filter produces a sharp image of a sort I find it

hard to duplicate with files created behind an AA filter. But these are largely matters of taste - I agree with

you on the main point, which is that the lenses and the rangefinder handling are really the reasons one would

choose the M8, and having made that choice you do have to live with compromises in other areas.

[johannes_bohnacker]

I don't see the R system's future to follow the paths of other SLR manufacturers in being replaced by or transitioned to an AF system. It's

inherently manual focus. Many people using AF systems in fact prefer the "good old" MF bodies with split-image screens and really large

viewfinders. This is a niche Leica can fill. Otherwise they'd be better advised to put their proven R lens kits in high quality AF barrels with

Canon EF mount.

 

Or maybe they should do both. I bet Leica could sell lots and lots of their R lenses as full-featured EF mount versions (i.e. with ultrasonic

AF and in-lens aperture actuators). Maybe they should better invest their expertise here instead of playing catch-up with others. After all

optics is what they know best, and they still have the mechanical and electronics expertise that would be required to build first-class AF

lens barrels that are at least on par with the build quality and handling of Canon's L series. Imagine an L series barrel, or even a step

above, with Leica optics.

[markci]

<i>Mark - Freinds and family are using their digital cameras for the last time. They have acceptable pictures from their phones/Hps. Of course some will want better pictures - larger pictures - but these can be printed by any home computer.</i>

<p>

If they find the photos from their phones "acceptable" then it's safe to assume they would have found the results of disposable film cameras acceptable as well. And that has nothing to do with the SLR (or Leica rangefinder or any serious camera) market.

[marc_bergman1]

"Film cameras are already as robust and foolproof as can be and if made to the highest quality will not let you down."

 

Pros used backups for their film camera just like they do now with their DSLRs.

[marc_bergman1]

Don E,

 

Yes it it was indeed a very brave decision by Leica.

 

It reminds me that I have to get out my Yes, Prime Minister DVD's. It is much better to watch than current TV.

[christopher_m]

<b><u>The Intel Approach:</b></u>

<p>

Intel wasn't always king of the computer chip nor was the manufacturer of the chip highly valued by consumers. In

the 80s computer chips were just a part of the overall computer, but Intel found great success in marketing directly to

the consumer with their "Intel Inside" campaign.

<p>

Leica could easily partner with several camera companies whose optics are not well established (Sony?). Many

consumers aren't really aware that the quality of the lens matters. All they focus on is the number of the megapixels.

So the lens manufacturers need to raise awareness of the importance of the quality of lens by marketing directly to

consumers. Ads on the National Geographic channel shouldn't be too expensive and should hit a more targeted

audience. Additionally ads on other stations targeting mothers who want quality pictures of their children would be

another great idea.

<p>

<b>A lesson from Coca Cola</b><p>

Both Coke and Pepsi profited well off the Cola Wars in the 70s and 80s. While they were both fighting over the pie,

the size of the pie kept getting bigger. A little Ziess- Leica competition would be a good thing for both of them.

[johannes_bohnacker]

Christopher,

 

you wrote: "Leica could easily partner with several camera companies whose optics are not well established (Sony?)". As

you sincerely noticed, Leica already is in a partnership with Panasonic. Sony closely works with Zeiss. You might take a

look at their latest ZA series DSLR lenses - Zeiss AF lenses exclusively available for the Sony Alpha mount. Zeiss also builds

manual focus lenses with Nikon F, Pentax K and M42 mounts. That's why I propose Leica might build ultrasonic AF lenses

with Canon EF mount.

[warren_lafever]

correct me if i am wrong but didnt leica release a 4/3 mount dslr?

[doug herr]

"<I>didnt leica release a 4/3 mount dslr?</I>"

<P>

Digilux 3 <BR>

Clone of a Panasonic, major components made by Olympus.

[anthony_brookes5]

Marc B - Yes but those film backups were voluntary - electrnic backups are normally there because they have to be.

[mike dixon]

<i>Yes but those film backups were voluntary - electrnic backups are normally there because they have to be.</i><P>

Complete nonsense. Over the years, I've had numerous problems with mechanical cameras, during the course of normal use, that put them out of action. The only problem I've ever had with a digital camera was also a mechanical problem (reflex mirror coming off).

[anthony_brookes5]

Mike - Lucky you - you are unique IMHO

[mike dixon]

There's nothing unique about my experience. Mechanical devices, when used frequently, wear and sometimes break. A friend of mine replaced his early digital SLR after about four years because he was going to need a second new shutter--the first two had worn out. The sensor and other electronics all worked as well as when they were new.

 

Always having a backup isn't a recent development among professional photographers. Backups for film equipment are just as essential as backups for digital equipment. Leica's development and quality control issues with the M8 were not caused by an inherent lack of reliability of electronic equipment.

[christopher_m]

<i>Johannes Bohnacker </i>- the partnership is only one piece, and its something that has been mention before. My

main point is that they need to raise awareness of how the quality of the lens effects pictures.

<p>

If you surveyed people who were about to buy a camera, and you asked them to rank the attributes that were most

important to them, you would likely get the following result (#1 being most important)

<p>

1. # of megapixels<br>

2. Look & feel of camera<br>

3. Camera brand<br>

4. Size of LCD screen<br>

5. Zoom ability

<p>

Lens quality wouldn't even make the list of what most people think about. It's not the consumer's fault because no

one has ever really advertized about it's importance. <A HREF="http://www.buy.com/retail/product.asp?

sku=204235606&listingid=24947306&dcaid=17902">Look at this ad</A> for a Panasonic Lumix DMC,

with a Leica lens. The fact that it has a Leica lens isn't even mentioned anywhere in the ad except as a part of the

photo of the camera.

<p>

I bet if you had a mirror product, with a Holga lens instead of a Leica, for $5 less, most people would buy the Holga.

They wouldn't even pay $5 more for a Leica.... because they don't know. Leica (and Zeiss) need direct to consumer

advertising to increase how much people value the camera lens.

<p>

[warren_lafever]

so whats wrong with them developing the digilux 4? there are plenty of lenses available and the cameras are very easy to use. (i have an oly e-500 and e-520)

[warren_lafever]

i think the sales people are to blame in part for pushing megapixels. i blocked an upsale the other day when i randomly went to the electronics store and talked to a lady who did her research then the salesman tried to get her to buy a different cam for 200+ more dollars because it had more megapix, long story short, she bought the one she researched. what ever leica decides to do, they need to drop their prices by about a third or more.

[don_e]

What leicaphiles want:

 

1. Camera brand

 

2. Look & feel of camera

 

3. Full Frame

 

4. # of Megapixels

 

5. Full utilization of M lenses

[joshroot]

<i>"Mike - Lucky you - you are unique IMHO"</i>

<p>

While I think this conversation has dwindled into the typical "I think Leica is lame and expensive (and I wish I had one)" vs "I think Leica is great and wonderful (and I have to defend my purchase)" drivel. I will add that my digital experience has been no more or less worse than my film experience in terms of things going wrong. Things went wrong with film cameras/film/labs things go wrong with digital cameras/memory/computers.

<p>

Murphy's Law doesn't care about digital vs film.

[anthony_brookes5]

Josh - Sorry you feel like that as we are touching on an area where Leica need to be involved. I have owned and run

businesses selling Mercedes-Benz, Porsche, Rolls-Royce, Bentley, BMW, Honda, etc.etc. In almost every case our

customers were not 'normal' in the high volume sense, but intensely critical of service. The price did not affect what

they bought but who they bought it from. This is the Leica scene. They want reliability, service, and highest quality.

The performance of the vehicle our customers chose was personal but was always one of the marque's models.

Many Leica buyers probably don't look at Canon or Nikon as options. Pros of course are a different matter but then

chauffeurs and taxi firms don't run Porsches or Mercedes- Benz in the main. We enthusiaists take a somewhat

different view comparing features of cameras that are not directly compeititive with each otherbut Porsche buyers

don't look at Mazdas.

[joshroot]

You have missed my point entirely.

[orvillerobertson]

Does anyone know the current state of development for digital shutters and apertures? This was a great sounding technology when I

first read about it a few years ago. I believe Leica would need some sort of useable breakthrough such as this to differentiate

themselves. If I remember right they were ceramic and would change opacity fromclear to light-proof. The problem back then was that

they were neither clear enough or light-prooff. Highly interesting technology if anyone can make it work reliably without costing more

than the rest of the camera body. The advantages of noiselessness and world-beating reliability cannot be ignored since there would

be no mechanical parts to ever wear out.

[orvillerobertson]

I agree with Josh about the reliability factor between mechanical and electronic cameras. I shoot or have used mechanical

rangefinders and various digital or analog autofocus cameras (what you see me post is from my mechanical and rangefinder side

only by personal preference). The mechanical ones could drive nails but were easy to throw out of alignment if dropped or

severely jostled. The others were less sold-feeling(my bias) but stayed in alignment much longer (shutter accuracy, focusing

accuracy, etc). I send both kinds off to be CLA'd or repaired about equally. The point is that Leica could go so many different

ways technologically and produce a very fine and useable machine. What they need is to have something that works extremely

well and advances certain technology forward. Canon charges $8000 for their top pro DSLR so the price bar has been raised.

They do not and cannot compete with the Canon but can create a wonderful machine that shows the M format (even just by look

and feel, which still matters to me) can deliver the goods. I believe doing this probably should kill off the SLR lineup so they can

focus resources on the new M.

[ron_breeze2]

"A few months ago I had a meeting with people from Leica. I was shown a mock up of a camera. It was genuinely intriguing. They are thinking

long and hard about the way forward. It's not all doom and gloom. Having said that, they came up with one proposal that was so weird it bordered

on the imbecilic."

 

Can you tell us more?

[joshroot]

I'm going to guess that if more could have been told, it would have. Most companies make you sign non-disclosure

agreements before you they show you even a version of what the future might.