Grim times for Leica

[hashim a]

<i>What a pointless argument.</i>

<p>

Ray... you are absolutely right, and last night i browsed the Leica forum and realized this topic has been discussed to death.<P>

 

i really had no idea - and i can see how what some of what i wrote may come off as being somewhat a bash against the company and perhaps even the owners. wasn't intended to be.<p>

 

although i can't say i entirely get the ferrari analogy, but i do kindev get how some people just prefer one thing over the other - for whatever reason(s).

 

<P>pretty simple i think and pretty fair.

<p>

 

<p>good shooting all.<p>

 

=)

[alex_rosental]

shooting a Leica is like driving a Porsche. Leica needs to drastically redefine their marketing strategy, advertising, product lines and markets segmentation for the 21st century.

[ishik_tuna]

I've been a Leica owner since the mid 1970's, I love my Leica's.

Leica use to represent technical excellence.

 

However, Leica is now permanently positioned as a technological runner-up in the camera body department, because it doesn't have its own sensor product/R&D.

 

Outside of this forum, nobody is interested in rangefinder cameras. That market is miniscule.

 

Marketing a "new" rangefinder is a terrible business model (although i'd love to see one). It's the hardware equivalent of marketing a new, low speed 35mm film.It's a dead end business model.

 

I suspect the future for Leica is in the Panasoninc relationship, and making lenses only.

Why they don't market lenses for the Canon and Nikon mounts, I'll never know...

 

yep, i have a bunch of leica glass, and yes i LOVE a new leica camera body...but that new Canon 5D is looking tempting......and it doesn't cost al that much....

[christopher_m]

How many watches does Patek Phillippe sell in a year? Why would someone want to pay $30,000 for a watch, when you can find high quality ones for $150. You can find a market nitche.

 

A seperate point that isn't mentioned: the strong Euro and weak dollar hurts sales to the U.S.

[lukeap69]

Why don't Leica make lenses for Canon and Nikon?

[gray_mason]

I wonder . . . Are the new Summarits considered "sub-prime" lenses?

[pics]

Because lens design is a high tech large R+D endeavour as well and there is little reason to believe that they could seriosuly challenge Canon and Nikon's best offereings in the SLR world. Come to think of it, if Canon and Nikon made RF lenses, Leica might really be in trouble. I've always wondered how much of Leica's outstanding optical quality is due to the inherent advantages of the rangefinder design and how much of it has anything to do with Leica itself.

[vic_.]

Michael Ferron: <i>"... You really should have been wise enough to leave politics to the blogs that specialize in

such. Mr. Obama was 2nd on a list of politicians who pocketed the most money from the mortgage giants. Not Mr.

Bush. (moderator if his comment stays so should this one.) Thanks ..."</i>

<p>By assuming that anyone who thinks Bush is an idiot is an Obama supporter, you should open your eyes, for

McCain also thinks Bush is an idiot, to the point of not inviting him or any of his cabinet members to his nomination

party.

<p>The current crisis will affect the camera industry more than most basic industries because cameras are not an

essential commodity for 99 percent of their buyers (i.e., non-pros), so a basic understanding of what caused the

crisis should be required reading, especially for Alaskans with high aspirations.

<p>The crisis was caused by the deregulation of CDOs and CDSs, Credit Default Obligations and Credit Default

Swaps, CDS's being "insurance" for CDO's. AIG was the biggest insurer for CDO's which is why they got into

trouble. Here's some reading, and the third link explains it all (heard it on NPR two days ago):

<p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collateralized_debt_obligation

<p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_default_swap

<p>http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=94686428

<p>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178318884054675.html

<p>My Leica lenses have appreciated in price, so Leica is doing some things right. Used lenses for all other

manufacturers go DOWN in price.

[jay_moynihan]

I have a pair of 18 year old Leica Binoculars that are excellent. I have used their Stereo-microscpes, which are also excellent. If you compare the price difference between Leica offerings in both those categories, and their competitors, the price difference is not nearly as pronounced as in looking at their “in-house” (so to speak) cameras.

With the exception of their licensing out the Red Dot to Panasonic (yes, some of the general public does associate Leica with “quality”), there M & R series is for the most part a luxury brand now. Actually it has been for about 20 years.

 

I am aware of some working photographers and advanced amateurs using them, and rightly so. Re the M series, up until quite recently they were the only new production film rangefinder, and are the only new production digital rangefinder. The glass for their M’s has among the best, if not the best contrast and tonality characteristics of any I have seen in small format.

 

I would love to be a Leica camera customer. I am not because:

1. M8 or film-M, they are way outside my price league.

2. I was not amused by the back totally coming off when changing film (not to mention that being a bizarre affectation on the M8 if I remember correctly).

3. On the M8, the special filter/magenta cast problem.

 

Anyway, Their pricing does relegate them in the “mass market” sense, to luxury along with Monblanc, Louis Vutton, etc. etc.. In fact, isn’t the current owner of the camera “division” actually a luxury goods oriented company?

 

The fate of the brand has for decades been very sensitive to what is happening in the broader economy & currency markets. They have already priced themselves for all practical purposes out of the amatuer/enthusiast market.

 

Speculation:

 

If the luxury market segment keeps experiencing problems though, the Leica brand in cameras will live on. My bet would be the Red Dot being purchased by an Indian start-up, and used on digital EVF bodies, etc.

 

Voightlander (Cosina) will carry on the film rangefinder tradition, and may do a digital, FF rangefinder, when the part-cost on the sensors gets low enough to fit in their business model.

[jovan_radakovich1]

I am a fine art photographer and although I am of modest means I have in past taken a second job just to own a Leica. In spite of reading online many a tale of woe regarding its reliability I eventually took a chance and bought a grey market R8, which I used for many years without a single problem. I must have been lucky! When I made the decision to switch from digital to film I sold the R8 for a small loss. This experience engendered considerable loyalty to the brand and I eagerly waited for the release of the M8. Aesthetically it turned out to be a beautiful camera with a wonderful feel but after reading every available review, learning its staggering price and other shortcomings I decided it wasn't worth the sacrifice required to buy when its output could barely equal a $500 Canon Rebel.

My method of working is very deliberate and slow, I don't need a camera capable of shooting 10 fps, 6400 ISO or even auto focus. Nor however do I need the headache of waiting weeks for chronic warranty repairs. As much as I love the concept behind Leica they stagnated. They brought the film rangefinder to a state of perfection and had an exalted place so long as film remained the prevailing format.

Other small companies have managed to stay competitive against much larger ones with incredible R&D resources. Ducati comes to mind. They are a tiny Italian motorcycle manufacturer compared to Honda and the other Japanese giants but have managed an impressive streak of dominance against them for decades. They make a product which is not only state of the art while retaining elements of his long heritage, but beautiful. All while maintaining an aura of exclusivity. Yes, they too made very expensive limited editions over the years which were never ridden but sat in heated garages of affluent collectors but they also produced entry level bikes within the means of most consumers.

Like many here I have been carefully following the latest news out of Photokina and have already made the choice to order a Canon 5d mkII with a Zeiss 50mm lens as my next camera. I'm afraid Leica lost what would have been another enthusiastic customer with their recent price increase and underwhelming range of products. $900 for a rebadged panasonic p&s?!?! That's insulting.

What a pity

[robert lee]

"...already made the choice to order a Canon 5d mkII with a Zeiss 50mm lens as my next camera."

 

You too, huh? I was that close to ordering the 50mm f1.2L when Zeiss announced the ZE mount. I really look forward to trying this lens from what I've been reading about the 50mm f1.4 Planar, and my recent experiences with the stellar 45mm f2 Planar and 90mm f2.8 Sonnar on a G1.

 

I hope Leica Camera AG will follow the Zeiss roadmap - stop throwing money away trying to catch up on camera bodies and focus on optics. This is one core competency in which Leica can rightly claim to be competitive. This can only be expected to become increasingly relevant as sensor implementation continues to improve.

[somak_ray]

They can make a film based panoramic camera like the X-pan

[doug herr]

"<I>I decided it wasn't worth the sacrifice required to buy when its output could barely equal a $500 Canon

Rebel.</I>"

<P>

Where did you hear this, from a photo.net troll using a pseudonym, who has never used an M8 and bases his image

quality judgements on in-camera jpeg files?<BR>

Here's a link to an early M8 user's report, using pre-production firmware: <A HREF="http://leica-

users.org/v32/msg15514.html">http://leica-users.org/v32/msg15514.html</A>. The start-up bugs the trolls keep

reminding us of are things of the past.<P>

More links: <P>

http://leica-users.org/v34/msg06780.html<BR>

"<I>the images that come out of the Canon 5D are softer than those

that come out of the M8. This is talking about raw files; 'in camera

processing' not having anything to do with it in the usual sense. A

top quality image from the M8 is always sharper than a top quality

image from the 5D.</I>"<P>

 

http://leica-users.org/v34/msg06413.html <BR>

"<I>the Canon 20D and 5D with Leica R glass

were the first to deliver something even close to drum scanned film.

The Leica DMR and M8 actually hit a higher water mark in terms of

rendering fine detail. In my opinion they actually sit in a place

between the 5D and medium format backs (in the 10 - 16 mpixel range)

in terms of color rendition - skin tone, dynamic range, and fine

detail. They're surpassing drum scanned film of similar ISO and size.</I> "

<P>

Pity those who rely on photo.net for accurate information. There are a few good people here but it's infested with

trolls.

[mjferron]

Vic says "By assuming that anyone who thinks Bush is an idiot is an Obama supporter"

 

Vic I really do not care who anyone supports for US President. I do care that blame is thrown on someone who does not control the stock market in a blind attempt to discredit said person.. The Dow is up 34 points for the month and 18% for the past five years. Wow what a disaster. Maybe George should be blamed for folks profits instead?

[frank_yang]

"I wonder . . . Are the new Summarits considered "sub-prime" lenses?"

 

That makes my day ;-)

[sitemistic]

"A top quality image from the M8 is always sharper than a top quality image from the 5D.""

 

So, why do you suppose professionals use 5D's instead of M8's?

[marc_bergman1]

From Jovan:

<p>

"I decided it wasn't worth the sacrifice required to buy when its output could barely equal a $500 Canon Rebel."

<p>

From Doug, quoting someone else who has actually used the M8:

<p>

"the images that come out of the Canon 5D are softer than those that come out of the M8."

<p>

"A top quality image from the M8 is always sharper than a top quality image from the 5D."

<p>

<p>

From me:

<p>

One can always look to subjective evaluations but I prefer objective tests.

<p>

From DPReview:

<p>

Leica M8 RAW resolution

<p>

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/leicam8/page12.asp

<p>

Leica M8 JPEG Resolution

<p>

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/leicam8/page20.asp

<p>

Canon EOS 1000d RAW Resolution

<p>

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1000d/page18.asp

<p>

Canon EOS 1000d JPEG Resolution

<p>

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1000d/page33.asp

<p>

One can also check color accuracy, noise performance at various ISOs, and dynamic range at various ISOs. One can also download samples from the gallery.

<p>

One can look at the tests on other sites that show the same results.

<p>

From Doug:

<p>

"Pity those who rely on photo.net for accurate information."

<p>

From me:

<p>

Ain't it the truth?

<p>

[ray .]

Passing judgement on a camera you've never even picked up, let alone spent any time shooting with, and then posting

your holier than thou judgement on the internet.. Ha. What a joke.

[emraphoto]

comparing the images that come out of a digital rebel, f430 (or whatever) to a leica m8's files means you've never used one

(m8).

plain and simple.

[ggriswold]

I am hoping that before too long a full sensor, top of the line M body will be made that preserves the usefulness of my Summicrons. This M would have 12-18 Megapixels for stellar enlargements that really let the wonderful optics do their thing. That seems like such a no-brainer-- even if it is not the same form factor as existing M cameras... it surely would beat the clunky DSLR offerings. By not releasing a product like this they are missing an opportunity solely not to anger the small M8 crowd. It is great to promise upgrade paths on a product, but not at the expense of introducing newer and improved technology. I don't think I am alone in wanting a full frame camera that takes M lenses. This goes to a kind of insensitivity to what the users want and prolongs the problems with the M8 going forward. Cut the cord, roll out a M9 and sell some cameras already.

[jeffrey_prokopowicz]

The reason that Leica was so successful during the film days was of course the lenses, but also that they had a product that filled a unique niche that photographers found to be a valuable niche to be filled. How many PJs did you see with a Nikon Fs for long lenses and and a couple Ms for wide angle.

 

In the digital era, first off, the quality of Leica's lenses is blunted by the very nature of the medium, and the post-processing abilities. Wide angle today can be covered by FF SLRs, and longer photography by both DX or FX. There is no compelling reason or need to purchase a digital rangefinder. And the fact that these cameras and lenses are so dearly expensive is just the proverbial final nail in the coffin. And I don't even need to bring-up the documented problems with the M8 to make my case.

 

Leica digital is like a PDA in the age of the iPhone.

[musings]

Wow, this thread had jumped around quite a bit further up, but going back to the comment that people were "cheering the grim news about Leica", nothing could be further from the truth. I had the distinct pleasure of operating (never owning) an R8 for a short period and was knocked out by the sheer craftmanship and quality of the product. The only other SLR that I found that came close was the Contax RTS. I bring this up because it's hard to go from this level of quality to the recent mishaps like sensor problems with the M8, etc. If Leica cannot right the ship, then we will all lose a significant pillar of the photography world...

[emraphoto]

"There is no compelling reason or need to purchase a digital rangefinder. And the fact that these cameras and lenses are so dearly

expensive is just the proverbial final nail in the coffin. And I don't even need to bring-up the documented problems with the M8 to make

my case."

 

there ARE clear and compelling reasons to purchase a digital rangefinder... it is difficult to do but we must seperate personal bias from

fact. there ARE working photographers using digital rangefinders (dah to name one) who have very, very positive things to say. i work

amongst media/wireservice photographers everyday and the m8 shows up regularly. not just around my neck. the thing is once you

spend 12-14 hours a day on your feet, go home and color correct, caption and tag all the photo's then dump into the ftp it's time to go to

sleep. not defend the vitue of the gear you use on the interweb.

 

the m8 has a/ been 100% reliable for me (-15-25 for hours on end/numerous drenchings) b/ produced prints that have really, really

suprised me (coming from an mamiya 7ii) and c/ more than payed for itself in the past two years. that makes it a perfectly viable bit of

kit in my opinion. nice job leica. what i don't understand is all the folks telling me it isn't on the web?!?

[jeffrey_prokopowicz]

Jon, you never said what the "clear and compelling reasons" are to use a digital rangefinder, just that there are clear and compelling reasons. A major reason used to be the imperceptable "snick" of a shutter sound, now they are noisier than some SLRs. What can you do with your M8s that you couldn't accomplish with an SLR? I think you must be the exception with "100% reliability," either that or you're just very lucky.

 

Anyway, continued good luck and profitable shooting.

[fred_obturateur]

I couldn't disagree more with L DaSousa : I roam the streets of my city twice a week with a M3 and a 50mm Summilux ASPH dressed wery casually (read "poorly") and I quite often get hateful glances from the upper-crust, who probably own a M7 "à la carte" and who are like "what is this bum doing with OUR sign of richness".

 

So I think Leica's still a name with a symbolic value (means "money at the bank") to the wealthiest.

 

And getting a guy from Best Buy to manage Leica is one BIG mistake imo. Like getting Henri Ford, the master of mass-production, to manage Rolls Royce. Two different philosophies....