New Mini M?

[doug]

None of the posters who said nice things about the camera said, "I will buy it for full retail price". In fact they all said, "this is not the camera for me".

This is not the camera for me. There, I typed it. At the same time I believe there are people whose values preferences and whatever else are not identical to mine; I understand that their values and preferences are as valid as my own and I believe it's presumptuous to assume that those who would buy this camera would do so for reasons I would understand (whether I agree or not) such as the Red Dot.

 

[jonoslack]

Some people value enjoying using a camera more than they value spec sheets. The best camera is the one you have with you, and if you enjoy using it it's more likely you'll have it with you.

Exactly Doug - and if it also produces excellent images . . . . .

 

[Vivek]

This is not the camera for me. There, I typed it. At the same time I believe there are people whose values preferences and whatever else are not identical to mine; I understand that their values and preferences are as valid as my own and I believe it's presumptuous to assume that those who would buy this camera would do so for reasons I would understand (whether I agree or not) such as the Red Dot.

That is presumptuous all the same.

 

[monza]

Jono, not meaning to be difficult...just could have chosen a better way to make my statement. The target market probably doesn't really care enough to investigate manual operation. They care more about the magical "Leica" cachet. Sure, this doesn't mean they "know nothing about photography" but something tells me this will be the case for the majority; certainly most will not be photo-geeks, as you say.

It's a Kim Kardashian camera, for shoppers in Leica stores and boutiques, and Rodeo Drive. Some may not like this flippant pop-culture analysis, but seriously, what else can it be?

I asked the owner of one of the largest Leica dealers in the US what his opinion is on the camera: "What a sad day for Leica R&D." They've had ZERO interest in the camera. Although there will be some overlap of circles with existing Leica owners, this overlap will be small. I don't expect traditional dealers to sell many.

 

[Vivek]

It's a Kim Kardashian camera,

That would make it a camera for those who fund and support photography and photographers!

Kim Kardashian's 'Million Dollar Baby': Star 'Splashing The Cash On Luxury Birth' - Celebrity Gossip, News & Photos, Movie Reviews, Competitions - Entertainmentwise

$1000/day photographer hired!

 

[edwardkaraa]

To say it bluntly, if you think this camera is for you, go and buy one. If you think it's not for you, shut the f*#% up and move on. This is the principle I have always followed on the forums. Bashing a product, or the company producing it, because it doesn't suit my personal criteria, would be really pointless. Not directed at anyone in particular, more like a note to myself.

 

[Vivek]

That would make it a camera for those who fund and support photography and photographers!

Kim Kardashian's 'Million Dollar Baby': Star 'Splashing The Cash On Luxury Birth' - Celebrity Gossip, News & Photos, Movie Reviews, Competitions - Entertainmentwise

$1000/day photographer hired!

Oh, I forgot to add that is a positive reference you have made, Robert (in case some did not get that)!

 

[retow]

So it`s intended "not for photo geeks", a "Kim Kardashian camera" etc. Really? Isn`t it exactly these shoppers who want an all auto camera? Yet the X Vario`s manual controls, UI and reduction to the essentials are exactly designed for enthusiasts/photo geeks, as are the ones of the X1 and X2. So partly it`s designed for enthusiasts, and spec wise for non enthusiasts? This does not make a lot of sense, does it? As neither of these two groups will be fully satisfied with this very premium priced Leica. Leica went half way with this one. It could have appealed to enthusiasts with an integrated EVF and at least a lens with a more exciting zoom range (24-70e).

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Okay folks it is what it is buy it, don't buy it . Don't insult the folks that want to buy it or not buy it. It really is pointless to a major extent. Leica fans it wont hurt them they will still be in business another 100 years. Non Leica fans why would you care. I already threatened 100 posts back to close this thread. Drop the insults aimed at others. Drop the innuendoes from non Leica fans that Leica buyers are morons. We get it already. Enough we ALL have better things to do. Da lets see taking some nice images would be a change.

Capice

 

[MPK2010]

Some people value enjoying using a camera more than they value spec sheets.

Amen. It is not the only important characteristic of a camera, but it is the most important one. Another is the rendering style of the lens/sensor combination. Neither shows up on spec sheets. I have not used this new camera, but it may be strong on both counts. Looking forward to seeing some photos.

 

[monza]

Wow, people take this stuff way too seriously.

It's not really pointless to discuss a target market. This isn't an indictment of the camera, or the buyers, it's simply an analysis of the target market.

No one really knows what Leica is trying to do with this camera, other than themselves. Maybe they completely missed the mark and the price is far too high and it will not be a success to Leica; that will be self-evident if we see a price drop or it's simply discontinued. Maybe it will be wildly successful to whatever measure Leica has defined; they might sell all they can build. None of us know these things.

If the price were lower, it would be an entirely different thread and a different market niche and we'd be focused on other things. But this shouldn't make a simple market analysis a verboten discussion...

 

[Chuck Jones]

Wow, people take this stuff way too seriously.

It's not really pointless to discuss a target market. This isn't an indictment of the camera, or the buyers, it's simply an analysis of the target market.

No one really knows what Leica is trying to do with this camera, other than themselves. Maybe they completely missed the mark and the price is far too high and it will not be a success to Leica; that will be self-evident if we see a price drop or it's simply discontinued. Maybe it will be wildly successful to whatever measure Leica has defined; they might sell all they can build. None of us know these things.

If the price were lower, it would be an entirely different thread and a different market niche and we'd be focused on other things. But this shouldn't make a simple market analysis a verboten discussion...

I don't know Roger, save for his posts here on the forum. But I do know Leica's, and many of the same people at Leica that Roger knows and deals with often. I've heard this market strategy discussion from them myself. Leica's products have changed slowly over the years, too slow for the present owners and investors. They are trying to find market niches in an already over saturated retail camera marketplace. The luxury upper end cache market is just one of them.

Get used to it folks. My bet is there are bound to be more products with equally strange origins for even stranger marketing purposes still to come. Leica is no longer run by engineers or designers, it is run by bean counters spending money on marketing wonks to tell them where the markets are for high priced "luxury" specialty niche products to expand the line.

These new products will not be for most of us. They already own us, as the very fact this hotly debated thread exists in the first place clearly shows. They have our attention, and products for us to focus on with the M line and S line. Just as Canon and Nikon have several things in their product catalogs very few of us would ever need, Leica is trying to build a market with a few products for the glamour set. Good luck to them.

 

[Vivek]

They already own us, as the very fact this hotly debated thread exists in the first place clearly shows. They have our attention, and products for us to focus on with the M line and S line.

Good post! :thumbs:

 

[biglouis]

We could all discuss this ad nauseum but I must say I am beginning to be won over by this camera.

Firstly, I like the zoom range. Secondly, I suspect it will give as good results as, say, a Leica DRF with prime lenses of equivalent focal lengths with the exception of the exotic types, e.g. crons and summiluxes.

What could be better? Compact package, no issue with lens changes and dust, no issues with "Hmmm what lens do I need for my holiday to wherever" - just a straightforward tool with excellent optical quality and I suspect equally excellent results.

It is also worth pointing out that in fixed lens cameras the size of sensor is moot beyond APS-C. I say that as a RX-1 owner. To all practical intents and purposes the fact that my RX-1 is a full sized sensor is largely meaningless.

As a tool this camera may not be sold as a professional instrument but I bet it could easily produce professional results even if you cannot rely on it alone for weddings, or use it for sports events.

One thing I am intrigued about is whether this camera will appear as, or is indeed a re-badged Panasonic. There are rumours abounding about a possible new Panasonic fixed lens camera.

Anyway, just my two cents having thought more about it.

Louis

 

[jonoslack]

Wow, people take this stuff way too seriously.

It's not really pointless to discuss a target market. This isn't an indictment of the camera, or the buyers,

:ROTFL: If course it is Robert - it's an indictment of both

There is a rather wonderful video of Jeff Ascough showing Don McCullin how to use a Canon 5D MkIII - it's the first time he has ever shot digital
Don McCulin with a Canon
If you haven't watched it, then you really should.

What's the point of this?

What I'm trying to get at, is that there are plenty of splendid photographers (at every level) who have simply not kept up with the technology. They may have kept up with their photography (as Don McCullin certainly has).

The X Vario really is a camera which you can just pick up and use - even if you hadn't used a digital camera before - to say that the specs don't match something like the Fuji is, of course, true - but specs a good photograph do not make. Good Photographers make Good Photographs, and there are plenty of people around who are Good Photographers (even if they aren't as good as Don McCulin) - but who really aren't interested in the Tech. But they're very unlikely to hang out here

That's who I think this camera is directed at - of course, it's a Leica, so they need to have some money - but then they'd need some money for the Fuji too.

 

[biglouis]

What I'm trying to get at, is that there are plenty of splendid photographers (at every level) who have simply not kept up with the technology. They may have kept up with their photography (as Don McCullin certainly has).

I agree, it would be wrong to think McCullin or even a Salgado (who does do digital) have failed to 'keep up with the technology'. They are photographers first and foremost and work in the medium which best befits their 'art'. Why change a winning formula just for the sake of the technology?

I was blown away by the Salgado exhibition at the Natural History museum - a complete natural history of our planet, entirely in black and white! And shot on a variety of cameras, although the point is that the technology is actually irrelevant, it is the results which are compelling.

LouisB

 

[douglasf13]

:ROTFL: If course it is Robert - it's an indictment of both

There is a rather wonderful video of Jeff Ascough showing Don McCullin how to use a Canon 5D MkIII - it's the first time he has ever shot digital
Don McCulin with a Canon
If you haven't watched it, then you really should.

What's the point of this?

What I'm trying to get at, is that there are plenty of splendid photographers (at every level) who have simply not kept up with the technology. They may have kept up with their photography (as Don McCullin certainly has).

The X Vario really is a camera which you can just pick up and use - even if you hadn't used a digital camera before - to say that the specs don't match something like the Fuji is, of course, true - but specs a good photograph do not make. Good Photographers make Good Photographs, and there are plenty of people around who are Good Photographers (even if they aren't as good as Don McCulin) - but who really aren't interested in the Tech. But they're very unlikely to hang out here

That's who I think this camera is directed at - of course, it's a Leica, so they need to have some money - but then they'd need some money for the Fuji too.

Boy, I don't know, Jono. I can usually find a silver lining in many Leica products, like the X2, but this X-Vario just seems too far out in too many categories. It has a slow zoom, the usual Sony 16mp sensor, it is still kind of large for what it is, and it is expensive. While many may not keep up with digital technology, I'd think that most photographers spending this kind of money would have a handle on the importance of things like the apertures available.

I'm trying hard to understand who this camera is aimed at, outside of just being a bit of a wealthy ornament...not that I have a problem with that. I guess if you're a landscape and/or travel shooter in good light who wants something sort of small and very well built, this camera could make sense, but, as has been mentioned, there are so many other more flexible choices out there at such a lower cost, the wealth aspect of this keeps creeping in.

Man, if the zoom on the X-Vario collapsed into the body somehow, I could really see a market for it, despite the price.

 

[ptomsu]

Boy, I don't know, Jono. I can usually find a silver lining in many Leica products, like the X2, but this X-Vario just seems too far out in too many categories. It has a slow zoom, the usual Sony 16mp sensor, it is still kind of large for what it is, and it is expensive. While many may not keep up with digital technology, I'd think that most photographers spending this kind of money would have a handle on the importance of things like the apertures available.

I'm trying hard to understand who this camera is aimed at, outside of just being a bit of a wealthy ornament...not that I have a problem with that. I guess if you're a landscape and/or travel shooter in good light who wants something sort of small and very well built, this camera could make sense, but, as has been mentioned, there are so many other more flexible choices out there at such a lower cost, the wealth aspect of this keeps creeping in.

Man, if the zoom on the X-Vario collapsed into the body somehow, I could really see a market for it, despite the price.

Did you actually try one yourself?

I would consider me as a very advanced photographer knowing and owning (having owned) most of the latest and greatest gear. Anyway I am still amazed by this "ugly" and "not state of the art" Leica X Vario, with a far too slow lens etc., etc.

I see that you are still just behind latest and greatest technology, which you do hope makes photography better. But this will not happen, trust me! But a camera which you like to grap ad use will get you there much closer.

Just my 5c ...

Peter

 

[biglouis]

...and one more point.

Has there been much discussion about the distance scale? That seems like a very useful addition. Proper manual focussing. I don't even have that on my RX-1.

LouisB

 

[douglasf13]

Did you actually try one yourself?

I would consider me as a very advanced photographer knowing and owning (having owned) most of the latest and greatest gear. Anyway I am still amazed by this "ugly" and "not state of the art" Leica X Vario, with a far too slow lens etc., etc.

I see that you are still just behind latest and greatest technology, which you do hope makes photography better. But this will not happen, trust me! But a camera which you like to grap ad use will get you there much closer.

Just my 5c ...

Peter

I'm not sure what your point is, so I don't know how to respond.