An open letter to Leica (2015)...please share your own thoughts

[etrigan63]

I love Rangefinders but how about innovating the Rangefinder mechanisms itself? A digital rangefinder would be interesting along with the ability the reposition the rangefinder patch to other areas of the frame (or anywhere in the frame).

Speaking of that, any future Leica with Live View should have the ability to move anywhere in the frame not just the center portion. Critical focus becomes less meaningful when we are still forced to focus and recompose if we don't want our subject dead center. Another benefit would be in camera Image Stabilization. Sony has proven that it's possible to do with manual focus lenses. I think Leica should add this even to their rangefinders. It's certainly possible even if the shutter has to be an electronic based shutter.

Keep innovating but remember why we love Leica to begin with.

There is a company called Konost which is doing just that: a digital rangefinder.

http://www.echenique.com/2015/03/03/konost-to-release-digital-rangefinder-camera-in-2016/

 

[bradhusick]

If the Q rumors are true about it being a fixed lens full frame camera, how much should we pay for that? I would say no more than $2500. If that's the price point, Leica wouldn't be able to make them fast enough.

 

[asiafish]

I would only say one thing. Support your customers. That means to follow through with the new cover glass for the CCD sensor corrosion issue. It means making sure you can support the product with spare parts for at least 10 years. It means keep the small, light, slow and affordable lens line current alongside the impressive, fast and fancy stuff.

The M-E was the perfect product for 2012, and a stripped M-E (Typ 240) is needed today. Something just enough less expensive that those who entered on the used market can aspire to buy new.

Finally, listen to us, the customers, as I believe you have been doing. The X (Typ 113) was a direct result of what we said on the launch of the X Vario, which itself was a response to what we said on the launch of the X2. The same goes for the improvements to the Summarit line, which were always great lenses, but now are marketed that way.

 

[asiafish]

I've finally gotten to a comfortable place in my photography, and the same can be said for my gear. I've decided to "opt out" of the current (M240) and probably next upgrade cycle and added a brand-new M-E to my 2-year-old M Monochrom. I've also kept it simple with two modern lenses, both small, light and not the fastest (35mm f/2.5 Summarit and 50mm f/2 Summicron non-APO). Yes, the new gear is probably better, but what I have is far better than anything available a decade ago, and there were plenty of photographers back then much better than I am today.

 

[ashwinrao1]

Great comments from everyone. I do feel that Leica does a reasonable job supporting their products, albeit that it takes some time for them to turn over equipment that we want back (having paid quite a bit for it).

Brad, I suspect that the Q will be close to double the price...though I am hoping for under $4K. I'd consider strongly it for $3,500, but more would give me substantial pause....

 

[atanabe]

I would hope that they keep the price point closer to $3500, X with the 23 f1.7 is $2000, next step would be the ME at $5000. Much higher than that and it will be a tough sell. I was almost all in for the X but the Q is intriguing.

 

[Godfrey]

I'm not sure what the point of this "open letter to Leica" might be. Seems to me that, so far, it's been folks expressing what they personally would prefer Leica to make or do for them.

If I were to address Leica as a corporate entity, I'd first thank them for the forty-five plus years I've had enjoying the use of the equipment they make as well as the excellent, personal service that their U.S. Distributor has provided me. I'd thank them for the outstanding and unusual service—I know of no other camera manufacturer whose service department would have given my 1964 Summicron-R 50mm lens a full CLA as well as a mount upgrade to allow full use on a later model body, itself discontinued since 1973 or so. I would praise their conservative development program and the way they have focused on the essentials that matter to my photography as much as their willingness to innovate with new control paradigms like the touch screen based UI of the T model. I would also praise their handling of the M9 sensor corrosion situation; after all, stuff like that happens now and then, and so far they've done as good a job of taking care of me and all the rest of their customers as I can imagine any company could when presented with such a devastating and unforeseen problem.

If I had any advice to offer them, it would be to keep sticking to the things they've done well, keep the innovation moving, and do their best to keep pricing in check without sacrificing quality and service. They've done an excellent job of making equipment that does what I want, the way I want it to, and of staying relevant (to my photography, at least) in this time of turbulent change across the entire industry.

Regards the Q, just days away seemingly, it certainly seems a fine effort from the rumored specs and design points, although I would prefer it with a 35 to 50 mm lens rather than a 28 (my personal predilection would be a 43mm lens for a fixed lens camera). A derivative or sibling model with interchangeable lenses—probably using the T mount and lenses as that automatically allows M mount lenses as well—would make good sense as a follow-on. I would not suggest abandoning the M line cameras at all, nor introducing yet another mount specification and lens line. There's certainly room in the market for the an M-like modern body as the X and X Vario have, as well as the innovation of the T body. As well as the incorporation of modern features like WiFi communication and control integration, etc.

G

 

[aDam007]

I'm not sure what the point of this "open letter to Leica" might be. Seems to me that, so far, it's been folks expressing what they personally would prefer Leica to make or do for them.

If I were to address Leica as a corporate entity, I'd first thank them for the forty-five plus years I've had enjoying the use of the equipment they make as well as the excellent, personal service that their U.S. Distributor has provided me. I'd thank them for the outstanding and unusual service—I know of no other camera manufacturer whose service department would have given my 1964 Summicron-R 50mm lens a full CLA as well as a mount upgrade to allow full use on a later model body, itself discontinued since 1973 or so. I would praise their conservative development program and the way they have focused on the essentials that matter to my photography as much as their willingness to innovate with new control paradigms like the touch screen based UI of the T model. I would also praise their handling of the M9 sensor corrosion situation; after all, stuff like that happens now and then, and so far they've done as good a job of taking care of me and all the rest of their customers as I can imagine any company could when presented with such a devastating and unforeseen problem.

If I had any advice to offer them, it would be to keep sticking to the things they've done well, keep the innovation moving, and do their best to keep pricing in check without sacrificing quality and service. They've done an excellent job of making equipment that does what I want, the way I want it to, and of staying relevant (to my photography, at least) in this time of turbulent change across the entire industry.

Regards the Q, just days away seemingly, it certainly seems a fine effort from the rumored specs and design points, although I would prefer it with a 35 to 50 mm lens rather than a 28 (my personal predilection would be a 43mm lens for a fixed lens camera). A derivative or sibling model with interchangeable lenses—probably using the T mount and lenses as that automatically allows M mount lenses as well—would make good sense as a follow-on. I would not suggest abandoning the M line cameras at all, nor introducing yet another mount specification and lens line. There's certainly room in the market for the an M-like modern body as the X and X Vario have, as well as the innovation of the T body. As well as the incorporation of modern features like WiFi communication and control integration, etc.

G

And this is where we differ.. You use Leica for fun. I use them for business. Their customer service is inconsistent, and repair times horrible and not up to professional standards. Even with extended "premium" warranties, they let me down.

Their service pales in comparison to Canon/Nikon/Sony. And for the price, their electronics should be better. And if their electronics continue to be "prototypes" at best, they should charge much less, period.

The funny thing is, I really don't mind paying a premium, but I want them to deliver. You know how many e-mails I've sent Leica that said something like "I love your company. I love using your products, but I wish you would take your time, creating something more solid. Something professionals can rely on. And if/when it does break down, that you'd be quick about repairs, and would have a better system in place for loaners and repairs."

So yeah, I can list out what I "WANT" as a product from Leica. But the core of my frustrations over the brand is that they release semi-functional prototypes into the market, and then don't offer the same level of service as other companies.

 

[Godfrey]

And this is where we differ.. You use Leica for fun. I use them for business. ...

That's quite an assumption. I used them for "business" too; still do, when I take a client. They worked/work well for me.

Sorry if the fact that I'm a satisfied customer offends you.
If I weren't, I'd use some other vendor's equipment.

G

 

[Vivek]

If we have to list our use everytime in a thread..I am a rank amateur. Always wish to be and never get saturated, become stale and static. Also would like to have fun with photography. If there is no joy, forget it.

But for the amateurs (not me) many of the online fora will be dead as well.

 

[turtle]

My thoughts are:

Be careful with going overly boutique. IMHO the T system could have been a storming success, but the body is almost all wrong, from my perspective. I was seriously interested in a great quality APS-C very compact 'back to original M concept' type of T, where the investment would be less than M, but with performance great for street and documentary shooters. I understand the M and I get the S, but the T completely lost me as a concept. Please forget the original concept, reinvent it and give the lenses a body appealing to more users.

Please do not forget that not everyone wants to pay a fortune for that extra 5% of performance. There are many other reasons why people buy into the Leica brand (utility, form factor, build quality etc) and so its great to see the Summarit-M range refreshed, but applying this approach to M bodies would be helpful. Get more bodies into the hands of more photographers and reap the benefits of economy of scale. Porsche has not done too badly out of the Boxster and Cayman.

Please clean up quality control. Too many bodies and lenses seem to arrive in customers hands miles out of adjustment (or with other defects).

Well done for your support on the CCD sensors. What a relief to this Monochrom owner. Had you not done this, I would have dropped Leica there and then and sold every last lens, never to return. Paying GBP 5500 for my body was a huge stretch and I have no regrets, thankfully.

Please produce a super high resolution body (if possible) to allow your best lenses to deliver their potential. Maybe it would be financial suicide, but a M system 'S' and 'R' model (Speed and Resolution) would appeal to a lot of people. The problem with the M240 is that it isn't quite either (but to some that will be a good thing).

 

[Vivek]

Well done for your support on the CCD sensors. What a relief to this Monochrom owner. Had you not done this, I would have dropped Leica there and then and sold every last lens, never to return. Paying GBP 5500 for my body was a huge stretch and I have no regrets, thankfully.

+1 on that!

Everytime an important monetary issue for a serious cause comes up, I go through that. Still can't believe how much money that cost!

 

[aDam007]

That's quite an assumption. I used them for "business" too; still do, when I take a client. They worked/work well for me.

Sorry if the fact that I'm a satisfied customer offends you.
If I weren't, I'd use some other vendor's equipment.

G

Your satisfaction stems from the fact that they've replaced a mount on an old lens of yours, because their basic binary technology (which I admit is quite genius) has allowed them to. That's something I've done myself twice now in the last month in under ten minutes (save for enamel drying times). What other assumptions would I come up with, if that's your defence of the brand. Also I bet it took them a while to do said "modernising". Look, I'm not trying to bash you, or your working relationship with the brand, that wasn't my intention. It's just I find it hard to believe that you think Leica service is "professional level" based on the fact that they CLA & updated an old lens for you. Until you've had run ins with them, frequently on a professional level, it's really not fair to comment. Oh and sure I could use another vendors equipment, and I would, if Leica didn't check the boxes that were more important to me. Thankfully I have the money to invest heavily in backup gear. Some people don't, some people won't see the need. Anyway, see below.

**I wrote a big long rant about all the various ways I've been mistreated by Leica. But I decided to erase it, because at the end of the day, I don't really think anyone cares. And, I think it's more productive to just offer a solution. And to be fair, Leica has on occasion made up for it. I've even received phone call apologies which is kinda nice considering. Below I have written a very viable solution. If it's not cost effective, or labor is harder to find then I think. Then I guess it's just not possible. But this is what will make Leica seem professional in my eyes, and will make me more tolerant of QC issues that always seem to crop up. Lastly would make me see value in the brand, as a working professional who uses Leica cameras only**

Here it is, my #1 opinion on how to make Leica better: If every city that had a "Leica Store" it was mandatory to have a Leica repair shop. One or two trained technicians per "Leica Store" who sit in a little room and actually fix things. Rather then having everything be sent to Germany where you're already loosing two weeks due to shipping. At least if products break, I know they'd be fixed within the week. And I'd maybe be a little more tolerant of what fan boys call "quality control issues". Since at this point the repair center is almost on par with Canon/Nikon/Sony/Fuji.

 

[Godfrey]

Your satisfaction stems from the fact that they've replaced a mount on an old lens of yours, because their basic binary technology (which I admit is quite genius) has allowed them to. ...

No. Not to mention that I have no idea what you mean by "their basic binary technology." (Being able to do what they did with the Summicron-R lens for the Leicaflex SL means that a) they had the parts in stock, b) they had the expertise to do the job correctly, and c) they are willing to do it at a reasonable price. Most manufacturers aren't interested in supporting customers with 50 year old products, it's not cost effective, and most manufacturer service personnel are not trained in how to work on such old equipment.)

My satisfaction with Leica stems from the facts that

• ... over the forty-six plus years of using their products, I've had very few needs to call upon their service. And when I did, they provided outstanding service.
• ... the equipment they've made suits a large percentage of my photography very well.
• ... the quality of the lenses and images produced by their equipment is outstanding.

I've never had a "run-in" with Leica service; their equipment has been very robust and dependable. I've never doubted it would get the job done when I picked it out of the bag. When I did need service, I called them and they took care of me. Period.

I have other equipment as well, of course. A Leica RF is not the ideal tool for all of my photographic needs. I've used Leica gear alongside, primarily, Nikon and Olympus SLR cameras as well as medium format cameras. I've had a similar amount of need for their service as well (very little overall). Of the others, Olympus has been the best to work with—almost on par with Leica.

Your rant sounds like you have a chip on your shoulder about Leica and expectations that they are not prepared to meet. I can't see why you would persevere using Leica equipment if you have repeated problems with it, and don't with other vendors' wares. The magic in a photograph is only in a very small way dependent upon the equipment with which it is produced. Why persevere with equipment that annoys you, or that you find unreliable? I'd dump that stuff in an instant—which is why I don't buy Sigma, sold my Sony gear, etc.

I just don't understand why you are so offended by my satisfaction with Leica. The fact that your experiences have been negative has no impact on my experiences with their gear. I'm not offended that you dislike them so much; I'm just mystified as to why you keep using them.

G

 

[aDam007]

No. Not to mention that I have no idea what you mean by "their basic binary technology." (Being able to do what they did with the Summicron-R lens for the Leicaflex SL means that a) they had the parts in stock, b) they had the expertise to do the job correctly, and c) they are willing to do it at a reasonable price. Most manufacturers aren't interested in supporting customers with 50 year old products, it's not cost effective, and most manufacturer service personnel are not trained in how to work on such old equipment.)

My satisfaction with Leica stems from the facts that

• ... over the forty-six plus years of using their products, I've had very few needs to call upon their service. And when I did, they provided outstanding service.
• ... the equipment they've made suits a large percentage of my photography very well.
• ... the quality of the lenses and images produced by their equipment is outstanding.

I've never had a "run-in" with Leica service; their equipment has been very robust and dependable. I've never doubted it would get the job done when I picked it out of the bag. When I did need service, I called them and they took care of me. Period.

I have other equipment as well, of course. A Leica RF is not the ideal tool for all of my photographic needs. I've used Leica gear alongside, primarily, Nikon and Olympus SLR cameras as well as medium format cameras. I've had a similar amount of need for their service as well (very little overall). Of the others, Olympus has been the best to work with—almost on par with Leica.

Your rant sounds like you have a chip on your shoulder about Leica and expectations that they are not prepared to meet. I can't see why you would persevere using Leica equipment if you have repeated problems with it, and don't with other vendors' wares. The magic in a photograph is only in a very small way dependent upon the equipment with which it is produced. Why persevere with equipment that annoys you, or that you find unreliable? I'd dump that stuff in an instant—which is why I don't buy Sigma, sold my Sony gear, etc.

I just don't understand why you are so offended by my satisfaction with Leica. The fact that your experiences have been negative has no impact on my experiences with their gear. I'm not offended that you dislike them so much; I'm just mystified as to why you keep using them.

G

I love rangefinders. I like the 50APO. I just wish Leica would get their stuff together. I can PM you if you'd like more details on my personal experiences. Maybe it'll help you understand how I can't see Leica as a company that offers professional level repairs and service. I ask myself why I even bother with them every time an issue crops up. But I like what I like.. I'm not a business man at the end of the day, I'm an artist I guess. I don't make rational decisions. Or else I wouldn't use Leica for anything professional. This I think is why I get so angry with them, and yeah I probably do have a chip on my shoulder after picking up my gear yesterday from the 8 week "spa" treatment, having it be worse then before it left.

I'm not offended, I just can't believe that our opinions differ so much. And I think you may have misunderstood my intentions. Your opinion of the company, just shocks me, and I disagree with you strongly on the fact that they're up to professional standards. They are not up to par. I really wish they were, I use them professionally, so I need them to be, but they are not.

 

[Godfrey]

No need to send me your personal troubles. We're going to disagree. Let's leave it at that.

I'm happy enough with Leica and their current products that I've recently put another $12,000 into another lens and another body, and will likely buy another new lens or two in the foreseeable future. For me, that's a huge statement of how much satisfaction I have with their products today.

G

 

[iiiNelson]

From my personal experience and the reason I bought out of Leica almost 100% (I retain a contingent of a few lenses in case they do make something I want at a price I'm willing to pay) is that they are a luxury company, with luxury prices, that don't exactly offer cutting edge technology to match. I've come to realize that a "Movado" (Sony in this analogy) with actual swiss movements (while not cheap) might actually perform better than an "Omega" (Leica in this analogy) that has changed to Chinese movements. They both tell time and one has a more prestigious lineage but it's not the standard of the world it once was any longer.

I love my M and if money were no object and I had the time or thought to use it more I would not have sold it. The fact is it could not surpass what Sony was doing from a technology standpoint. While some don't like the constant updates/ revisions of the Sony bodies - I rather constant updates and have the choice to upgrade while retaining 30-50% of new value than to be stuck with a body technologically outdated when compared with the competition prior to release.

That's just my view. Regarding what they are doing now and what they may do in the future regarding a mirrorless body - it's too little and too late I think for the price they will probably charge. I mean look at today alone - They announce the Q and it seems like it'll be a great camera but it's priced halfway between a A7RII and a new Leica M-E. Their one wildcard that I get the urge for is the Monochrom and if someone makes a less expensive FF alternative then I'd probably sell the rest of my M lenses towards it.

 

[aDam007]

No need to send me your personal troubles. We're going to disagree. Let's leave it at that.

I'm happy enough with Leica and their current products that I've recently put another $12,000 into another lens and another body, and will likely buy another new lens or two in the foreseeable future. For me, that's a huge statement of how much satisfaction I have with their products today.

G

Yep, satisfaction with their products is exactly why I have spent over $100K on Leica gear. That and I like stuff. But I never said anything about not being satisfied with their gear. That's the whole point of my frustration. I'm incredibly satisfied with the stuff... When it works.

What I'm not satisfied with is their customer service, and repair times. And overall logistics in both areas could be vastly improved with minimal effort.
There is no denying that. Anyone I know who uses Leica and has had need of a repair would say the same.

It's kinda like having a bitchy bipolar girlfriend, but she's good in the sac. Though I'm married so maybe that's not the best analogy

Obviously I'm just annoyed over my 50APO / M240 repairs, and the whole S-system nonsense I'v dealt with recently..

 

[JonPB]

An open letter to Leica:

I think more people would be likely to spend what it takes to buy a Leica if more people were talking about the art and craft of photography than about the photographic equipment they are interested in purchasing. Education is key: the more people know, the more they appreciate quality.

My recommendation would be to make a line of special edition cameras and/or lenses, the proceeds of which are entirely dedicated to funding endowments for photographers. This might mean that tuition is paid for photography classes or workshops. This might mean that teachers--grade school, college, or workshop--are supported so that they can offer more people the chance to learn from them. It might mean something else. But I think that more than a few Leica collectors would happily rationalize their purchases if they knew they were sharing their passion for photography and for all things Leica. And I think that more than a few photographers who would never otherwise consider Leica might come to appreciate the value, as opposed to solely focusing on the cost, of Leica equipment.

Oh, and if the next generation M-E is nothing more than an M 240 sensor and mount welded to the rest of the Q 116, I'd be very pleased to buy one. To top that, make a second generation R-Adapter M that includes a little motor to stop down the aperture.

Cheers,
Jon

 

[doug]

Oh, and if the next generation M-E is nothing more than an M 240 sensor and mount welded to the rest of the Q 116, I'd be very pleased to buy one. To top that, make a second generation R-Adapter M that includes a little motor to stop down the aperture.

+1

Interchangeable lens Q + smart adapter for R lenses = my checkbook is ready

otherwise Sony gets my money