Official USA Pricing for Leica S2

[jonoslack]

These reactions from mostly people in the US are understandable allthough somewhat unjustified.

snip


Another thing nobody pointed at: It is easier to cut prices than to increase prices.
If sales are less than expected a price cut may well be possible.

In absolute terms the S2 is not priced out of reach for most Europeans be it pro's or amateurs.

snip

As for the future of Leica depending on the faith of the S2:
Leica is owned by a powerful German entrepreneur who can in fact afford the whole S2 adventure to be written off against taxes.
Nobody with a sense for sound business starts the development of a new product to loose money.
In this case it is highly unlikely an unsuccesfull S2 will take Leica down.

Just a note of solidarity - I completely agree - this thread is like some kind of dreadful outraged feeding frenzy. You don't like the price? don't buy it then! If everyone agrees then it'll be a failure - if not . . .

As for the development of an M9 - as I said back in May, if they were developing one, they wouldn't tell us (quite unlike the S2).

 

[sinwen]

We need hope and pray every day that the S2 is a roaring success, else Leica will use the M9 to offset for S2 losses.

I believe there won't be any M9 (full frame) at all.
*First because Leica has always said it was impossible to make a FF into a M body with actual M lenses. Remember they couldn't place a proper IR filter to avoid problem with certain lenses geting too much inside. It seems to be a physical size matter and it's not going to change.
*Second, what was 2009 Leica incomes made from? M8.2 ? Hug....! P&S ? Pana sell them not Leica.
They should be already into the hole !
*Third, the M concept is outdated (see below)

The new M lenses are insanely expensive (the new Nocti & 24 Lux). And the Safari and White editions of the M8.2?!?!

As was the DMR and the M8 !!!!!! Awfully expensive !!!! I repeat again these cameras are just pieces of electronic the market provides to everyone. Is Leica so pretentious to mark up five times what they don't manufacture? As for lenses it's a bit different and we can understand a high price for a high mechanical/optical products Leica does.
Again whealthy people didn't care for 5000 figure, at 25000 they feel the punch and bark with the wolf.

The longer Leica waits, the smaller the M9 market gets. And these crazy prices are alienating their customers.

The MicroThird format has taken over the M, Leica is part the 4/3 membership and here again they missed the boat.

 

[KurtKamka]

No offense, but the 4/3 concept and cameras don't do much for me. Probably just me, but I can't fathom giving up the rangefinder experience for a 4/3 experience.

Kurt

 

[ptomsu]

No matter how good the S System really is or not - these prices are a joke :thumbdown:

I cannot see any application where such a system will be worth the money especially if you compare to P65+ and the new H3D2-60. And those prices are more than competitive!

And finally - which SW is going to ship with the S System being comparable with C1Pro or Phocus ????

I feel this is a clear nightmare where Leica is driving into. Wish them good luck but I do not believe in this!

 

[fotografz]

The biggest problem with this camera isn't the price, but the marketing. On their website, Leica states: "In a class by itself", followed up by studio shots on the S2 page that could just as well have been taken with any MF camera. Result: photographers on this and other forums discuss the price of the S2 compared to Hasselblad and Phamiya, a comparison the Leica is doomed to lose.

If Leica had shown photos of the camera in use by some super tough NG photographer hanging from Mount Everest by one hand in the rain, taking photos with the S2 with the other, we would have seen some very different discussions. It is a unique camera, but it's hardly mentioned in any discussion I've seen so far.

Leica's marketing and PR department (do they have one?) has a lot to learn. They'd better start before it's too late. For starters, they should have a look in the Nikon F6 brochure. That's the kind of stuff they need to show to build confidence behind what is supposed to be an all-weather camera. Not some dinky studio shots.

Some photographers, like me, wouldn't even consider a traditional MF camera, so comparing the price with those is rather uninteresting. The question for me is if I can afford it or not. At the moment, I can't, but if I could, I would buy it in an instant if it works as claimed.

I'd have to agree with you on this point to some degree. I spent a life time marketing almost everything under the sun, including some pretty expensive considered purchase items.

IMEO Leica has missed the mark so many times with their marketing and PR efforts that one wonders if there is a sub conscience corporate death wish at work More likely it's stubborn corporate arrogance ... of which there are numerous examples in the news every day.

A potential issue with your marketing scenario is that companies like Phase One have done extreme torture tests with their backs already ... and its common knowledge that their gear will take a lickin' and keep on tickin' (frozen in a block of ice; Elephant stop demos). Now the camera body and lens o rings is a different story, and perhaps the source of a competitive stance. However, if even slightly successful, I doubt it would take much for Hassey and Phase to seal up their systems overnight.

The other aspect is the advent of some pretty "up there" bullet proof 35mm DSLRs ... and relentlessly improving optics as a result of higher meg. machines. These cameras are already in excess of what many publishers and even advertisers require for reproduction ... who, BTW, are paying considerably less for the work these days. I think most pros that could afford this system would be paying for it with money made 5 years ago, not now, or even in the foreseeable future.

Like you, I'd like one. Like you I can't afford it. Coulda, woulda, shoulda ... but couldn't, wouldn't and shouldn't.

In a nut shell that's the number one marketing hurdle IMO.

Including full 3 year (or longer) full passport warranties at least during the launch phase would have helped position the S2 as being both a higher image quality camera than a 35mm DSLR, while being as tough as any 35mm DSLR out there. Whether even that would be enough is debateable.

 

[Steen]

(...) Look at how successful Sony has been with a Prosumer level, high meg camera because of the AF Zeiss lenses available for it. Granted, the A900 is only 3K, but the Zeiss ZA lenses aren't exactly inexpensive considering that none of them are APO designs.

I fully agree, Marc.

The clever combination of Sony A900 + the high-end ZA lenses was exactly what I had in mind when saying: "If I had a mainly optical company I would want to develop a camera that made me sell a lot of lenses instead of just very few lenses ... "

I simply fear that Leica's camera price will decrease the sale. The high-end S-lenses vill last for decades, the digital body won't.

 

[TRSmith]

Just a note of solidarity - I completely agree - this thread is like some kind of dreadful outraged feeding frenzy. You don't like the price? don't buy it then! If everyone agrees then it'll be a failure - if not . . .

You might be right Jono. But if I were introducing a new product to market and encountered this sort of reaction to its pricing by one of the larger markets for said product, I'd have to be concerned. As in most aspects of life, perception is often the most critical part of success. So far, as Jorgen has suggested with his remarks about the Leica Marketing and PR, we have only their word that it's the "best" but very real evidence that it's the most expensive.

All of which is ok I guess. There is always a product (seemingly) that is considered the ultimate in terms of quality with a price to match. But after all the odd stumbles surrounding the M and the management changes at Leica, it (the intro of the S2) feels like the opposite of a foundation for future success.

It may turn out that we're all a bunch of whiners (whingers?) and that within months, the Euro and the Dollar will be on par allowing everyone in here to suddenly realize they can afford to take the plunge with a completely new system. But until then I have to trust my gut which tells me this is far too rich for my blood and start getting serious about the alternatives.

And yes, that is disappointing. I really wanted the camera. The long build-up since the first revelation of the camera had me salivating. It feels almost as if after silently building my courage and rationalizing every which way, when I finally asked Gwyneth Paltrow for a date, she laughed at me.

 

[sinwen]

Buying the M digital hasn't done any good to Leica. Because they could afford the toy they bought it without much price consideration but just rely on "Leica fame".
This has encouraged leica in their wrong pretentious path.
The S2 idea was to beat the CanoNikon FF "only", already dropping the R line in their mind, until they realised they were playing with MF, they thought "great idea we'll strike two with one stone".
If only this prices concern had taken place when it should, means at the launch of the DMR and then the M8, this S2 project would never existed and Leica alive

 

[Chris C]

Buying the M digital hasn't done any good to Leica. Because they could afford the toy they bought it without much price consideration but just rely on "Leica fame"....

If, by 'they' you mean those of us who purchased the M8; then your statement needs redressing. The M8 is my first Leica. I purchased it after rigourously following the trauma of it's bodged release [complete with utterly incompetent PR and marketing by Leica], and the revelations by the earliest adopters that it was indeed a compact camera which punched above it's weight. I downsized to the M8 after working with 6x7, and 6x9 rollfilm rangefinder cameras for over 25 years, it was a very conscious choice to purchase the M8 and the cost was big for me. My M8 is a serious camera bought for serious work, it has it's legacy faults and I've voiced them , but it doesn't resemble a toy in any way whatsoever.

Contrary to your assertion, those of us who did take the leap by purchasing the M8 may well have saved the company - though that is a speculation as none of us have access to the company's true financial health at the that time. I have zero interest in what you perceive as 'Leica fame', but I do have interest in seeing the company invigorate it's 'M' line - which I believe has greater potential than the current M8/M8.2, or the S2 which has always felt like a vanity dead end to me. Leica deserves a lot of the criticism it gets from it's customers, but your sloganeering I quoted above is ultimately weightless, and worthless, and fails to land a blow - if that was your intention.

........... Chris

 

[fotografz]

If, by 'they' you mean those of us who purchased the M8; then your statement needs redressing. The M8 is my first Leica. I purchased it after rigourously following the trauma of it's bodged release [complete with utterly incompetent PR and marketing by Leica], and the revelations by the earliest adopters that it was indeed a compact camera which punched above it's weight. I downsized to the M8 after working with 6x7, and 6x9 rollfilm rangefinder cameras for over 25 years, it was a very conscious choice to purchase the M8 and the cost was big for me. My M8 is a serious camera bought for serious work, it has it's legacy faults and I've voiced them , but it doesn't resemble a toy in any way whatsoever.

Contrary to your assertion, those of us who did take the leap by purchasing the M8 may well have saved the company - though that is a speculation as none of us have access to the company's true financial health at the that time. I have zero interest in what you perceive as 'Leica fame', but I do have interest in seeing the company invigorate it's 'M' line - which I believe has greater potential than the current M8/M8.2, or the S2 which has always felt like a vanity dead end to me. Leica deserves a lot of the criticism it gets from it's customers, but your sloganeering I quoted above is ultimately weightless, and worthless, and fails to land a blow - if that was your intention.

........... Chris

Ditto.

After many initial trials and tribulations with the M8, it has settled down to be a serious tool I use for a fair amount of paying work. Nothing is more welcome when on the go for 8 straight hours of shooting than to lift the M8 to eye rather than the lead brick I've been toting around all day. The image quality for much of that work demonstrates that the Leica legacy is still there running side-by-side with the big dogs.

-Marc

 

[jonoslack]

Look at how successful Sony has been with a Prosumer level, high meg camera because of the AF Zeiss lenses available for it. Granted, the A900 is only 3K, but the Zeiss ZA lenses aren't exactly inexpensive considering that none of them are APO designs.

Has it been successful?
I know it's much liked around here (I love mine). But I see no signs of it being a success, my dealer hasn't sold many, my other dealer stopped selling them altogether. Added to which I've never seen one in the 'wild' and I don't know anybody outside these forums who actually owns one.

 

[jonoslack]

You might be right Jono. But if I were introducing a new product to market and encountered this sort of reaction to its pricing by one of the larger markets for said product, I'd have to be concerned. As in most aspects of life, perception is often the most critical part of success. So far, as Jorgen has suggested with his remarks about the Leica Marketing and PR, we have only their word that it's the "best" but very real evidence that it's the most expensive.

Hi Tim
I don't think this ever looked like a "larger market for said product". Maybe some of the well heeled amateurs (and I bet some will still fall for it). What I find really strange is that anyone is surprised at the price - they've always talked about €20,000 for the body. The lenses look to me to be exactly the prices I'd expect (especially when looking at the prices of the new M Lenses). It was never going to be attractive for anyone who is cost conscious AND also has an investment in other MF products.

Manufacturing in Europe to Leica standards with a limited production - how was it going to be anything other than blisteringly expensive? Selling bodies at a loss so you can make money on the lenses means you have to put up the prices of the lenses!

Their stated target was fashion and advertising (a rare beast around these forums?).

I'm not for a second saying that it's going to be a success (I don't pretend to know), I'm just astonished at the outraged surprise for what was (even to me) absolutely obvious.

I still think it's success hinges almost entirely on how good it is (which is rare for a camera).

 

[Guy Mancuso]

The real issue here is the perceived value and costs are way out of line given the economy and competition out here already. When 99 percent of the people say ah crap it is way out of line than what we expected or what makes prudent sense to the wallet than you have a major issue. It is the stubborn corporate politics that is going to bury them. Obviously Leica completely ignored every comment and suggestion made when it came to introducing a new system to the market. People that know or deal with the industry on a daily basis and have a sense of value in the product lines and having systems out there already producing the best images on the planet. The other issue is it went beyond competing for 35mm users by around 22 thousand dollars and went beyond MF by around 8 thousand dollars. It jumped from a tweener system into something way beyond what it should be. It jumped complete categories by just the price alone 34k for a basic setup is beyond any reasonable reach for 99 percent of the population. That is way to big a number to be successful . If that number was even 95 percent that thinks it's too much at least they had 5 percent to maybe pull the rabbit out of the hat. In this case it is only as obvious as the nose on our face that Leica is truly trying to makeup there entire R&D output in a 1 or 2 thousand units and going for short term returns. At least this is very perceived by me. This is really depressing to watch and see them sleeves completely put a rope around there neck on release. There not even giving themselves a chance here and for what reason to say they have the most expensive system around and say we can pounce on everyone when we all know that is not remotely true at all. Maybe they don't follow the tests that go on between backs or completely ignore them. I'm going to say this and it is not very nice but the key word here and I truly believe what has everyone scratching there head is one word arrogance. Arrogance just does not work in the market anymore

 

[jonoslack]

There not even giving themselves a chance here

Whatever - I'm just astonished that you're surprised - it's actually cheaper than they suggested they were aiming at!

p.s. arrogance works in every marketplace I look at!

 

[Double Negative]

I think Leica is just doing what Leica does best... Selling to that elusive, yet deep-pocketed 1-2%. Is it expensive? Yes. Is it really nice stuff? Sure. But let's face it - Leica has never been about the mass market. They enjoy a niche that has become associated with the Leica brand name. There WILL be people buying the S2 at this price, rest assured. It's just a matter of how many, in the long run.

As for Leica going for short-term profits, sure they're good at that. Sell less units but with a much higher profit. But even if they do sell out all of the 1,000 units in the first run - they still wouldn't recoup the R&D, tooling and marketing costs. So it seems one would have to take "short-term" a little loosely.

Meh. I know I ain't buying one. :wtf:

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Whatever - I'm just astonished that you're surprised - it's actually cheaper than they suggested they were aiming at!

p.s. arrogance works in every marketplace I look at!

Actually Jono it is not what they promised and that was to be competitive to other MF systems. It is not even close as I said before i can get very close or way above the S2 and still come in at a much lower cost. Frankly I can get a P65+ for less. Am I surprised , yes I am they overshot this thing by a country mile. If it was closer than i would not had a issue at all but it's out of control when you can't get a lens for less than 5 K US. That's just sick

The sad part really is this it is really taking the Pro's right out of it before it even starts and those superstars everyone keeps wishing for are almost vanished. I just spent a lot of time with the NY fashion shooters and they are hurting big time. We will never get back to those big productions and if we do they will be very limited in nature.

All this did was keep my wife out of jail from shooting my head off if I bought one. LOL

 

[robmac]

Doublle Negative - you're right in many respects and had the S2 being targeted as THE high-end very well-monied consumer camera, I think folks would still be surprised over the price, but just shake it off as Leica being Leica (as you say).

However the S2 is designed as a pro-MF body (dual shutters, etc) designed to go up against Hassy/Phase - in the hands of pros. They designed (in their minds) a Hassy H3dII-39 'killer' yet priced it like they were totally ignorant of current state of the pro gear market: priced at 2007-08 levels, large $$$$ for a premium S&S package (when the reputation of their current S&S is in the toilet), won't have many lenses out until 2010, try justifying the price (to a pro) as it comes with a copy of LightRoom (what drugs are they on?), when they have a lousy rep for new (digital) body intros, no rental presence, their first commercial attempt at AF, no entry kit package etc, etc., etc.

In short they design a pro MF body then price and market it like it was a platinum-plated limited edition 24x36mm AF version of the M9 - and then sum.

In optics, Leica is second to none. In camera ergos/mechanics (IMHO) they excel, in electronics - uh, iffy. In marketing, PR and strategic planning - I've seen few worse (and that's saying something). As said in a post some time ago, from the perspective of who they designed it for and who they hope(d) to sell it to - this thing is DOA.

Hopefully enough of the (monied) faithful, collectors, and so-called' superstars' pick up the 1000 unit slack or any meaningfully improved M8.2 or future FF M_ will be wishful thinking.

 

[jonoslack]

Actually Jono it is not what they promised and that was to be competitive to other MF systems. It is not even close as I said before i can get very close or way above the S2 and still come in at a much lower cost. Frankly I can get a P65+ for less. Am I surprised , yes I am they overshot this thing by a country mile. If it was closer than i would not had a issue at all but it's out of control when you can't get a lens for less than 5 K US. That's just sick

As I remember it they were always talking of body prices at around €20,000, and it's less than that - whatever the current dollar conversion rate is not their fault (although it might be their problem).

The sad part really is this it is really taking the Pro's right out of it before it even starts and those superstars everyone keeps wishing for are almost vanished. I just spent a lot of time with the NY fashion shooters and they are hurting big time. We will never get back to those big productions and if we do they will be very limited in nature.

All this did was keep my wife out of jail from shooting my head off if I bought one. LOL

I don't think those superstars are vanished in Europe . . . but either way, the idea that any reasonable pro who already had a fully working MF setup was going to rush out and change it all for an S2 is cloud cuckoo land - you might want to do it, but getting out of your existing system (after they've all dumped their prices) was always going to be impossibly expensive.

If they're really aiming at 1000 bodies a year (and perhaps that's all they can make). There are enough people who can easily afford it. You talk about turning off 99%, if they turn off 999 out of a thousand they still won't be able to make enough.

I stick to my point - if it's good, then it'll sell - not to you - certainly not to me, but it'll sell. (there's no shortage of ferraris and bentleys in our streets)

 

[LJL]

Another few stokes of this fire.....

Leica has always reveled in being an "uber" brand of sorts. O.K., that is a given. However, as Guy and others have mentioned, Leica went out of its way at the initial announcement of the S2 to declare that they were planning on moving into a market segment with a superior product at competitive prices. At the time, they were still sounding like they wanted to create a tweener market niche. So far, fine. Well, now they are trying to deliver into that tweener market niche, but at prices that exceed the MF niche. Hmmm, something seems amiss already, but most of us that have used Leica glass were prepared for some premium, just not what Leica is asking now. It remains to be proven that this new camera is able to produce everything it touts, all the time, every time without issues. But wait, we have yet to see anything beyond a few Webified images in a market pandering ad. We have heard a few folks that have handled it be impressed, etc., but none in the hands of testers, nobody really shaking it down, no images to display the boasted superiority of things, etc.

As others have stated more elegantly than me, the price of the body is almost insulting from several perspectives. First, it is single body design, just like the 35mm DSLRs it is really competing with. None of those competitors have every looked at their bodies as anything more than nearly obsolete in a few years. Leica is on that same track, regardless of what they say. It may have a 56% bigger sensor than a 35mm DSLR, but that hardly supports a 300% price differential in my mind, nor in the minds and pocketbooks of a lot of folks that seriously shoot for a living. It will need to be replaced at some point, and probably sooner than later, so the cost is hard to swallow.

Secondly, and the point I keep making that really galls me is the lens pricing. Leica had gone out of their way to brag about how their new design and manufacture would allow them to offer their great glass at more competitive prices than we see in MF. So far, that is not true, based on their price schedule and nothing more than a few MTF charts....again, where are the real images! Now, if you do not want to doubt the Leica lens capability, that is fine, but the premise of offering stellar optics at more competitive prices is pure B.S. Leica did prove that it could redesign lens construction with their M Elmarit line, and keep prices in check. So what happened with these S lenses? (Not looking to debate size of glass and stuff, as that is not as significant as some think. AF and internal shutters are bigger points, but again, that was the big claim Leica boasted early on about how they have made that entire process more streamlined and therefore less costly.) Guess they just figure all of that cost savings does not have to be passed on to consumers and they could ask uber-premiums for the new glass that everybody has to have to use this new system. If that is not last century arrogance in the new economy, I really am at a loss for a better example.

Start doing the math.....instead of calculating how much you need to save and spend, calculate the number of missteps in marketing....calculate the amount of overpricing against anything else in the market....calculate the number of promises broken or more than subtly changed....calculate the lack of evidence that this new tweener system will produce.

Sorry, but even if I were to keep drinking the Kool-Aid from Solms over the supposed greatness and capability of this unproven system, the pricing scheme is still way out of whack to the economy and to the veiled promises made from the start and throughout the entire ramp up. At this point, it is not even as much an issue of not being able to afford this system, as not wanting to afford this system after all the wait. Leica blew way past the mark on pricing this thing, regardless of whether you live in Europe, Asia, the US or anywhere else. That used to be just my "opinion", but now it is looking more and more like both a shared "opinion" with many others who would have been excellent candidates for it, as was as some "fact" about pricing out of reality compared to any of the competitor markets, 35mm DSLR or MF. I wish Leica well, I guess, but my interest in this has fallen deeper than that initial gut-kick feeling when I saw the prices.

LJ

 

[David K]

I stick to my point - if it's good, then it'll sell - not to you - certainly not to me, but it'll sell. (there's no shortage of ferraris and bentleys in our streets)

Jono, you may well be correct... only time will tell. Anybody remember that special edition Noctilux they brought out recently at $16k plus... it sold. Compared to that these lenses are a bargain On the other hand, conspicuous consumption is no longer considered cool. I read an article recently that net-a-porter, which sells very high end fashion items, now gives it's customers the option of having their goods delivered in brown paper wrapping. Think for a moment of the reception an S2 buyer would get on this forum. My guess is that he/she would more likely be ridiculed than envied... and not all of that would be sour grapes. The consensus seems to be that you'd have to have no regard for money to buy this system. Not an image many are looking to project these days.