Leica chief speaks of removal of Lee

[Guy Mancuso]

Hate to say i told you so but Jack and I were at PMA and his comments went over like a lead balloon to the Leica folks at PMA that were running the Leica booth . I knew right there he was toast. Just happened to be at the right place at the wrong time.

Leica chief speaks to German website about former CEO and future product plans news - Amateur Photographer - news, camera reviews, lens reviews, camera equipment guides, photography courses, competitions, photography forums

 

[Daniel]

Read the entire interview. Such a pity events took this direction. Oh well, both parties will live and learn and move forward.

From this interview, I'm getting the message that the M8 will remain Leica's flagship camera. This is encouraging because this suggests that the M8 will not be replaced anytime soon, but will be allowed to evolve per Leica's R&D output - that is only when new features are perfect for prime-time. This seems to be in line with Mr. Kaufman and Leica's conservative approach in "keeping up" with technology. And I think conservative is a good thing here, otherwise, Leica will be uncontrollably pulled into different directions and looses its focus.

Anyway, this is the impression I'm getting from this interview. Quite assuring.

 

[PeterA]

"Read the entire interview. Such a pity events took this direction. Oh well, both parties will live and learn and move forward....From this interview, I'm getting the message that the M8 will remain Leica's flagship camera. ...... Quite assuring.

If the M8 remains Leica's 'flagship' camera - then Leica is dead. Why?

The M series cameras have alway been about wide to normal focal length shooting - and not too wide at that. At a stretch people can use 75's up to 135's - at a stretch people can use wider than 21mm (from other makers
mind you) - but really the rangefinder focusing system has its limitations for real world shooting outside the confines of lets say 28-50 mm.

You want an Mseries camera for the 28 cron or 35 lux and 50 lux - these are the shooters lenses - yes you can use other lenses ..just like you sometimes switch hands to play a golf shot out of the rough - emergency only please.

Now lets have a look at all the issues that I have to cope with with my M8 - IR/backfocus/scrolling screen/limited ISO/sticky shutter/loud shutter/scratchy LCD ...and compared to my MP - it really is a backward step from Leica - teh MOST important issue being - I cant USE my M series shooter's lenses the way they were designed to be used!!!:wtf:

I have an M3/MP and M8 body - like them all - but hey ( re M8) ...lets be honest..nice files and all...a FLAGSHIP CAMERA!! you gotta be joking me..:ROTFL::ROTFL:

Now the R series cameras not only cover every focal length of the M series but they extend capability from 15mm ...to super tele and macro and zooms.
Leica's real flagship camera will be the full frame R - the same one that they will probably make initial announcements about in Autumn as stated in the interview. Add autofocus and focus confirmation to a full frame chip, a better battery and improved flash management as well as some weatherproofing - thats a winner baby!!:clap:

I cant wait.:toocool:

 

[jaapv]

If the M8 remains Leica's 'flagship' camera - then Leica is dead. Why?

Well, in any case after reinvigorating a company that was weeks away from bankrupcy at the introduction.:salute: As for wideangles, yes, Leica must supplement the WATE, and uprate the 35 Summilux, so I'm sure the lens R&D is working on that one... The R system has always been of less impact on the Leica stable than the M system, so in that context the remark is quite understandable.

Anyway, this is just a rehash of the far more informative Handelsblatt article.
http://www.handelsblatt.com/news/default_200038_1401865.aspx

 

[PeterA]

...." As for wideangles, yes, Leica must supplement the WATE, and uprate the 35 Summilux, so I'm sure the lens R&D is working on that one... ..

The R system has always been of less impact on the Leica stable than the M system, so in that context the remark is quite understandable...."

Congratulations!!:salute: - you are the very first person I have ever heard to suggest that the current version 35 lux 'needs' uprating. As for the WATE - i also beg to differ - the reason one buys an M series lens is for speed my friend - if I wanted F4 to be my wide open aperture - why shoot 35mm - when I can use MF?..

Regarding R versus M - i have made my reasons clear as to what i think the two systems are there to do from my perspective and for what its worth. In similar fashion I am happy to say that I use both type of camera - and to me by far and away the most flexible and most developed system is the R series - for all the reason I cited above.

thanks for the link to the other article ..

 

[robmac]

Based on my experience (sordid tale) dealing with company CEOs and other execs, I'll put a wager in (hoping I'm wrong):

1A. Lower-end digital M to 'broaden the RF appeal'. Possibly manufactured by Panasonic. Will pair nicely with the 'rits. QC aside, if Leica intends to make/keep the M as it's flagship camera (in term of $$$ as well as public profile) it needs to get it into more hands. More hands means lower cost, better QC, cheaper lenses, wider distribution, quicker service turn-around etc.

Consider the M8 Leica's D3, it needs a D300. It will be a tricky balancing act with the current M8. Unlike with an SLR line, there are not a lot of ways to differentiate one RF from another of a higher-snack bracket other than labor costs and greater use of plastics and MAYBE FF.

or

1B A radical price cut to the M8, possibly in combination with the units being manufacture by Panasonic to lower labor costs and up QC and distribution -- given the low vs. high-end differentiation quandary raised above.

plus

2. The new R_ will only be 'hinted' at in Fall. When CEOs use the phrase 'hint' it means just that - think concept car. My Spidey Sense says it's going to be a longer wait for an 'in-hand' R10 than people would hope for.

We shall see - hoping that tingling at the back of my neck is just a cold draft.

 

[LJL]

Does anybody beyond those loyal to Leica and familiar with how the larger market uses stuff really think a digital rangefinder will ever capture a larger market share of the digital camera world than it is now? Seriously. Most snapshooters can barely get things right with all the full-everything digicams....especially focus, so rangefinder focus will always remain more for the "purists" and hobbyists and those who have used it before and appreciate both its effectiveness and its shortcomings.

I am agreeing with Peter here....I love my M8, wish it did have fewer flaws/issues/shortcomings at times, but it just does not seem like a mainstream type camera for most potential users, regardless of the price. Say Leica dropped the price to $1,500 for an M8 body....sure, there will be a initial surge of buyers. Then they will hit the lens selection and cost hurdles. Then they will start to get frustrated with their results and how many shots got missed that were not with a cheap all-everything digicam. Just my thoughts here. Not being snobbish, just trying to be a bit more realistic.

A more serious market segment is going to be in the DSLR camp. That is where folks are or are heading. There are expectations for performance and lens selection to cover more than just wider angle snapshots. (Cheap digicams can do that for most folks today.) Keeping the M as the "flagship" is a very noble gesture, but it does cement Leica into a very small market niche and customer base. Making it less costly will help a bit, but the rangefinder crowd will remain a smaller group of shooters. Just my opinions here. I have no plans to give up my M8 and its great glass, but I have to have more capabilities and longer glass selection for a lot of my photography. The Ms cannot get there. The R-line could, if it has a lot of the things done at least as good or better than what the top players are doing there now. Seems pretty simple to figure out.

LJ

 

[Guy Mancuso]

I have to say if the R10 is not what it should be , than Leica will be in trouble. You just can't depend on the M to carry you without a major update to the M9. So if they just do upgrade path that is fine but they need more in the way of the R and 4/3 systems also. They need enough product to sustain each other

 

[LJL]

Guy,
I agree, but I am still not sure a "perfect" M9 is going to expand the base of customers all that much. The larger buyer segment is going to be those DSLR folks, be it 4/3 or R-line. If those offerings are not there, Leica will always be faced with its customer base eroding to other makers to fulfill the large range shooting needs. I (and you) still shoot Canons or Nikons for needs that are not being met by Leica, almost regardless of price. We wish for the better glass and imaging we enjoy on the M8 and some still do on the DMR, but it is not there. Leica has a much better shot as succeeding and maybe growing by staying more firmly in the DSLR segment....and with several offerings. The M group can increase their kits that way, and others can get re-introduced to Leica through competitive DSLRs, and then maybe get drawn into Ms for all they offer.

LJ

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Well I agree the customer base for 4/3rds and DSLR is much bigger in the industry . So leica really needs to replant there feet again. The DMR was a first step and they came up big on the images we all know how nice those files are but they need to find there place in the DSLR market and survive in that niche. The 4/3rds market they need a better foot hold also , it is a growing by leaps and bounds this segment of the market. leica needs to bring out a Digilux 4 at Photokinia also

 

[jaapv]

Congratulations!!:salute: - you are the very first person I have ever heard to suggest that the current version 35 lux 'needs' uprating. As for the WATE - i also beg to differ - the reason one buys an M series lens is for speed my friend - if I wanted F4 to be my wide open aperture - why shoot 35mm - when I can use MF?..

Regarding R versus M - i have made my reasons clear as to what i think the two systems are there to do from my perspective and for what its worth. In similar fashion I am happy to say that I use both type of camera - and to me by far and away the most flexible and most developed system is the R series - for all the reason I cited above.

thanks for the link to the other article ..

Thanks. You need to reread; I suggest they develop other wides besides the WATE, like you do....:angel: And I meant faster ones too, despite the optical difficulties....

And yes- I agree on M and R, I do shoot both - always have....( with a short Canon hiatus and of course Visoflex fun:toocool....
However, up to now the R cameras have always appeared to have been a bit of ugly stepdaughters in the Leica mindset.

 

[robmac]

I agree with most of the later posters. Lets ignore the CEO's comments for now.

Picture yourself in his shoes looking out his window from Solms gazing at Nikon, Canon and now Sony & OM dominating the overwhelming %'ntge of the DSLR and handycam market.

In relative comparison Leica:

1. Are a small niche premium-product company renowned for RFs, the first broadly accepted digital RF, RF glass and SLR glass (forget sport optics, etc for now).

2. Have a very limited R&D & marketing budget that must be targeted where it gets the most bang for the $$$.

3. Has a manufacturing scale nowhere near that of the big boys - and higher labor costs.

4. An SLR line that while having bar-none glass, is film-based and all manual focus. The DMR alliance died sadly.

5. A flagship product, the M8, that has, by its nature, a slower development cycle than the standard DSLR because of the lens registration issue getting in the way of full frame.

That being said, they have NO competition in the Digi RF segment whereas they have nothing but massive competition possessing a HUGE head start in terms of market share, sensor and AF tech development in DSLRS.

Focusing the bulk of their efforts & $$$ on developing, marketing and supporting a new high-end DSLR body with a new AF lens line for the relatively miniscule sales they will generate would be a tough equation to justify.

As much as Leica COULD develop a kick-ass 25MP DSLR, given the state of the empire as it were, I think it comes down to as a business, SHOULD Leica go down that route?

Failure of an R10 could mean an end to Leica as we know it. That's a BIG risk to take when the odds and $$$$ are stacked also insurmountably against you.

Hell, who knows. CEOs make some of their best/worst decision based too often on ego, desires to leave a legacy and bonus criteria vs. business sense anyway...

 

[LJL]

Rob,
All good points. What is the real option for Leica....a steady downward spiral on the M line, which does have limited market attractiveness overall? Leica's DMR may not have been perfect or beautiful, and it was dependent upon a failed vendor source relationship, but that option was not unknown and the present position was pretty visible. This is not to throw rocks at them. They have "conquered" the digital RF market. Sort of like conquering Liechtenstein in a way. (No political, social or personal harm meant with that analogy.) There are extremely limited growth options for them, short of the world deciding DRFs are what they really want, and then they could not keep up with demand, nor fend off the inevitable competition that would come from Canon, Nikon, and others.....they used to have RFs in their line too at one point.

It is not a pretty problem to solve, so they do need to declare some sort of position and hope it pans out for them. Just hard to see DRF growth at the present prices, except to those already in the camp, or those looking for that high-end specialty cachet. Not saying it is bad, just that the future does not look like growth and expansion very much. They may not have the resources and manufacturing capabilities to do the R&D and build of things like the others, but they could devote energy to creating something that is sustainable, like their history has provided. That is a lot harder in the digital world, but the optics are not going to change all that much, while the electronics will. What would be so terrible for them to produce a competitive, even if somewhat "disposable" DSLR body that took their outstanding glass. Not their older world way of doing things, but if they make and sell the best glass, keep doing that, and fit nice, affordable and up-to-date bodies to that glass which support the steady stream of relentless electronic improvements.

LJ

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Now this is a thread Leica needs to view. All great data points

 

[Maggie O]

I think y'all might have mis-interpreted the meaning of "flagship" in the owner's comments- the M series is the camera the public thinks of when they think "Leica." Heck, I have to admit that I surprised, back in the 80's, when I was told that Leica made SLRs.

So, it is vitally important that the M8 is taken care of and well regarded, because, for a lot of people, Leica=rangefinder. At least that's what I think Kaufmann was getting at with his comments.

massively cross-posted with three or four other posts

 

[DonWeston]

Leica is really between the rock and the venerable hard place here. It has been a niche market company for about 50 yrs, since slrs became the popular camera type. They have neither the market or the deep pockets to compete with the BIG BOYS. DO they even want to?? Should they??? Both questions I will leave aside. What is left is a DR that appeals to fairly damn few of us in the photo community, really in total number. IF they added AF to the M8 or at least a focus confirmation system, this would extend usage maybe to few more photographers that are already familiar with the camera and system. It might get a few other well endowed and moneyed execs to get the BEST camera, but alot of photographers just would not switch over period, due to the inherent limitations of a RF. Leica can't or won't even extend the lens line so far with wider optics, are they really going to come up with a much more advanced camera body, possibly alienate the CORE Leicaphiles they have already?? What if a Zeiss or C/V company type comes out with a GOOD version of the RD1 with full 35mm frame, AF, etc., will Leica lose some of the costumers they already have? There are so many rumors re: M8 and its future, what is the company to do. What are they going to do...Sorry for the rant, but am glad I don't have to decide....

 

[Maggie O]

Um, isn't "autofocus rangefinder" an oxymoron? Why not keep the M-series as rangefinders and do a D-series of interchangeable lens-d, optical viewfinder-d, AF cameras, along with a revived digital R-series? Too much money for R&D?

 

[LJL]

Maggie,
I agree with that. The issue becomes one of "what else have you got" type of approach. It is not hard for Leica to remain very much the top for the RF market, and what folks think of when they think about Leica cameras. The harder part comes when folks that are drawn into Leica, like many of us, do have needs beyond the RF capabilities. If Leica wants to be ONLY a RF builder, that is fine, but then the overall market is limited, revenues are going to be limited, and they still need to spend on updating and maintaining the line. Without a steady cash inflow, that becomes difficult. The point of the digicams is to capitalize on the brand and generate cash flow from a larger base. That is what Nikon, Canon and the rest do. Their huge profits are not made from the DSLRs, though that may be changing a bit more as those sales really ramp up more, but the association of what great images those cameras capture. The world has changed a lot since Leica ruled the film camera roost for a while. DSLRs displaced them then and are not giving up any ground today. If Leica does not play in that area also, being noted as a premier glass and camera maker, they will go quietly into the night. More M cameras will be fine, but if there is nothing else to really offer that folks will buy, and that may generate a lot more cash flow, they get stuck. The DSLR is still a tool of choice by most photographers. The MF and RF market segments are very small and specialized in comparison. The MF segment has seen tremendous change recently, but still will only attract a very limited number of professional and very demanding other shooters that have the means to buy into it. The M8 and its successors are not really in that same sort of realm. The camera takes outstanding images, but its further utility is limited at best. Leica needs to preserve it for sure, but it also needs to figure out how to sustain itself in the market beyond just the rangefinders.

One option is to seriously start making glass for everybody else's DSLRs, sort of what Sigma and others do, but that is a huge "catch me if you can" game on the part of Nikon and Canon. That comes back to producing their own body that uses their outstanding optics to their maximum potential. I think the DMR was a very good concept, and a similar approach is not bad for the R10, but instead of making the DMR module swap with film, make it swap with electronics. Update the lens line to handle AF effectively and go from there.

No matter what, Leica's is in a bit of a tough spot. Keeping the M as the flagship for recognition is fine, but they need something else to allow growth into the overall camera market. The Digilux is a step on a rather limited sensor platform. The R is going to face tough competition for sure, but that is the nature of this business today.

LJ

 

[sandymc]

Thing is, there is no DRF (or rangefinder) segment in any real sense. Market segment are defined by customer needs, not products. Products just fill needs. Up till 5-10 years ago, there was a segment for rangefinders, just because focusing a wideangle lens is easier on a RF than a traditional manual SLR. But autofocus has effectively killed that ease of focus argument. What there is today, is either nostalgia, or a desire for Leica glass - the Epson succeeded because it was the best available thing to put Leica M glass on; likewise the M8, not because either was or is a great camera. IMHO, as long as Leica tries to pursue a "DRF segment" rather than build the best box with the available technology to put Leica glass on, they will get smaller and smaller. And if that box is autofocus/liveview/whatever, fine with me......

Sandy

 

[Michael B. Elmer]

Let's hope that Leica has analysed the current situation in the light of history.

In the 1970'ies Leitz by introducing the CL in 1973 cannibalised the market for the M5 which was for its days (1972) as revolutionary a rangefinder camera as the M8 in 2006. As you may know, this almost led to the end of the M camera. Production of the M-camera in Wetzlar was stopped, and we can all thank dr. Mandler, that he convinced Leica that production could continue in Midland, Ontario.

The CL and the C-40/2.0 is still a wonderful combination, although the small rangefinder base limits the camera's capabilities with other lenses.

Also the CM as well as its predecessor, the Minilux, are wonderful cameras with their fixed Summarit 40/2.4.

I would love to see and to buy and use a digital CM with the same size of sensor as the M8 and with a fixed Summarit 30/2.4, that would equal the 40 mm lens on the old CM and Minilux. Such a camera would not cannibalise the market for the M8. Many M8 users would be happy to use such a camera as a point and shoot camera.

It seems more doubtful whether it would be wise for Leica to introduce a digital CL with the same sensor as the M8 and with the M8-bayonet. Although Leica may according to guesstimates now have sold more than 20.000 M8's, there would still be a risk of the digital CL's cannibalising some of the market for the M8. People who already have an M8 would probably be tempted to buy the digital CL as a second camera instead of an M8.

Even If Leica introduced a 30 mm Summicron and/or Summarit (2.4 or 2.5) for the Digital CL, and even after the introduction of the Summarit-line of lenses, there would be a risk that buyers of this camera would be more tempted to buy lenses from other makers than buyers of the M8.

Hopefully, Leica has made thorough investigation and analysis of the market before introducing a digital CL. If there is no risk for the M8 and its further development, the digital CL shall be more than welcome.

As regards the R10, I must confess that I am very disappointed that dr. Kaufmann has not promised us that the R10 will be compatible with our expensive and beloved R-glass. Compatibility backwards and forwards is one of the most important reasons why we love the Leica and a key to Leica's survival.