Lurking somewhere in this conversation is a larger issue, that of how to undertake revamping traditions. It’s a tricky business, to be sure, and evermore so in a world with significant, high paced, and constant technological change
Leica has, as have others, to make changes, while at the same time, tried to stay true to their core values. The problem becomes more difficult as there is a lack of clear consensus on what those core values are.
Looking back over Leica’s efforts over the past say 10-20 years, one can readily see a number of mis-steps or approaches that didn’t work out. But one can also see some that did, surprisingly so - each of us will have our own list. I suspect the M9-M10 dwould be on most, and not the M8. I’d pick the MM and even today’s CL as special examples.
What is admirable about Leica is that they are still trying - having both misses and successes. One has to give them points for a willingness to try, to explore, and for engaging the issue of what makes them special if we step back, the list of approaches tried is rather long, and quite interesting. It includes fashion, boutiques, quality manufacture, T and S models, among others.
Puts’ departure clearly signals some sort of internal struggle going on, probably related to future business models, focus and direction; it’s likely that core manufacturing (Puts’ favored approach) is under revision. Maybe it’s necessary to change, maybe it’s a mistake (remember Hasselblad?). We’ll see over time.
But I for one am heartened by those in the company who have good design values, and a willingness to make a product with some core values I share -which include a focus on ease of use, refinement, build quality, and lens excellence. They are cameras made for thoughtful shooters. Let’s hope they continue to have success and remain in the game. The world needs smaller companies charting out a different path.
