Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/11/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Do you work for Leica? Dante On Nov 1, 2009, at 8:05 PM, Geoff Hopkinson wrote: > Frank I think fair to say that you have been quite prominent > expressing your > opinions here on several Leica issues recently? Also fair to say > that some > others think differently? I put several of your posts together here > with > nothing edited and I offer my responses below each. > ..................................... > This is exactly what I was talking about.... make noise for what you > want....otherwise the manufacturer will have no idea that there is a > demand....I signed up... and if the R10 is priced within my means, I > am in > for 2 of them.....Frank Filippone > ...................................... > *From my visit to Solms in June. The LUG does not have a high > profile in > Solms. They do look at other internet forums, with the (exclusively > Leica > content) L Camera Forum being the most prominent. Making noise here > is not a > very effective way of telling Leica your opinions. > When the R10 cancellation was announced in June, Stefan Daniel > estimated that a body would have cost 6,000 to 7,000 Euro. His > recent video > interview includes confirmation that they still don't believe the > existing R > lens owner pool is enough to make an R10 viable and Leica will not > make a > conventional dSLR.* > *..............................................* > Hey, if you don't speak your mind, the status quo continues.... and > God knows, our beloved M8 cameras will be upgradeable > forever......Right! > Daniels has the company line to speak and repeat. He does so well. > Yes, the M8/M9 are .68 VF cameras. Does that make it a) right, b) > customer driven, c) the only choice Leica had d) my or your choice? > I don't > think there is history that says.. they could have, customers had no > say, > not my choice or preference. YMMV. They did not do a higher mag VF > for some > reason.. what that real reason is, is Leica's secret..... and they > ain;t > telling us. What I get upset at is the incessant statement that it > can not > be done. Or that there is no one that wants a higher mag VF.,... I > do. I > liked my M3 finder ... .91 and all that. Sure, it was useless if > you had a > 35mm lens on ( without eyes) but it was a wonderful shoot with a > 50......Both eyes open..... remember what is was like to not get a > headache > if you were following the action with your M3, with both eyes..... > so that > you could see the action come into your frame? A .55, so I can see > the 28 > frames clearly with glasses, and a .42, so I can see the 21 frames > clearly > with glasses. I like the current M8/9 for 35's and above, but it's a > bit too > tight for the 35 and almost right for the 50. Maybe a 0.8. But right > now, if > I could have one body that showed me 21mm framelines, visible with > glasses > and another body that had the current framelines I'd be delighted. > Sure it > can be done. They already did it... the .85 and .58 M6TTL cameras are > examples. Maybe you don't like the choices, maybe like me, the M6 > 28 finder > is not visible with glasses in a .72 body ( not easily, at least), > maybe > they did it for time to market, stubborn Germanic marketing > theories, or > otherwise. But don't blindly say it can't be done or that they will > not do > it.....Market demand focuses efforts on the "impossible" and or > stubbornly refused.....and the LUG is one way to getting the word to > the > uppers at Leica that there is a marketing need that needs > addressing..... A > higher Mag Digi-M would pump demand for the longer lenses, like the135 > APO Telyt, make focusing easier and more accurate for the Nocti and > Summilux > 50 and 75, and Summicron 75, and 90 lenses, all valid reasons ( the > main reason for the .85 M6) for a higher VF mag. If market demand > created a > White M8, then market demand can create a higher mag M8., M9, or > M10. Whatever happens, never lose sight of the power of the consumer > to > get products they want, onto the shelves.... Speaking of which.. the > M9.... > No IR filter required, no smaller sensor..all impossible, or so we > were > told..... Nonsense. Marketing nonsense. Want better low light > response than > an M8 or M9? Complain, incessantly. It will come... So will my > higher mag > VF..... Frank Filippone > .................................... > The gentleman's name is Stefan Daniel, not Daniels. > The reasons for a .68 VF in the M8 and M9 are that they use the same > VF as > the M7 (albeit with a different eyepiece) owing to the greater body > thickness. Look through one if you can find one. It is the highest > magnification that will allow the 28 framelines to be reasonably > visible > (without glasses). The same standard for all of the recent film > cameras. > Remember that the two alternate sets were dropped from standard film > camera > production some time back, presumably due to insufficient demand. > Unless you > have some evidence to the contrary? > I have the M3 too; the finder was different and even more expensive > to make > as well. I agree that it is wonderfully clear and useful for the 50, > 90 and > 135. Since it did not natively support even the 35 frames that > magnification > was dropped a very long time ago. Leica listening to customer > demands. The > .85 was meant to be a compromise (and the .58 at the other end). If > those > versions were sufficiently in demand, why did Leica drop them? That > 135 is > by all reports a superb lens but it evidently does not sell in > comparable > quantities to the wider types. I just don't see any case for > expecting that > Leica might make any variations on the M9 design anytime soon since > clearly > they are working as hard as possible on just trying to meet the > existing > initial demand. > ................................... > I would think of my criticism as both constructive and market > driven.... not > a bad combination to listen to, if I were Leica...... Companies tend > to > think that they know what is best. The problem is that > sometimes they get tunnel vision or desperately believe their own > marketing > hype. What they need to do is to listen to customers, objectively > evaluate > the criticism, and take action. A hard but necessary corporate > survival > reality. If I can be a voice of the user, if only 1 user, and make > what are > constructive criticisms, I will. And make no apologies for it. Frank > Filippone > ................................. > Frank, Leica already has a CEO and business plan ;-) Fair to say > that some > customers or potential customers may also tend to think that they > know best, > sometimes get tunnel vision etc?? > ................................. > What other major development can save their company? The S2? The M9 > already exists, I was referring to new camera product development. > If I go > back just a few months, then my recommended priority was #1 FF M8, > #2 a > Digi FF SLR, #3 new optics to go with the DigiR. Deep 6 the S2, > continue > with the rebranded products to bring in some short term profits. > Followed by product tweaks. R Bodies: Poor seller? The R8, > introduced in > 1996, was one of the last high end SLR Film cameras. It was hideously > behind in features compared to Nikon and Canon. But it did take R > glass. > By 1999, the R8 and R9 was selling against the Digi-SLR rebellion > ( Nikon D1 > introduced in 1999). The R9 was never going to be a big winner, when > everyone was buying digital. If it had been a Digi camera, it might > have > been Leica's best seller! Think of all the R fans out there that > would beat > down the doors to use their R glass with a Digi R and not gone Canon > or > Nikon..I am already on record.. the S2 "stole" resources from the > R10, and > for that reason alone it should have been cancelled. Leica does not > make the > X1. It is a financial strategy. As it does not > steal a large amount of resources from the R+D team, I am neutral on > its > existence. Anyone that does not like the X1 because of its features > ( or > whatever reason you wish to put here) is going out and buying a > $13-20K of > M9 stuff? I doubt they buyers are in the same camp. 2 different > markets, > with little to no overlap. > .......................... > See response above ;-) > Yes obviously Leica Camera AG believes that the S2 will allow them to > compete in a particular (different) market segment. They do not > believe that > they can compete in the 'shark pool' of dSLRs. > Leica considered the "digital CL' concept as a more affordable M > entry but > assessed that it would be competing with both the M8/9 and the used M8 > market. That last is their assessmnt of the best entry point for > people not > prepared/able to pay the M8/9 new prices. > ......................... > I've read that Nikon is making the camera, I also heard > Panasonic.... but > that may or may not be correct. They are all rumors.. The > differeing > question is... do you really believe Leica is building a $2K camera > with > lens and 12MP sensor? Themselves? In Germany/Portugal/EU? Has > anyone > visiting the Leica factory seen the X1 being manufactured there? > We have > videos and personal tales of the M9 being made in Germany. But the > X1? > NADA. The S2 uses resources. My opinion is that the focus should > have been > on the Digi-R. So, my comment that the S2 stole resources from the > Digi-R. > Did they start/stop/ever think about a Digi-R? Maybe, but if they had > followed what I believe is a #1 priority, the Digi-R, the resources > were > misdirected to the S2. > As a film camera, they were way behind the 8 ball.... features > lacking all > over the place. But optics? #1. The market for a digital SLR > something that > takes R lenses and uses the full AE, etc, would be quite robust..... > the > market for another high end MF DIgi camera, in a field of entrenched > manufacturers, with no installed base of lenses available to set > the stage > (see the Hasselblad V Line), is significantly smaller, and in my > opinion, > may really not exist beyond the really rich amateur. And thus my > choice for > R+D expenditures.... > Digi-R. > Ok.. I'll say it more bluntly.... You have proof otherwise? It is > not a > debate over who is building the X1... If I thought Leica was, I > would be all > over their case. Get back on the subject... the Digi-R. > ........................ > Leica has carefully stated that the X1 will be assembled in Germany. > Clearly > not every component will be made there. The same situation to a > greater or > lesser extent as the M9 for example. I thought that the X1 sensor > origin > was pretty well known but I haven't seen it officially in print so I > won't > repeat it again here. Since its not even in production yet and only > exists > as a few prototypes, maybe wait until they actually produce some and > see > what is shown? > > Cheers > Geoff > The new LEICA M9 -Passion for perfect pictures. > http://www.m.leica-camera.com > > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/ > http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information