Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2014/04/07
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]It's painfully obvious why Leica abandoned the R system. The SLR market had become commoditized by competitors with much lower costs of production. Modern optical design software and computer aided machining was making it possible for these other manufacturers to manufacture lenses of extremely high quality at much lower prices. The advent of the digital SLR would shift consumer focus from quality and precision to features. Megapixels would sell cameras now, and some competitors, notably Canon, had the capability to design and manufacture sensors in house. Competing would also mean somehow adapting the R lens line for autofocus, and in doing so, the lenses would no longer have the silky precision feel for which they were so renowned. Another factor was the global economic downturn. It always makes me smile when I read forum posts where people say that Leica should have more reasonably priced products. In fact, they are doing just the opposite, and rightfully so. In the current market, you have a small group of people who can afford things like $11k Noctiluxes and $7k camera bodies. And for those people, the steady rise in prices over the last decade is fairly irrelevant. They are more than happy to pay those prices in exchange for quality, design and cache, perceived or otherwise. And they can afford those prices regardless of the state of the economy, while the majority of consumers struggle to buy anything at all. In this light, Leica's decision to focus on these consumers is very sensible. Focusing on the M line and keeping prices high has numerous advantages: 1. It is the most iconic of Leica products, and stands to benefit the most from Leica's image and heritage. 2. It is a niche product, so few/no other manufacturers would find it worthwhile to field a competing product. 3. The experience of using and handling an M rangefinder and its lenses highlights traditional Leica strengths of quality and precision feel. 4. Sales numbers are naturally lower, so production can always be kept at full capacity. In times of high demand, customers are waitlisted, futher enhancing the exclusivity of the product. 5. Customers base is relatively unaffected by economic changes. 6. The higher margins afforded by the M line allow Leica to keep production in Germany. If you have ever tried to iteratively design and manufacture something in one place, and manufacture it in a distant place with a very different time zone, you'll know what a royal PITA it is. Keeping production in Germany allows them to monitor quality locally, iterate faster on design and production with people who speak the same language and who work in the same building. That alone is a huge benefit to the management and employees in terms of lifestyle. It dramatically reduces all sorts of problems, travel expenses, frustration, mistakes misunderstandings, and allows everything to move faster. If you ask me, Leica is doing exactly the right things. It will be very interesting to learn more about typ 701 and what it means to their strategy. --Jim On Apr 7, 2014, at 5:23 PM, Geoff Hopkinson <hopsternew at gmail.com> wrote: > They decided to compete with Hasselblad and Phaseone Frank. It is a tiny > tiny market yes. Leica's prices there are broadly comparable in fact, they > offer something significantly different and they have increased their > market share. The R10 body was to have been in the order of twice the > price of the pro Canon and Nikon bodies. Now that the medium format > sensors are evolving I think that tiny market will be even more > interesting. > Having been fortunate to shoot an S side by side with my M I promise you > that there is a big difference > > cheers > Geoff > >> On 8 Apr 2014, at 9:24 am, "Frank Filippone" <red735i at verizon.net> >> wrote: >> >> And so they decided not to compete with the Japanese DSLRs, instead to >> compete with the Japanese MF-DSLRs.... A smaller market with entrenched >> users, Leica at much higher prices than the competition, and with the 35mm >> DSLR's adding capability, more MP and significantly lower prices than the >> MF-DSLR. >> >> I do not see a big difference,,,, but then I do not work at Leica. >> >> I always believed the S product family was a competitive/commercial >> mistake.... >> >> Frank Filippone >> Red735i at verizon.net >> >> >> While Leica Camera wanted to provide a vehicle for the existing R lenses >> their analysis was that those people on their own were just not a >> sufficient >> market to make the new camera a commercial success. They elected of course >> to proceed with their 'middle format' S system instead. The R10 at a much >> higher price would have had to compete directly with the Japanese designs >> which dominate the market. At the same time the M9 was in development in >> house and concurrent with the S system design and their resources were >> stretched. As it turned out the M9 was more successful than was >> anticipated >> and while the S2 camera got to market the (CS) lenses for it were delayed. >> >> >> Cheers >> Geoff >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information