Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/02/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Nick,
Thanks for several excellent observations, especially about "splitting
sales between...models" and how the "Leica M is cheaper than a Contax
G2!" I agree.
Art Peterson
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: [Leica] RE: Thoughts for Solms on a new M7
Author: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us at internet
Date: 2/12/98 12:09 AM
Be careful what you wish for......
It sounds like a great idea to have a whole bunch of M cameras, one for
every taste! Trouble is, the market can only expand so much, splitting
sales between many models will marginalize the older designs. In an
economic downturn, management will "simplify" the line, and soon it's
goodbye M6.
So who cares? Wouldn't it be OK if we still had an "M" camera in name,
maybe appearance, and status, plus lots of lights and buzzers to show off
to envious SLR friends?
At the risk of starting an incendiary skirmish, I don't think so. The M to
me is not a collection of features on a bullet point list to compare in a
magazine article. And I'm not just talking about history or tradition,
either.
Let me make a bold statement: The Leica M is cheaper than a Contax G2! Let
me explain. Any electronic equipment has a finite life cycle. I'm not
talking about reliability over the normal use of the product, but 20 years
from now. When the circuits degrade from aging, the replacements stored on
shelves will be equally old. No one will make new flex boards for 20 year
old cameras. This is happening now to the early generation of electronic
cameras from the 1970's. It's not a matter of support from well meaning
companies, it's just a matter of technology. An SL or FM will be around
longer than an R3 or F3. Electronic cameras, like VCRs or computers may
give long, reliable service, but they are not lifetime investments.
A machine which has proven to have a potential for a lifetime (!) of use is
a very different kind of investment.
Having said that, and bowing to the inevitability of some innovation, It is
fun to speculate on what Leica might do with the M line. It seems to me
there are two markets they might pursue.
First, there are still many professional users of the M, as witnessed here
on the LUG. these are the photographers who would likely benefit from TTL
off camera flash, high speed shutters, etc. These cameras would need high
mag finders for the Nocti, 75, etc. but would also need to take the widest
lenses (auxillary zoom finder?) and of course would be only in black (no
commemoratives!). Can't wait, you say? Well, such a camera would no doubt
be expensive, but also probably larger than current M's. But pros would be
carrying big lenses and flash rig, so what of it? Also will end up on the
scrap heap with other electronic toys one day, but pro use will wear them
out first, and anyway that's what amortization is for!
The second market is what I would call the high end amateur travel shooter.
This is where I am concerned that adulation for a G2/me-too would endanger
sales and survivability of the traditional M. But I am not a complete ogre.
Leica is already a point & shoot marketer, and their products are OK for
what they are. I do wish they had a more distinctive presence in the
compact market, but I hope they can do it without compromising their unique
traditional products.
Well, if you've made it this far (don't you have a life either?) I guess I
should reveal my real daydream Leica. It would be a true chrome mechanical
camera, III size or smaller, short RF suitable for w/a or slow teles, M
mount with traditional shutter or built in vario lens with mechanical
compur type, M6 style match diode & combined RF/VF for modest lens
selection 28 or 35-90. Kind of a screw-mount updated with the best of the
CL and minis, Like the M6J was an M3 with the best of the M6.
Appologies for wearing your eyes out,
Nick Hunter