Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/10/10
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]aaron & others, just wanted to respond to a couple of points in your well-formulated post, and add my 2 cents to the discussion: >that Leica seems to have failed to appreciate the value of offering a >lower-cost entry-level M-camera. i'm not sure why they should offer a lower cost m camera, nor am i convinced that there is an great demand for such an item: for those interested in getting into a high quality rangefinder camera system at lower than leica cost, there is already the contax g1 and 2 (and those don't seem to be doing as well as one might think - $500 rebates on the g2 suggests that substantial enticement is needed to attract potential buyers). and these cameras already have the automated features many of us here on the lug have been presuming to find on the future m7. cheaper still are the current fixed lens offerings from rollei (the qzt & w) and konica (the by now infamous hexar). and of course, there are always the leica p & s... >the release and apparent runaway success of the Cosina/Voigtlander cameras >and lenses suggests that there is indeed quite a market for entry-level >35mm rangefinders. not to be pedantic, but the current cosina/voigtlander camera is not a rangerfinder and the 15 and 25 lenses are not rangefinder coupled; for all intents and purposes, it is a p & s with interchangeable lenses. the new 35, 50 & 75 lenses will be rangefinder coupled for the new cosina/voigtlander rangerfinder, that has been announced, but not yet released. i wonder, since i'm sure it will cost more than the current viewfinder camera, if it will prove to be as popular... also, it seems to me that all of the hubbub of recent months is over the cosina *lenses*, not the camera body. i wonder just how many bodies have been sold and how that figure compares to sale figures for the two lenses. regarding the two lenses, the one that has generated the most interest is the 15 - a focal length leica does not make for the m camera, hence the tremendous interest it generated, imo; about the 25 we've heard relatively little here on the lug, which suggests that those interested in such a focal length would probably rather purchase the leica 24, as i did. i would wager that if leica offered a 15 for the m - even at current leica prices - most of those interested in extreme wide angles would hang up their cosina lens and purchase the leica. > MR. Cohn--I'm still not sure >why an English-language list insists on using 'Herr'; it's actually a bit >creepy) i agree with you 100%! * i'd like to conclude by saying that i'm not against innovation/development of the m camera system (the relatively recent ttl metering is definitely a welcome feature for me), i'm simply not persuaded that a fully/partially automated, or entry-level m is what the camera buying public wants or needs. there are already automatic/low-cost rangefinder cameras out there for those who would like such a camera. as for myself, i bought a leica because it was a well-built manual rangefinder with excellent lenses. though the cost is high, to me it was worth it - something i am persuaded of every time i print pictures taken with that wonderful machine. as for the argument that leica will go bust unless it moves to capture the low end of the new rangefinder market (if such a thing actually does exist) with less expensive, more user friendly or *comfortable* cameras (to use mr cohn's euphemism), i am not persuaded of that either. surely, only the future will tell, but i can't help but feel that trying to support a company well known and loved for making high quality, precision instruments by creating a line of lesser quality cameras aimed at a market they would be hard pressed to compete in seems to me both foolhardy and improbable. guy (who already owns a cosina camera: the nikon fe10!)