Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/01/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I believe that for the current, annual production number the M6 is a quite cost efficient design. In fact the Leica M was gradually cheapened during the past 40 years and many of us complain about that. Eliminating the meter from the M6 is not a smart move. In fact eliminating features, in particular electronic features will only marginally reduce production cost. The main cost for electronics are r&d, not procurement and assembly of components. Moreover a meterless M would have to compete with the bulk of second hand M2, M4-2 and M4-P which are available for under USD 1000. For USD 200 Cosina's VC-meter is quite expensive, certainly more than Leica could save by removing the meter from the M6. Scrapping frames from the viewfinder, frame pre-selector, winder coupler or reducing rangefinder base. are no help, too. Organising a second production line will cost more than the saved components, would require substantial investment of r&d in a product that had to be sold at a noticeably lower price. So where is the return on investment? The only solution would be an entirely new camera that unlike the current M is DESIGNED for cost efficient mass production. But in terms of marketing and product positioning the introduction of an entry level model that does not canibalise sales of the more profitable, higher level models is delicate. I agree with Stephen that this happened with the CL. By the way, USD 1,000 for a 50mm, f1:2.0 standard lens is also a lttle bit steep. So what about reviving the "Elcan 2.0/50?", Ernst Leitz Canada designed in 1970 for the K7? Hans-Peter