Re: [Leica] Leica R8 Brick

["dominique pellissier" <noct@club-internet.fr>]

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Hans-Peter.Lammerich <Hans-Peter.Lammerich@t-online.de>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2000 6:37 PM
Subject: [Leica] Leica R8 Brick


>
> Right now Leica (and Mr. Cohn) has to realise that the R8 will never ever
> recover the r&d investment and, in addition to that, may pull down R lens
sales
> as well. In the light of the company's limited resources the number of
options
> are very limited as well:
>
> suffer from low sales at high prices or vice versa
>
> close the eyes and pretend that the R8 is a great product that deserves
the high
> price and blame the largely ignorant market, with the exception of some
> competent enthusiasts, of course,
>
> admit that the product is actually not so great, reduce prices
accordingly,
> accept the dent in your reputation and eventually piss off early buyers
who paid
> the fully price and who will suffer from deteriorating re-sale value,
>
> invest additional funds in upgrading the R8, get rid of the current stock
and
> revive the interest in R lenses
>
> squeeze the R8 into a smaller body, preferably with electronic/mechanical
hybrid
> shutter (help!), that means through away all moulding tools and make new
ones
> (outch!) , make new motor winder and motor drive (arrrg!)
>
> squeeze more functions into the existing R8 body, e.g. motor drive,
electronic
> focus indicator etc.(with off-switch), to better justify price, weight and
size
>
> invest REAL money by introducing AF, REALLY pissing off early R8 buyers
AND
> owners of new or upgraded ROM lenses
>
> As a matter of fact, the entire history of Leica SLRs is that of an
indecisive
> management and a permanent shortage of capital for other than minor
> modifications to the existing product line. Leica never managed to
establish a
> commercially viably production number with competitive production cost,
let
> alone initiating innovations and hence was trapped in its niche market.
Leica's
> attempt to enter the SLR market in the mid 1960s resulted in the Leicaflex
which
> came several years later than the Nikon F and even lacked TTL meter. After
being
> upgraded to SL and SL2, production cost were reported to be higher than
the
> price Leica could ask from the dealers. To get a commercially viable
product on
> the market, Leica decided to utilise and improve existing Minolta designs
(XE1
> and XD7) and set-up low labour cost production facilities in Portugal. Of
course
> Leica users began to ask why they should pay Leica prices for a Minolta
design
> made in Portugal, but at least the R3 and R4 were modern cameras at the
time.
> Since the mid 1980s and long after Minolta had discontinued their XD7
Leica
> continued to muddle through with the R4/XD7 design.
>
> Back in the 90s, Leica R users were lusting for a mechanical R. Indeed, 10
years
> after the introduction of the R4, Leica introduced the R6 with a
mechanical
> shutter. Although the shutter was not particularly fast (1/100s x synch,
> 1/1000s, in comparison to Nikon's FM2), designed and manufactured "in
> co-operation with Copal" (read purchased), Leica's marketing hype praised
the R6
> as if it was genuine Leica space technology. In fact the R6 was priced a
couple
> of hundred marks above the M6 at that time.
>
> To some extend, the R8 resembles the history of the M5. The customers did
not
> like the additional bulk and shape in comparison to the classic M body.
Leica
> then discontinued the M5, re-issued the M4 and customers had to wait for
the M6,
> until Leica was able to find a supplier for the TTL device who could
> economically design and manufacture for a small production number and who
was
> able to shoehorn the device into the classic M body.
>
> In contrast to that, Kyocera marketed a completely new Contax 645 AF
system,
> comprising a complete new AF body and a line of completely new AF lenses
(new
> optical design, new negative format and new lens barrels with integrated
> ultrasonic AF motors). I doubt that Zeiss contributed more than the brand
name
> or, maybe, some computer runs for the optical design. Despite Kyocera's
rather
> limited experience with AF SLRs, the Contax 645 competes reasonably well
with
> the big players (Canon, Nikon). I don't know for what market volume the
Contax
> 645 system was designed, but it certainly is closer to the Leica R's than
to
> Nikon's or Canon's. With interchangeable prism finder, film back,
integrated
> winder and AF it is cheaper than the R8, lacking all these features, using
more
> purchased standard components and a smaller negative!
>
> Hans-Peter
>
>
>###########
Very accurate analysis indeed !
In my opinion there is a solution for Leica : abandon the R system and
concentrate resources on the M system.
Maybe with a Viso 4  (including ttl and automatic preselection) and some
lenses developed for the R : 100 apo, 180 apo, 70-180 apo.
Maybe with a digital M.
Just a 2p thought.

Dominique Pellissier