Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/04/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On Thu, 19 Apr 2001 02:58:44 +0100, leica@davidmorton.org wrote: >Paul Chefurka wrote: > >"I can't understand why the RF isn't selling - it must be the lousy >engraving on the top plate. As a camera design, I think it represents >a humiliating defeat for Leica." > >Let me get this clear. We're told - from a number of sources - that Konica >RF sales since its launch are a huge disappointment. In contrast, during the >first three quarters of FY 2000/2001 M6 sales are *up* by 11.7%. > >This represents a "humiliating defeat for Leica"? > >In addition to the technical niceties, for a camera design to be considered >a success it has to sell in sufficient numbers - and price - to make back >the R&D budget, or at least show signs that it might do this eventually. >Those signs don't seem very clear for the RF as yet. Oh, absolutely - the Hexar may turn out to be a sales failure. There can be any number of reasons for that - superior competition, brand perception, product perception, or just plain old-fashioned recto-cranial inversion in marketing. My point was that, considered purely as a design, the RF is a plausible M7. In fact, it's almost exactly what the M7 dreamers here and elsewhere have been asking for, lo these many years. And it's darn near perfectly executed. And Leica didn't do it. It's got the electronics, it's got the motor, it's got a swing-open back, it's got full-manual operation for everything but the film advance, it has the .58 VF that Leica finally realized everyone wanted, it takes all Leica's lenses (marketing CYA notwithstanding) and it's built like a brick outhouse. It may yet turn out to be the Betamax RF, but if I was a Leica camera designer I'd feel at least a bit embarrassed. Paul