Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/09/24

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] new 1ds mark II
From: banacloj at mac.com (Juan Gea-Banacloche)
Date: Fri Sep 24 14:49:59 2004
References: <00b401c4a275$46f15170$6401a8c0@ccapr.com>

B.D.,
Did not they try that (selling at or below cost) with the SL-2 (and 
failed).

I agree with you completely that a higher end Canon or Nikon DSLR is a 
much more sensible alternative for almost everybody. For the few (or 
many, I don't know) who bought the Modular Telyt or the 70-180, the 
back may be a reasonable solution.
My only point was that, within their price list, the Digital Module R 
did not seem out of place. But your points are well taken.

Juan

On Sep 24, 2004, at 4:30 PM, B. D. Colen wrote:

> I realize that there are development costs, etc. But I wonder...What do
> you suppose would happen if Leica offered that back at cost? That's
> right - at cost? Let's suppose that the back COSTS $1500 to produce.
> Suppose they sold it for $1500, which would allow any Leica R owner to
> get into high quality digital for $1500. And would allow anyone else to
> get into high quality digital AND Leica for the $1500 plus the cost of 
> a
> used R8...How many R bodies would Leica then sell? How many R lenses?
> I'm no business man, but I'll bet they would make allot more money in
> the long run selling that thing at cost, bringing new Leicaphiles into
> the Leicatent  than they'll ever make selling it at 4K plus...
>
> But what do I know? Much of the Leica attraction seems to be its high
> cost and exclusivity....
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org
> [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of
> Nathan Wajsman
> Sent: Friday, September 24, 2004 4:04 PM
> To: Leica Users Group
> Subject: Re: [Leica] new 1ds mark II
>
>
> Juan Gea-Banacloche wrote:
>
>> What baffles me is the pervasive comparison between Leica and Canon &
>> Nikon in terms of bang for the buck. Has Leica ever been "competitive"
>
>> (value for money) in the SLR arena? My impression is that they stopped
>
>> even trying decades ago. Don't get me wrong, the R8 and R9 may be
>> absolutely wonderful machines, but do they offer more features (for a
>> similar cost) than the flagship Nikon or Canon? In this context, the
>> pricing of the Digital Module seems quite standard for the company (or
>
>> even less disproportionate than usual).
>
> The difference is that in the analog world, Leica can credibly make the
> claim that its cameras are in a class of their own, designed to last a
> lifetime. This is amply demonstrated by the number of Leicaflexes, M3s
> and LTMs still in use among members of this group, and I have no doubt
> that current M6s will prove equally durable. However, when Leica enters
> the digital arena, no such claim can be made, and so a comparison to
> other makers of digital cameras is much more relevant.
>
> Nathan
> -- 
> Nathan Wajsman
> Almere, The Netherlands
>
> General photography: http://www.nathanfoto.com
> Seville photography: http://www.fotosevilla.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information


In reply to: Message from bdcolen at earthlink.net (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] new 1ds mark II)