Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/01/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Believe it or not, Don, I, too, am glad Leica held on and continued to produce sensibly refined traditional gear - and I'd include the ill-fated M5 in that category. Unfortunately, the company has fallen down in three areas if what one cares about is long-term survival: 1. Marketing. And by marketing I'm talking about how they positioned the product. Had the company used advertising, student programs, and PR to position the M as "The" serious pro camera, the camera that every newspaper, magazine and documentary photographer wants around his or her neck even if they're being forced for commercial reasons to use a motor drive-laden behemoth, they would have, I believe, secured a much larger market than they did by position the product as a jewel for the elite. More money in marketing - and real R&D - rather than in special editions, would have gone a long way. And don't forget that the kind of position I'm suggesting would appeal to the "jewel" crowd, the serious "am" crowd, as well as up and coming pros - because the folks in those other groups also want to be seen as 'real,' 'serious' photographers. 2. Reflex development. (Ducking incoming :-) ). Yes, the R8 & 9 have THE best viewfinder on the planet - no question. There is outstanding glass for them. But as sales prove and have proven for some time, the market for a manual reflex camera at a top AF reflex price is limited indeed. Had Leica developed an AF version of the 8/9, while continuing to turn out the MF for as long as they could financially, I believe they could have turned the R line into a money maker. Obviously they were never going to be a Canon or Nikon - most wouldn't want them to be. But they could have really done things with the line that would have made it a financial success. 3. Digital. Here, as in most areas, the company has done too little too late. I know there are people on this list who have already ordered their R back on faith. But what Leica has chosen to do in the digital realm is to set out to produce a very expensive - when compared to high quality digital cameras that are already out there (and as folks here are finding out, work very nicely with the R glass) - back for cameras in a line that is already losing money. And, if they hope to sell this back to new buyers, the price of camera and back jumps into the digital stratosphere, and doesn't begin to compare in utility to the few digitals in that price range. I realize that Leica is a tiny company compared to the competition, that it is a niche market company, and that it is a very limited R&D budget. But perhaps all of that argued for finding a partner/buyer 20 - or at least 10 -years ago. As someone suggested to me off-list last night - what if Zeiss acquired Leica. Talk about synergy. B. D. Not angry at Leica - but saddened by Leica. -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Don Dory Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 9:33 PM To: 'Leica Users Group' Subject: RE: [Leica] Doomed:now a discussion of leica owners B.D., Likewise, I would love to know the exact breakdown of used versus new. I suspect a very high percentage of used for normal folk. You are exactly correct, the stuff lasts forever, has a high enough perceived value that people will spend hundreds resurrecting trashed cameras, and even the really obsolete stuff performs pretty well. Leica held on from the seventies by bringing out better and better product. Now that the lenses are almost better than 95% of the users (who is going to use 50 ISO film on a tripod with a cable release) the almost as good serves many people very well. The Japanese manufacturers faced this in the mid-eighties. For many, that old F, Spotmatic, SRT, FTb, or FT-1 served just fine to produce nice family snaps. Hence the drive to develop auto focus which would obsolete all the old equipment over night. It is almost funny that Canon, which really did obsolete all the old stuff is winning the auto focus, digital revolution. However, kudos' to Leica for hanging in with the old technology for so long. Better optics, less flare, truly micro detail in the images. I really hope somebody produces a 10mp M mount camera at some reasonable price so that I can see the lenses on digital work flow. Don dorysrus@mindspring.com -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+dorysrus=mindspring.com@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+dorysrus=mindspring.com@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of B. D. Colen Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 7:17 PM To: 'Leica Users Group' Subject: RE: [Leica] Doomed:now a discussion of leica owners All arguments aside, Don, I'd really love to know the answer to this one. The problem is that while Leica knows what new equipment it sells and to whom, even Leica doesn't know what used stuff these same people may own. And the percentage of people who have never bought a new body or lens is probably unusually large. I know that my sample of one didn't buy a new body or lens until the late 90s. I figure that buying a new body makes sense because of the warranty, especially given that the bodies now have electronics in them. But to this day the only reason I can see for buying a new lens is that used ones aren't yet available - the lenses last forever, and wysiwyg. Best B. D. -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Don Dory Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 7:01 PM To: 'Leica Users Group' Subject: RE: [Leica] Doomed:now a discussion of leica owners B.D., I have talked to something less than 500 and more than 100 Leica owners over the past then years or so that are not LHSA or LUG folk. It is truly amazing how many people own multiple cameras. The owner of the local gun store, the regional manager of Fuji technical services, an architect, an agent for national talent, an owner of a very large construction company, some guy who caught me shooting light bulbs back lit by the sun. The list goes on and on. One thing that helps is that Atlanta had a very strong Leica dealer for decades. The owner was very dedicated and helpful as well. I remember him flying to Germany to pick up a 400 F2.8 for his customer. So, I will admit that my local area is possibly not typical. But the same thing happens to me in Kansas City when I visit. :) Don dorysrus@mindspring.com -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+dorysrus=mindspring.com@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+dorysrus=mindspring.com@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of B. D. Colen Sent: Sunday, January 23, 2005 12:14 PM To: 'Leica Users Group' Subject: RE: [Leica] Doomed: Leica MP 0.58x But Don, how many people are we talking about? Sure, there are many fans and collectors - but are we talking 500, 1000, 10,000 - world wide? I'm sorry, but I can't believe you've personally talked to more than 100 such people - aside from LHSA and the LUG. Most people who own Leicas are Uncle Ned's. And those who aren't have made their investments, and are dying off. What did we figure the average age is on the LUG? 50something? -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Don Dory Sent: Sunday, January 23, 2005 9:19 AM To: 'Leica Users Group' Subject: RE: [Leica] Doomed: Leica MP 0.58x B.D. said: While Leica acquiring is a disease for some, I would guess - just as you have guessed - that most Leica owners have a single body and own, at absolute most, three lenses; I'd guess most owners have one or two. Actually, that has not been my experience at all with living people. Yes, when someone asks about Uncle Ned's old camera he brought back from Germany, they are only talking about a single camera/lens. However, I could go on for a very long time about individuals that I thought on the surface were normal seeming but have quite a few Leicas stashed away. Perhaps it is a southern thing and the more frugal NEasters only have a body and a lens or two. What is more interesting, is that these individuals have no interest in selling their cameras or lenses. The proverbial story about the SL2 losing so much money that Leica needed to sell three lenses with every body to break even could have an interesting twist. There are a whole bunch of old bodies that might need new lenses. C/V has proved that a modest price point we will buy a few lenses just to try out. If Leica could ever sort out their production and both fill demand and lower cost then they might sell more items. I guess I am suggesting that some production move to a lower cost of business location. Lower price, more product sold, less cost per item to amortize R&D, lower price yet. Back to my original rant err slant, if I did a survey of all the non LUG or LHSA people I know who own and use Leica's, it would probably come out to three bodies and seven lenses as an average. The actual break out would include a LTM, and two M's or alternately an SL, R, and a P&S. In other words, a wide assortment of camera's purchased over the years. Don dorysrus@mindspring.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 _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information