Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/11/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]i do agree with you, i think the r10 should have been before the S2. with AF and new lenses, the R10 would have been a killer. then hey could have followed with the S2. but their thinking is not logical. how many 10k nocti lens they plan to produce and sell, how about a 6.5 24mm lens? if i was running the company. the r division would have turned to making lenses for canon and nikon, and this a cash cow. would have doubled the m r&d in both lens and body stuff and then bought a company like dalsa to make my own chip. On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 8:24 AM, Frank Filippone <red735i@earthlink.net> wrote: > We disagree on what Leica should offer first, the S2 or the R10. > > I believe there is no significant market, no significant volume, and > therefore no significant "profit" in the S2. Significant is in terms of > Leica as a Corporation, not as a comparison for Mamiya, Hasselblad, or > other. > > I further believe that the R10 has a chance to put Leica back as a > significant player in the D-SLR market, albeit a niche player , as the M8 > has brought them back as a player in 35mm Digital Cameras. > The competition is not with respect to other camera bodies, but rather the > glass...... where Leica has a superior position already but no way to > capitalize on it without a camera body: R10. > > I believe the R10 should be rushed forward, and the S2 be a second player, > when time allows. > > Dr Kaufmann disagrees, apparently with my point of view. > > Frank Filippone > red735i@earthlink.net > > > Frank what are you putting forward here? > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > -- ------------------------------------- regards, mehrdad