3,000 Zeiss Ikons Since November

3000 Cameras at $1300 is about $4 million. What do they sell to distributors and stores at? $1000? What does Mr. K sell them to Zeiss at? $700, $600?

Considering that it was not a clean sheet camera, I would think they are happy with that. Maybe half again as much revenue, maybe more in RF lenses, plus the Nikon ones.

I think Canon is fixin' to get FF sensors down market. Maybe in a couple of years the zRFd will be about $2000-$2500, used $1400 a few years after that. I can wait.
 
leafy said:
If the Chinese could copy the Leica M back in the '50 '60, they can certainly do it now :)
Click to expand...

Wouldn't even have to do that. Just move the entire production facility from Portugal to Shanghai - lock, stock and barrell! :D
 
This may be sacrilege, but if Leica were to relocate all production to the PRC I'd have no problem with that at all -- assuming the quality control was still up to their standard. I think the Chinese have long since proven that they can make products of equal quality to anyone's. I type this on a Lenovo-made IBM ThinkPad, for instance.

I reckon there are some pretty stringent EU rules limiting outsourcing, however.

It's encouraging that so many ZIs have been purchased -- I guess there is a market for it! (I wonder how many of that number are owned my members of this list?)
 
Bertram2 said:
And why do i think the new ZI-D , which I suppose to be in the drawer already, ready for marketing, will have Nikon imaging technology inside ? Photokina 2006 will tell us.
bertram
Click to expand...

I also suspect there will be a concept model at photokina this year. It may not be a working prototype, but that wouldn't bother me. Zeiss has openly stated the lenses were designed with a digital in mind. Most likely, so was the chassis platform. Hence placing the winder on the bottom so that the rangefinder mechanism and top plate need only be modified slightly...

-grant
 
Bertram2 said:
And why do i think the new ZI-D , which I suppose to be in the drawer already, ready for marketing, will have Nikon imaging technology inside ? Photokina 2006 will tell us.
:D :D
bertram
Click to expand...

Hopefully not the ill fated LBCAST sensor from the D2h. 4Mpixel cropped sensor with lots of noise over ISO800 is not what I would buy.

Even the Sony sensors in other Nikons are cropped.

No, it better be one of the bigger sensors from Kodak, Imacon etc.pp.
 
KoNickon said:
T
I reckon there are some pretty stringent EU rules limiting outsourcing, however.
Click to expand...

There are none tho sometimes it would be better to have them. We lose 1000 jobs per day in Germany, and for the most companies it isn't a question of surviving but of how to squeeze still more return on invest out of a production.
10 -15% in Europe are now considered as not beeing enuff, you can make up to 25 % in China and so they go to China.

For Leica tho it is a question of surviving, the old fashioned elaborated design, material and the small tolerances make the assembly and the QM expensive and it is all work done by hand.

More ROI would grant enuff financial ressources for developing and innovation, a basic condition to survive nowadays. There had not been any since the 50s, they thought they would not need it.

Bertram
 
3000 units in under a year is pretty good for Carl Zeiss, I'm sure they weren't really even thinking about tens of thousands units, not that they'd mind if it happens... :) By comparison, how many RD-1s were ever sold by Epson, anyone?

With this progress, l think CZ would be motivated to look closely at going digital... I'm looking at their ZI brochure under the heading 'Why film & not digital?' And it appears that Zeiss is going for gold with full format sensors, no cropped sensors for Oberkochen...
"When digital sensor technology takes another leap... accepting the high incident angles of a wide-angle M-mount lens to the corners of a full format sensor, you can count on us to come up with high performance digital systems..."

Now I'm tempted to hold onto the $5k I'm saving up for the Digital M! Well maybe start putting pennies into another cookie-jar for a possible ZI DRF, so I can have both!

Kev
 
With regards the issue of out-sourcing the manufacture of an entry priced Leica, I don't think it is so simply a matter of opening a plant in China, Korea, Japan, or South-East Asia, etc...

Even at the proposed price of just under US$2k, it is a question how many fully mechanical CRF bodies they can move in a month? The rationale for out-sourcing manufacturing, works for products that are bought literally at rates of tens of thousands units per month...

A $2k mechanical CRF camera is simply not that kind of product.

Kev
 
Socke said:
Hopefully not the ill fated LBCAST sensor from the D2h. 4Mpixel cropped sensor with lots of noise over ISO800 is not what I would buy.

Even the Sony sensors in other Nikons are cropped.

No, it better be one of the bigger sensors from Kodak, Imacon etc.pp.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't mind a Fuji sensor like the one they're using in the F10/F11/F30. It's a P&S that performs at SLR levels up to 3200ISO because of it's unconventional structure (is it octagonal ?) They used to push the megapixel with it, but now they've come to their senses and they're using the extra information for better low light performance. I wonder if it would be feasible to build it in full (35mm) frame size.


Peter.
 
Socke said:
Hopefully not the ill fated LBCAST sensor from the D2h. 4Mpixel cropped sensor with lots of noise over ISO800 is not what I would buy.

Even the Sony sensors in other Nikons are cropped.

No, it better be one of the bigger sensors from Kodak, Imacon etc.pp.
Click to expand...

Volker ,

based on the infos we have about the wide angle prob at digital RF cameras I simply can't see any solution built on the current generation of chips.

My assumption is rather that the retrofocus-like design of the Zeiss M lenses is for an optimized result with APS sized chips, not for fullformat chips.
I am not an expert tho, maybe I am wrong. A crop factor would not make sense either on the other hand.

For me an academic discussion anyway, I don't need it. RF for me is a film camera.
As long as the chip pics do not look like film at least. :angel:

OT:
Got a new replacement belt today for my Pioneer Pl 120 I bought 1973 and listened to some vinyls, first time again since '94 or so . Again I found, digital sucks !! As if the D/A converter would filter all the life out of the music ? And my CD machine isn't a cheap one , believe me ! :D

Bertram.
 
copake_ham said:
Grant.

Sorry, but not surprised to hear that B&H has only sold two of these cameras. B&H isn't really a camera store anymore!

Notice for All Here: B&H is NOT a camera dealer! At least anymore.

They now advertise heavily on NYC radio stations that they are an all-round electronics dealer. One of there current ads has a conversation like this:

1: I hear you went to B&H for a tripod.

2: Yeah, but instead I got an I-pod.

1: An I-pod instead of a tri-pod? At B&H?

2: Oh yeah, they have all the I-pod models.

1: Wow! Got to get to B&H for an I-pod!


Same with HDTV's, computers etc,

B&H now considers itself an "electronics store". It is trying to maintain market position against the "invasion" into NYC of such chain sellers as Best Buy!

I figure that many of you outside NYC still think of B&H as a "camera store", But check out their website and print catalog - I think you are in for a rude awakening! :(
Click to expand...


Yeah, but are their prices insane?

FRlol.gif
cunao.gif
emotlol.gif
jester.gif



R.J.
 
Last edited:
anselwannab said:
3000 Cameras at $1300 is about $4 million. What do they sell to distributors and stores at? $1000? What does Mr. K sell them to Zeiss at? $700, $600?

Considering that it was not a clean sheet camera, I would think they are happy with that. Maybe half again as much revenue, maybe more in RF lenses, plus the Nikon ones.

I think Canon is fixin' to get FF sensors down market. Maybe in a couple of years the zRFd will be about $2000-$2500, used $1400 a few years after that. I can wait.
Click to expand...

Mr. K doesn't sell them to Zeiss. He doesn't own them to begin with. I would think that the arrangement is more complicated than that.
 
Cosina is the contract manufacturer for Carl Zeiss, and perhaps in regard the manufacturing facilities at the Cosina plant, both companies share equity stakes... How does that translate to cost per unit charged by Cosina and profit taken by Carl Zeiss, only the respective bean counters can make sense of.

Kev
 
Kev T said:
Cosina is the contract manufacturer for Carl Zeiss, and perhaps in regard the manufacturing facilities at the Cosina plant, both companies share equity stakes... How does that translate to cost per unit charged by Cosina and profit taken by Carl Zeiss, only the respective bean counters can make sense of.

Kev
Click to expand...

Exactly. And I would expect that Mr. K's rights to sell them in Japan - & through the grey market to retailers like Popflash & Cameraquest - must factor into this equation somehow. Stephen Gandy once observed that this arrangement seems to function more like a partnership.
 
I gotta think that there are more ways to structure the deal than you can count.

Dealer's only make 3%? Was that in response to me? $40 to stock and sell a $1300 camera sounds a bit low. Maybe for B&H that just blows them out the door.

Mark
 
When I worked at a camera shop in Boston, they sold most new cameras for cost plus 10%. Things might have gotten a bit tighter since then, but I imagine retailers are making more than 3%. Of course if dealers and retailers together are getting a cut of only 20% combined (or even less), that leaves more profit for Carl Zeiss AG and some for Cosina. Hopefully they can plow that money back into more nifty camera and lens designs. Can we have too many good Zeiss products?

I believe Zeiss had announced previously that they were selling about three ZM lenses for every ZI body, so they are probably well over the 10,000 count for lenses in the first production year. Another 6-8 million dollars in sales. Not too shabby. :)
 
Last edited:
Very well, I stand corrected, although I will note that the 10% markup you discuss is gross, not net, but let's not quibble. Perhaps what I should have said was that markup in other industries from wholesale to retail is often larger than in electronics.

Ben
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom