an M9 for the masses...well, not quite!

G

georgef

Well-known
Local time
3:00 PM
Joined
Mar 15, 2007
Messages
325
I was wondering what the thoughts here were about LEICA comming up with a much better priced M9, to aproach a lower income customer base! I would definately be looking at getting an M body that does NOT require a year to save for! I am not talking about a P/S but a real M body built more like a camera for many than the elitist equipment the M8 is (c'mon, you know it is so).:D :angel:

I believe this is more about company vision than base economics!


Ohh yeah, and some LEICA lenses that are priced along side the optics from the rest of the world!!! I may then actually be able to afford new LEICA glass, not the ebay special!

Your thoughts?
 
I've mention a digital CL many times both here and at www.dpreview.com. I doubt we will see one, as a lower priced Leica will probably make them less money in the long run. An M9 is likely to be a flagship camera, and will be more expensive than my last new car most likely.
 
I doubt this will happen. Leica's manufacturing facilities are limited. The cost of setting up a whole new production facility, not to mention the R&D, would probably outweigh any profit to be had.
I imagine they are quite happy in their niche, relying on Voigtlander and Zeiss to introduce new photographers to rangefinder, who may eventually "upgrade" to Leica.
 
...to aproach a lower income customer base!
Click to expand...

They do make the D-Lux 3. If you want some degree of manual control, that's the only affordable digital camera they make. The best small digital cameras nowadays that follow in the tradition of the Barnack Leica are the Ricoh GR-D and GX-100. I wish Leica would make a small-sensor digital camera like that, but I don't see it happening.
 
George, with all due respect, this has been discussed to death here. The Summarits are Leica's answer to a low cost glass.
 
dojcsak@sbcglobal.netNo matter what upgrade evolves from the M8, it will be of little satisfaction to loyal Leica customers, who continue to pay premium prices for Leica bodies and lenses, if the company fails to provide resonable and prompt technical service to customers who have discovered that the new digital camera sensors are flawed. What purpose is served by owning a new M8, if it doesn't work, and takes months to get back from the Leica service center. What working professional photographer can afford to put his or her reputation on the line when such a camera breaks down and takes an inordinate time to fix?
 
Last edited:
I do believe we will see a digital CL.

But I am also guessing that it might be priced at US 3k or more .... Because that's what the market could take, IMHO.
 
I don't care who makes it, at this point, but something like the R-D1 would be fine. An M mount, a decent sensor and manual controls. If they want to make it suitable for "pro" use, then dual card slots, a dedicated iso dial and a self-cleaning sensor would be great.

Ricoh has invented a new kind of camera, IMO, similar in spirit to the Barnack Leica, with it's GR-D and GX-100. Too bad Leica themselves don't see fit to follow up their own traditions and make a competitor. An interchangeable lens, small format digital camera. Mmmmm...:D
 
I am conviced that Leica has to make a 'digital CL' to survive. If they don't do it, others will (Cosina, Zeiss, Epson etc.). There is a huge market, particularly in USA, for a cheaper digital M.

Leica has to make new products to keep the flow of money coming in. A cheaper digital M is far easier to develop than the 'perfect M-animal' like M8 - or even worse; the Full Frame M9 that everydoby dreams of, - and is impossible to make - at all, or for less than 20.000. - Euros.

I see a CL with 1,5 crop sensor, a solid state shutter (no mechanics) 8 - to 10 mill. pixels CCD sensor 'off the shelf' from some well known sensor producer and software to compensate for vignetting, and Capture On 4.0 included. Price; 3,500 US$.
 
sitemistic said:
I'm not sure what a digital CL would really have to offer, especially at $3,000. There is something about the concept of a "budget" Leica M that really doesn't make much sense to me. Perhaps to give someone who already has an M8 something else from Leica to buy?
Click to expand...
I agree with you here. Leica has the premium DRF market all to itself. Why spend the time and money to create a whole new camera when they can barely keep up with the demand for their one current model? Let the other players create the budget camera and Leica will keep the premium customers.
 
kevin m said:
They do make the D-Lux 3. If you want some degree of manual control, that's the only affordable digital camera they make. The best small digital cameras nowadays that follow in the tradition of the Barnack Leica are the Ricoh GR-D and GX-100. I wish Leica would make a small-sensor digital camera like that, but I don't see it happening.
Click to expand...

The GRD and the GX100 I have.
If you look on flickr, those who use Leica, usually also have the GRD, etc.
I even went so far to acquire the LTM GR Lens.


Why doesn't Leica make something similar?
It would sell like nuts.
 
Olsen said:
I am conviced that Leica has to make a 'digital CL' to survive. If they don't do it, others will (Cosina, Zeiss, Epson etc.). There is a huge market, particularly in USA, for a cheaper digital M.

Leica has to make new products to keep the flow of money coming in. A cheaper digital M is far easier to develop than the 'perfect M-animal' like M8 - or even worse; the Full Frame M9 that everydoby dreams of, - and is impossible to make - at all, or for less than 20.000. - Euros.

I see a CL with 1,5 crop sensor, a solid state shutter (no mechanics) 8 - to 10 mill. pixels CCD sensor 'off the shelf' from some well known sensor producer and software to compensate for vignetting, and Capture On 4.0 included. Price; 3,500 US$.
Click to expand...

Indeed I equally agree.
Back perhaps some 50 years ago, when Canon and Nikon was copying Leica M-mount, they must have been thinking we don't stand a chance.

Leica can turn the table today. This caged thinking.
Think what the sales volume would be if a digital CL was introduced,
with live view . . . and some basic kit lens?

What's not to like about this?
I would be afraid they can't make enough to fill orders.

Not enough money to pull it off?
Hire me as CEO, and I will do a stock split, get some more capital.
Do some share swap with Panasonic. . . make the compact CL in Japan.
Sign Kimura Takuya to do some ad in Japan,
and it will sell like nuts.

You don't need to be an optical engineer to run a camera factory.
Yes, it would help. But no, if does not help with churning out RFs.

The need for live view in dslr indicate the SLR mirror box is 1/2 necessary these days.


Let's face it.
Every friend I had knows with their gut that Leica/Zeiss makes some of the best lenses. But not everyone is willing to spend that amount of money to acquire one.

So most buy a Canon Rebel or some Nikon Dxx model. And start acquiring lenses, and at the end of the day they end up spending more than buying a Leica M8.

I have many friends who could trade in their gear for an RF, and are on the verge of doing so after they see the results from an M8.
 
Last edited:
Cosina? Then you would only have to buy the pricey lenses. I think its the best bet for an inexpensive digital M body
 
Ths is a common fantasy that does not bear close examination.

HOW are they going to make this 'VolksLeica'? Where can they save money?

Make it in China? Yeah, right.

Cheers,

R.
 
Don't they have their D-Lux range of cameras? Granted, it's a Panasonic, and the driving concept is a little different, but the form factor looks very similar.
 
M9.. mmm, I have a sad thought.

M9.. mmm, I have a sad thought.

For the first time I am beginning to think that I will not bother with another M series camera. I was possibly foolish enough to buy an M8. I couldn't resist even though my credit card screamed. It's now in for repair as it is a very sick camera so maybe I am not writing this with the best frame of mind. The framing is one of the issues, along with focus and colour. I did drop it two inches onto a table, but that too is an issue. I can drop my M6 and have done on numerous occasions and it just looks a little bruised, but works perfectly. I just worry that these wonderful (and I mean that truly) digital cameras are just not worth that much of our investment as they get superseded so quickly, become obsolete and none sell-able. I am sort of flirting with using DSLR's again on the hoof, although I hate the bulk of them. I find myself grabbing the Canon D5 with a 50 mm prime on most occasions. That's why I havn't posted many pics recently on the RFF. So M9, do I care about tjem making one?

I hate the beginning of the end of a great love affair. Maybe when I get my M8 back, maybe then I will soften and be convinced. But I hate this niggling doubt.
 
Ths is a common fantasy that does not bear close examination.

HOW are they going to make this 'VolksLeica'? Where can they save money?
Click to expand...

Yes, yes, we know, Roger, that to you the Leica is a "luxury good" and it's worth selling off the family jewels or cashing in the 401k. But at some point, for people who WORK for a living, anyway, money is money. And $5,000 for a camera that's not suited for professional use is silly, no matter how 'nice' its files, or how much it makes its owner feel part of a photographic tradition. Leica has long-since cashed in the chips they earned in the 50's making high quality working tools. They largely make very nice toys, now, that can't be used in the rain, or dust, or whenever one must rely on the gear to get the shot, or might worry that taking $10k worth of kit to snap a few vacation pics 'might not be a good idea in this neighborhood.'

Here's what's going on with digital cameras that most users either don't know or acknowledge: Full-frame, and even APS-C sensors aren't a replacement for 35mm film in quality. In terms of resolution, anyway, they're more like medium format. The photographing public in general, and Leica users, too, are hung up on the box they grew up with. 35mm photography was the standard for so long because it was the smallest camera one could use and get reasonable image quality. That's no longer the case.

Small-sensor digital cameras are the 'new' 35mm cameras of the digital age. They have more than enough IQ to make the family snapshots and vacation photos. Plus - and there's more than a little irony here - they're the cameras that are out there making a 'new' kind of photography, much as the Barnack Leicas did in their day. They're small, they have unique features, and they're allowing people to take pictures in ways and places that pictures haven't been taken before. THAT, my friend, is where Leica needs to be. Specifically, they need to be making a competitor to the Ricoh GR-D and the GX-100. Those cameras are closer to the "spririt" of the original Leicas than anything the company is making now.

As far as a digital "CL" goes, Leica could do worse than simply bring the Epson R-D1 back to life. An M mount with a decent sensor and manual controls is all that's needed.
 
As has been said elsewhere this has been done to death elswhere. However a quick 2cents. Budget M8 - Leica have more sense.

The M8 is as much as the pro dSLRs or more. What's new? Compare the prices when CaNikon were still making film bodies. The M6, M7 et al were all more expensive as was the glass. Hell, the RF bodies and lenses have always been more expensive than Leica SLR ones. The price difference didn't kill Leica in the past and won't now.

Leica did "experiment" with a "budget" camera- the CL. It was successful but still discontinued. Maybe the reason was that it was taking sales not from other markets but from Leicas more profitable normal range. Why repeat this with the M8? It's like asking Gucci or Versace to make a line of budget clothing. ;)

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