bmattock
Veteran
The problem - for Leica and those who are staring extinction in the face due to their inability or refusal to change, is that they do not understand the difference between a durable good and a commodity; or perhaps they refuse or are unable to understand that cameras were the former, and are now the latter.
When film became a relatively stable market (35mm and 120 roll film), we saw cameras built for decades. Camera manufacturers built tanks, cameras that could be fixed and maintained indefinitely, and with great mechanical precision.
When AE and later, AF, entered the picture, costs began to be cut in an effort to incorporate the newest technology, but with an understanding that these advances were still advancing - they were in a state of flux. Most of the early AE and AF cameras are in no way comparable to their purely-mechanical ancestors.
When AE and AF had finally stabilized - for the most part - mechanical and electronic quality returned again to the marketplace.
Then digital turned everything on its head again.
And this time, the shift was permanent - or at least permanent from our point of view in the ebb and flow of time.
Digital cameras are far from stable. The technology evovles daily. There is no need - indeed, no reason - to build a digital camera capable of weathering decades of abuse. No one will want a 6mp dSLR in ten years - it will be virtually worthless, like a Time magazine promotional giveaway 35mm camera of the 1980's. That's even assuming it works by then.
But Leica wants to build high quality machines.
Digital cameras have no use for such devices. Yet. Leica does not get it. They're idiots. Really. A bunch of ancient creaky stuffed German suits who think they can dictate how the world will revolve around them.
Canon, Nikon, Pentax, and Olympus figured it out - but nearly too late. Konica-Minolta was too late. Companies like Sony, Panasonic and Samsung are smacking them around some. They're not traditionally camera companies, but they know computers and high-tech; and that's what digital cameras are. The smartest of the traditional camera companies made pacts and partnerships with the computer companies like Leica did with Panasonic and Pentax did with Samsung.
Hey, I just called Leica stupid, but yet they cleverly partnered with Panasonic. How can that be stupid? Its only stupid because they don't realize that's where they should be putting nearly ALL their efforts, not operating it as a sideline. That's their future, if they're going to have one.
Perhaps someday, digital camera technology will plateau. And when it does, there will be a place for cameras that are durably made goods again and not throw-away commodities. But I don't see that day on the horizon at the moment.
If camera companies can't figure that out, they are not only doomed, they deserve to be doomed for being criminally stupid and cheating their stockholders.
When film became a relatively stable market (35mm and 120 roll film), we saw cameras built for decades. Camera manufacturers built tanks, cameras that could be fixed and maintained indefinitely, and with great mechanical precision.
When AE and later, AF, entered the picture, costs began to be cut in an effort to incorporate the newest technology, but with an understanding that these advances were still advancing - they were in a state of flux. Most of the early AE and AF cameras are in no way comparable to their purely-mechanical ancestors.
When AE and AF had finally stabilized - for the most part - mechanical and electronic quality returned again to the marketplace.
Then digital turned everything on its head again.
And this time, the shift was permanent - or at least permanent from our point of view in the ebb and flow of time.
Digital cameras are far from stable. The technology evovles daily. There is no need - indeed, no reason - to build a digital camera capable of weathering decades of abuse. No one will want a 6mp dSLR in ten years - it will be virtually worthless, like a Time magazine promotional giveaway 35mm camera of the 1980's. That's even assuming it works by then.
But Leica wants to build high quality machines.
Digital cameras have no use for such devices. Yet. Leica does not get it. They're idiots. Really. A bunch of ancient creaky stuffed German suits who think they can dictate how the world will revolve around them.
Canon, Nikon, Pentax, and Olympus figured it out - but nearly too late. Konica-Minolta was too late. Companies like Sony, Panasonic and Samsung are smacking them around some. They're not traditionally camera companies, but they know computers and high-tech; and that's what digital cameras are. The smartest of the traditional camera companies made pacts and partnerships with the computer companies like Leica did with Panasonic and Pentax did with Samsung.
Hey, I just called Leica stupid, but yet they cleverly partnered with Panasonic. How can that be stupid? Its only stupid because they don't realize that's where they should be putting nearly ALL their efforts, not operating it as a sideline. That's their future, if they're going to have one.
Perhaps someday, digital camera technology will plateau. And when it does, there will be a place for cameras that are durably made goods again and not throw-away commodities. But I don't see that day on the horizon at the moment.
If camera companies can't figure that out, they are not only doomed, they deserve to be doomed for being criminally stupid and cheating their stockholders.
