No, history is not enough. That's being proven out.
Passionate defenders? Possibly. They'd have to do it like Apple does. That takes cash (Apple has 18 billion of that) and vision (there aren't many Steve Jobs.)
And absolutely, emra, they'd have to put money into the service end, too.
Passionate defenders? Possibly. They'd have to do it like Apple does. That takes cash (Apple has 18 billion of that) and vision (there aren't many Steve Jobs.)
And absolutely, emra, they'd have to put money into the service end, too.
Toby
On the alert
sitemistic said:
The point is I think they have to offer something different to what Nikon and Canon are offering. An APS-c sensored compact camera with a decent viewfinder and well thought out manual controls would be a good punt - I mean honestly how hard can it be ?
icebear
Veteran
Closing Doors
Closing Doors
Hi folks,
there was an interesting article in the NYT Feb.26,2008 (yesterday) on closing doors :
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/science/26tier.html?_r=1&ref=science&oref=slogin
Hope the link works (othewise go to NYT : science section " Advantage of closing doors")
It's about focussing on some important options/projects and shutting down others in order to free capacity. Making decisions on priorities and follow the decisions consequently. There is a number of test designs that shows how reluctant the human mind is to let go of options because this is perceived as a loss.
Leica should let go of MP/M7, maybe finish production runs with stock material and than close that door and LOCK IT UP. That's it end of this raod after half a century. Move on.
I think this might be an option to survive. Many will mourn and cry but hey who gives sh... do these go into the shop and order a NEW M7/MP - no they don't.
Closing Doors
Hi folks,
there was an interesting article in the NYT Feb.26,2008 (yesterday) on closing doors :
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/science/26tier.html?_r=1&ref=science&oref=slogin
Hope the link works (othewise go to NYT : science section " Advantage of closing doors")
It's about focussing on some important options/projects and shutting down others in order to free capacity. Making decisions on priorities and follow the decisions consequently. There is a number of test designs that shows how reluctant the human mind is to let go of options because this is perceived as a loss.
Leica should let go of MP/M7, maybe finish production runs with stock material and than close that door and LOCK IT UP. That's it end of this raod after half a century. Move on.
I think this might be an option to survive. Many will mourn and cry but hey who gives sh... do these go into the shop and order a NEW M7/MP - no they don't.
navilluspm
Well-known
I do not shoot Leica because I can not afford it. There is one way Leica can breath life into the M system: Have Panasonic develop a digital M-Mount RFcamera for under $1000 with the M8 sized sensor.
If this were to ever happen, I bet your bottom dollar that interest in RFs would soar! There are people who are interested in pocketable quality for an affordable price.
If this were to ever happen, I bet your bottom dollar that interest in RFs would soar! There are people who are interested in pocketable quality for an affordable price.
icebear said:
Indeed.
Case in point, Apple again. Newton, LaserWriters, etc. Ditched by Jobs when he came back to Apple, so the company could focus on the core. It took a year for the new products to hit the market (iMac) and the subsequent ten years speak for themselves.
slm
Formerly nextreme
sitemistic said:
Exactly ! Leica need new products to stay in the game. Leica is Leica, they are M rangefinders. So, make new products under a new brand. Does Leica have the engineering and design to make products competitive to Nikon and Canon ? I think we all know that answer. Would they develop a loyal following ? Why wouldn't they ?
sooner
Well-known
Sitemistic, as you point out, we don't actually know how well CV or Zeiss is doing with sales, so I don't see why you would imply that CV is NOT selling well. I guess I prefer to describe the glass as half full. And my point isn't so much that Leica would sell millions of Leicas if they just dropped their price, but rather that more of the rangefinder niche market (like me) could afford their product. In other words, better pricing means better penetration of their niche market, whereas now they leave at least hundreds of guys like me craving their product but unable to spend that kind of money. And as you point out, in a small market can they afford to leave some hundreds of thousands of dollars of product unsold?
slm
Formerly nextreme
sooner said:
I agree here - there is definitely a market for a mid priced digital rangefinder.
Yes, I suggested Nkon buy Leica in another thread.
Does Leica have intellectual property that Nikon could use? Unknown, but possibly. Leica isn't worth much to Nikon in terms of the potential for profit with the current product line, so it would only be worth the name, and whatever IP.
But I disagree that Leica should just be put on a conventional digital camera. There are already loads of those.
The key is to revamp the rangefinder concept into something modern, and manufacture it at a price where it can be sold as a true alternative to the dslr. It can be done...maybe not by Leica themselves.
As far as CV goes, they don't have the dealer base to sell big numbers. This is something else Nikon brings, a worldwide distribution channel. They also have the history of doing unusual things, like the S3 and SP rangefinder re-issues, which is why I use them as the example. Panasonic may have engineering and money but they don't have the name cachet or the channels.
Of course, if Nikon wanted to design a modern RF, they wouldn't need to buy Leica to do it.
Does Leica have intellectual property that Nikon could use? Unknown, but possibly. Leica isn't worth much to Nikon in terms of the potential for profit with the current product line, so it would only be worth the name, and whatever IP.
But I disagree that Leica should just be put on a conventional digital camera. There are already loads of those.
The key is to revamp the rangefinder concept into something modern, and manufacture it at a price where it can be sold as a true alternative to the dslr. It can be done...maybe not by Leica themselves.
As far as CV goes, they don't have the dealer base to sell big numbers. This is something else Nikon brings, a worldwide distribution channel. They also have the history of doing unusual things, like the S3 and SP rangefinder re-issues, which is why I use them as the example. Panasonic may have engineering and money but they don't have the name cachet or the channels.
Of course, if Nikon wanted to design a modern RF, they wouldn't need to buy Leica to do it.
Last edited by a moderator:
dazedgonebye
Veteran
sitemistic said:
I would think that enough appropriate sensors and image processing firmware exists for this to be handled "off the shelf" for the most part.
They need the right partnership and willingness to build the thing outside of Germany.
FPjohn
Well-known
Just a note. A local , Madison WI, camera store told me they do sell M8s with ease and that they reorder to fill the demand.
yours
FPJ
yours
FPJ
Autofocus would be a necessity. Could this be done with an M-mount? I don't know the answer to that.
trittium
Well-known
If they are ending the Leica M line soon, now is the time to invest in gear. There will alway be a stong intreset in Leica equipement. No production = less supply. Less supply means more $ for gear. Just look at the RD1 and Nikon RF line.
dazedgonebye
Veteran
sitemistic said:
They own the current solution to that problem, angled micro-lenses. Apply that solution to another sensor, or the current sensor with whatever minor improvements that can be had easily.
The key is to compromise a bit on the build and to build it overseas.
I also agree with an earlier comment about building lenses for other mounts. There is a high end market out there for no-compromise glass and Canon/Nikon owners that would buy.
slm
Formerly nextreme
What would be the market for a mid-priced digital rangefinder? Would it be 50,000? 100,000? What would R&D cost to make one?
Hmm, good question. I think we could say, maybe with the proper marketing, a certain percentage of the mid priced dslr market would either purchase a digital rf in addition to, or instead of that dslr. Conservative estimate, 3-4% of mid priced dslr consumers.
Hmm, good question. I think we could say, maybe with the proper marketing, a certain percentage of the mid priced dslr market would either purchase a digital rf in addition to, or instead of that dslr. Conservative estimate, 3-4% of mid priced dslr consumers.
Last edited:
Toby
On the alert
sitemistic said:
Not strictly true - wasn't the sensor out of the RD-1 from a nikon D70?
One thing they could certainly do is Put an aps-c sensor into a M body - that would solve a lot of the sensor issues, and with Pentax for one bringing out a 14mp sensor and Canon using 14 bit processing they may still be able to improve image quality if they got the right components.They may even be able to put VR in an M body. All they'd have to do is develop a new wide angle lens to compensate for the crop factor.
Whether the cognescenti would swallow it is a different matter ....
visiondr
cyclic iconoclast
sitemistic said:
Great example. That's precisely what's going on here.
Toby said:
That's not the group that will grow Leica, though.
FPjohn
Well-known
They sell
They sell
How many buyers are there globally who are not being sold the current Leicas? How much larger is the market for an upgradable digital with a viewfinder?
They sell
sitemistic said:FPJohn, that camera store needs to tell Leica to hang on, there is a huge untapped market for M8's in WI.
How many buyers are there globally who are not being sold the current Leicas? How much larger is the market for an upgradable digital with a viewfinder?
Olsen
Well-known
nextreme said:
The new Mustang is 'modern'? Don't you have modern cars over there? It has a stiff rear axle! It is a simple pick-up with a fastback design. It's an old fashioned car made at a factory with 70'-80' technology. In 2010 it will not meet EU emision standards...