majid
Fazal Majid
You're probably right about 4/3, but that does not mean m4/3 is equally doomed.
Well, the question is how many formats there will be. With digital, since there is no film manufacturing and distribution logistics involved, you have less of a pressure to limit the proliferation of formats. Film manufacturers couldn't produce and stock 35mm, 120, 220, 4x5, 8x10, 110, Disc, APS and every other crackpot format there, so the market converged towards a limited number of formats.
Similarly, there isn't a big enough market for interchangeable lens cameras to support an indefinite number of lens mounts. Olympus and Panasonic did the smart thing in uniting on a common format rather than going against the Canon-Nikon-Sony market leaders with two independent mounts. The question is whether they can reach sufficient volumes to make it a viable mount.
For fixed-lens cameras, the sensor size is an internal design decision of the manufacturer (most compacts don't even specify it in their data sheets), unlike with lens mounts where it is baked into the spec. 90% of cameras sold by volume are fixed-lens compacts. SLRs are only 10% (but 25% by value, 35% if you count lenses). While there is a strong minority of enthusiasts who want better quality compacts, the vast majority of people don't know or care, and are very happy with their nasty 1/2.7" sensors. Even if m4/3 is successful, it will remain a niche.
That's the promise, but now they need to deliver on it.
That remains to be proven. Olympus' sales and profits have been hurting and dragged down by the camera division (sales down by 43% year-on-year in the last 3 months, revenues down by 96%). Of course, the E-P1 was just released and it's too early to gauge its impact, but full-size 4/3 seems not to have succeeded in the marketplace, to put it mildly. Panasonic is probably in a stronger position, but it's still an uphill fight.
Replace "Leica" by "BMW" or "Porsche" in your statement and see how well it holds up. Leica are never going to be price-competitive with Japanese manufacturers. Given that, it makes more sense for them to position themselves as a luxury brand.
What really matters for Leica is whether people who would actually buy one are aware of them, not awareness in the general population, most of whom would not consider buying a camera above $500 in any case.
It's more of an advantage for Panasonic than for Leica, were it not for the offsetting financial payments for licensing the brand. It's also a double-edged sword if those Panasonic lenses don't live up to the brand promise.
Why? There is a downside risk of cannibalizing M9 sales, and little upside.
Leica can't manufacture itself mass volumes of lenses. Either Leica m4/3 lenses are a high-volume product, and will have to be manufactured by Panasonic (which means all Leica gets is a royalty), or they are a premium-priced item, say, in the same range as he new low-cost Summarit-Ms or Canon L lenses. It is far from obvious that m4/3 buyers are prepared to pay that kind of price even for Leica glass, and those that are could well be prepared to buy into a 100% Leica system instead, where Leica do not have to share profits with Panasnoc or dilute their brand.
From a marketing and financial point of view, it makes more sense for Leica to make itself a luxury brand (where exclusiveness is part of the draw) than to slum it with Panasonic. From that point of view, the rebadged Panasonics were actually evidence of desperation and weakness rather than an optimal strategy. I suspect M8 sales have done much to improve their financial condition compared to 2005, which allowed them to invest in R&D on the S2, M9 and X1 and thus rebuild their cachet.
One interesting thing about marketing in the last 10-20 years or so is that the midrange has been suffering in many markets. Leica has no credible future as a midrange brand, and they don't have the financial backing of a Sony or Samsung to turn themselves into a mass-market brand. The only way Leica would become significantly more affordable and commonplace is if Panasonic buys them. In that case, they would live on as a badge, but the products will not be the same.
