rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Leica pricing has been a hot discussion topic for a while, but with the latest few product releases we seem to have got some particularly emotional and vitriolic discussions, with people displaying deep disappointment and calling it a betrayal of Leica's photographic roots. So here's a few thoughts on the subject - I use Leica as an example here, but I guess one could, mutatis mutandis, have a similar discussion about Alpa or other manufacturers, too.
As far as I can see, Leica has been manufacturing luxury goods for a long time. The first luxury M6 limited editions began appearing in the late 80s, and it became visible with products like the MP and blatantly obvious with the a-la-carte program. It seems to me the M7 was probably the last film M primarily directed at photographers.
Now these luxury goods were always also good photographic tools in the hand of a skilled photographer who happened to have a sufficient income stream. I guess it's because of that, and because price increases were gradual, that buyers could for a long time tell themselves that they were not purchasing a luxury good, but a more or less exquisite photographic tool that happened to come at a price. Some of them still can, disposable income permitting.
My guess is that there will be buyers such as this for the M-M and for the new aspherical Summicron. We'll see a few of them on RFF over a short time, I'm sure. Many of these are quite serious photographers and the fact that they happen to be able to afford expensive gear doesn't make them less so; and while they're probably not the primary target audience, they are indeed necessary as a source of legitimacy for the marketing strategy to work.
However, as prices increased, other people began dropping out of the bottom of the affordability threshold, or they started to question the price premium over generic high-end cameras. At some point Leica, for these people, crossed the red line between high-end photographic tools, which seemed OK to buy if somewhat expensive, and luxury goods, which were seen as in conflict with Leica's background in professional photography. It seems that the release of the 50 Summicron Aspherical at >$7k was a point where this red line was crossed for a large number of people, hence the emotional discussions.
That's why people now get angry, as if Leica was betraying their roots. However, if such a betrayal ever took place, it took place a long time ago. Leica has been a luxury goods manufacturer for more than twenty years and you had to live under a rock not to notice it. That's why I am a bit baffled about the vitriolic threads we got about the pricing of the M9 Monochrom and the new aspherical 50 Summicron. It seems a bit late to complain about this now in 2012 when the change in marketing strategy took place in the 1980s.
As far as I can see, Leica has been manufacturing luxury goods for a long time. The first luxury M6 limited editions began appearing in the late 80s, and it became visible with products like the MP and blatantly obvious with the a-la-carte program. It seems to me the M7 was probably the last film M primarily directed at photographers.
Now these luxury goods were always also good photographic tools in the hand of a skilled photographer who happened to have a sufficient income stream. I guess it's because of that, and because price increases were gradual, that buyers could for a long time tell themselves that they were not purchasing a luxury good, but a more or less exquisite photographic tool that happened to come at a price. Some of them still can, disposable income permitting.
My guess is that there will be buyers such as this for the M-M and for the new aspherical Summicron. We'll see a few of them on RFF over a short time, I'm sure. Many of these are quite serious photographers and the fact that they happen to be able to afford expensive gear doesn't make them less so; and while they're probably not the primary target audience, they are indeed necessary as a source of legitimacy for the marketing strategy to work.
However, as prices increased, other people began dropping out of the bottom of the affordability threshold, or they started to question the price premium over generic high-end cameras. At some point Leica, for these people, crossed the red line between high-end photographic tools, which seemed OK to buy if somewhat expensive, and luxury goods, which were seen as in conflict with Leica's background in professional photography. It seems that the release of the 50 Summicron Aspherical at >$7k was a point where this red line was crossed for a large number of people, hence the emotional discussions.
That's why people now get angry, as if Leica was betraying their roots. However, if such a betrayal ever took place, it took place a long time ago. Leica has been a luxury goods manufacturer for more than twenty years and you had to live under a rock not to notice it. That's why I am a bit baffled about the vitriolic threads we got about the pricing of the M9 Monochrom and the new aspherical 50 Summicron. It seems a bit late to complain about this now in 2012 when the change in marketing strategy took place in the 1980s.
