How long before Leica dumps the RF in favour of an EVF?

[Keith]

Try buying five bottles of beer or five thousand. I bet you can get the five thousand at half-price.

Beer ..... surely not a valid comparison. I was thinking chardonnay! 🙂

 

[Fraser]

Or maybe a hybrid finder like the Fuji X100?

I can't remember the last time I used the optical finder on my 240 and if it had a built in EVF that didn't black out for a few seconds after exposure the way the clip on example does I'd be one happy camper! And surely the manufacturing costs of an EVF would be less than the current rangefinder mechanism.

No doubt some of you out there will think is total heresy! 😛

While my leica m9 was back in Germany having the sensor remapped etc I decided to pickup a secondhand x100 as a stop gap. I was amazed by the hybrid finder. It works great no parallax problems and macro works brilliantly. This is surely the way leica should go. New lenses with electronic contacts and the ability like nikon and canon (even the 6d) to adjust the focus. Oh and leica should have the ability to remap the sensor built in. I think sooner or later they maybe have to make the brave move to dump the m mount to something different just as canon had to when they introduced autofocus.

 

[Kwesi]

While my leica m9 was back in Germany having the sensor remapped etc I decided to pickup a secondhand x100 as a stop gap. I was amazed by the hybrid finder. It works great no parallax problems and macro works brilliantly. This is surely the way leica should go. New lenses with electronic contacts and the ability like nikon and canon (even the 6d) to adjust the focus. Oh and leica should have the ability to remap the sensor built in. I think sooner or later they maybe have to make the brave move to dump the m mount to something different just as canon had to when they introduced autofocus.

I personally don't see a need to change to an EVF and auto focus.
There are countless other brands to choose from that offer that.
I find the M line to be a respite from all that and am willing to pay a premium for the option.

 

[ian_watts]

So the question is if Leica were to lower its prices, would the increase in sales revenue more than make up for the price cut

I think that would entirely depend upon whether Leica's key priority in the short term is cashflow or profit.

 

[jsrockit]

So the question is if Leica were to lower its prices, would the increase in sales revenue more than make up for the price cut, or would there be less demand because it's now considered affordable by all?

Leica cannot compete with Sony, Nikon, and Canon when it comes to pricing. Even if Leica priced its cameras near these other manufacturers, they couldn't handle the same production I would guess.

 

[jsrockit]

I personally don't see a need to change to an EVF and auto focus. There are countless other brands to choose from that offer that. I find the M line to be a respite from all that and am willing to pay a premium for the option.

Well, the Q seems to be doing well... so, it appears that Leica having a quality AF camera is important to some users. Leica is smart not to keep all of its eggs in the M basket. Though, I think it would be suicide to get rid of the mechanical RF.

 

[Kwesi]

Well, the Q seems to be doing well... so, it appears that Leica having a quality AF camera is important to some users. Leica is smart not to keep all of its eggs in the M basket. Though, I think it would be suicide to get rid of the mechanical RF.

Agreed!
I think to turn the M to a mainstream camera would diminish its appeal.

 

[Keith]

Well, the Q seems to be doing well... so, it appears that Leica having a quality AF camera is important to some users. Leica is smart not to keep all of its eggs in the M basket. Though, I think it would be suicide to get rid of the mechanical RF.

I don't really see it this way. I think they would gain a lot of new customers who want the Leica name but not attached to a camera that focuses with a system that dates back to the thirties that can be hard to master initially.

Ultimately I expect to see a camera similar to the Q but with interchangeable lenses and the RF gone from the range entirely. Not within the next couple of years .... but ultimately.

 

[airfrogusmc]

If they stop making a rangefinder completely I would then have no reason to by a Leica. I would buy one of the other MANY options already out there. For me and the way I work a true rangefinder is the best option and I don't think I am the only one that believes that. At least I have a real choice in the sea of sameness out there in the one size fits all lets remove the photographer process world out there.

 

[jsrockit]

I don't really see it this way....

... Ultimately I expect to see a camera similar to the Q but with interchangeable lenses and the RF gone from the range entirely. Not within the next couple of years .... but ultimately.

80 something years of history and it keeps on going with rabid fans...

I know many are fans of the lenses, but there are equally as many who think the mechanical rangefinder is what makes Leica special. Why else would people spend $7000 on a seemingly under-spec body? There are many great lenses these days and many are not made by Leica. I never bought a Leica because of lenses.

 

[airfrogusmc]

History has shown Leica has never been about specs and new innovation (maybe with the exception being the first Leica). How long did it take them to put a meter in an M? Still don't have auto focus lenses for the M (thank God). For the street and really fast shooting there is nothing more intuitive than an M. No auto focus is faster than being pre focused. And the ability to see whats about to come in the frame or leave the frame so easily there is nothing better in my opinion and I have tried a lot of different formats and cameras over the years. There are certainly plenty of other great choices if you don't want a rangefinder.

 

[nongfuspring]

The R&D required for future M digitals I imagine is pretty minimal. They've already put in a lot of money to develop the digital M series, the elements that can be upgraded are much fewer than in a more modern digital camera; swap out the sensor and processor, a few minor handling tweaks and you have a new M.

With that in mind I doubt Leica will be dropping DRFs anytime soon - it would be like Porsche dropping the 911 or Ray Ban discontinuing the wayfarer; the M is intrinsic to the Leica brand identity and it's value lies in more than just it's profitability as a product line.

 

[Mcary]

80 something years of history and it keeps on going with rabid fans...

I know many are fans of the lenses, but there are equally as many who think the mechanical rangefinder is what makes Leica special. Why else would people spend $7000 on a seemingly under-spec body? There are many great lenses these days and many are not made by Leica. I never bought a Leica because of lenses.

Feel the same way!

 

[mcfingon]

You're a stirrer, Keith. Maybe the answer is they will and they won't dump the RF. My evidence is from BMW's attempt to dump their quirky horizontally-opposed twin motorbikes back in the 80's and move to triples and four-cylinder more mainstream bikes. They found some of the people still wanted the old style and some wanted new so they made both, while refining some of the quirks out of the horizontal twin. I have both styles of BM in my shed below:

 

[Kwesi]

I don't really see it this way. I think they would gain a lot of new customers who want the Leica name but not attached to a camera that focuses with a system that dates back to the thirties that can be hard to master initially.

Ultimately I expect to see a camera similar to the Q but with interchangeable lenses and the RF gone from the range entirely. Not within the next couple of years .... but ultimately.

For those customers Leica makes a variety of cameras that they will find attractive - The allure of the Leica M on the other hand is that its a bit like a musical instrument in that although it may take some time to master, in time it will sing to your tune

 

[jloden]

The rangefinder is a key component of the Leica M and I just don't see it going away in favor of an EVF. I'm not against EVFs and I've been using them since 2012, but they also clearly aren't a viable replacement for an OVF in every case.

I strongly suspect they will introduce a hybrid rangefinder technology in the next M that will retain an optical viewfinder component. Mind you, it need not necessarily be along the lines of the Fuji implementation either. That's one example of the hybrid approach but not the only one.

For example, I could envision an OVF with an electronic overlay focus patch fed focus data from the sensor, eliminating the need for the expensive, complex, and bulk-inducing mechanical rangefinder linkage. Something like that could also pave the way for a more svelte digital M closer in size to the classic film M, which is something Leica fans have wanted for years.

 

[jloden]

[...]

One thing that I find utterly annoying is the image review INSIDE the EVF. Both Sony A7S and Fuji X100T do that. You can't set "SHOOT WITH EVF, REVIEW WITH SCREEN".
You just use that eye sensor that keeps switching stuff on and off.

If you set the X100T to "Viewfinder only + Eye Sensor" it will use the VF only, and hitting the playback button (with the camera away from your eye) will display the image review on the back LCD.

Caveat is that this doesn't work for menus, only playback. The menu is still only displayed in the EVF so if you need to change a setting you either have to do it through the EVF or change the view mode first.

 

[willie_901]

Let's look at it from the other end. After being technically bankrupt in 2006, and expensive even then, they are a healthy company now, but they are certainly not raking in money by the bucketload. I doubt that they could lower their prices significantly without ending up in the red again.

This a pragmatic summary of the situation. This is also how come Leica cameras/lenses exemplify an interesting blend of quality and value-added pricing. The "paying for the red-dot" is used as a derogatory cliche and does not represent the whole truth. At the same time, like all cliches, it applies to some degree.

On some level people know this when they purchase new Leica products. This is where the value-added part becomes relevant. Leica products are not commodities. For some there is no competition. Porsche's "there is no substitute" marketing slogan applies.

In my view people should buy products they enjoy and match their priorities. Life is too short.

 

[willie_901]

... I think they would gain a lot of new customers who want the Leica name but not attached to a camera that focuses with a system that dates back to the thirties that can be hard to master initially.

...

I disagree. The market share that's up for grabs will not pay those prices.

My sense is the Leica name doesn't mean that much to young consumers looking to move up from smart-phone photography or upgrade from an entry level DSLR/mirrorless system.

 

[Luke_Miller]

T I'm not against EVFs and I've been using them since 2012, but they also clearly aren't a viable replacement for an OVF in every case.

A point that seems overlooked by some. I suspect Cartier-Bresson would have struggled trying to capture his "decisive moment" with a current generation EVF. At some point EVF latency will be reduced to insignificance, but until then optical viewfinders (or hybrid) are needed for some types of photography.