Rui Morais de Sousa
Established
Into the future
I don't believe very much in the future of the S system. Not in the economic situation we are living. "Normal" Leicas are already expensive enough!
Leica R's may be fine, but add nothing more to the competition, except better lenses. Lots of money for just a 35mm.
So, I think that the only solution is keeping the M system. It is something people own and use because they LOVE it, because it is DIFFERENT and has not much competition in the maket. You don't necessarly use M cameras because they make better photographs, but because they are a kind of camera that you like to handle. You ENJOY it! I am talking about FEELING here.
I think Leica should dig again the concept of the CL and rethink it, just doing it better. A cheaper well-made rangefinder camera that uses ALL M lenses. I would give all the priority to make it with M bayonet! That is what we all love most, or? We already have lots of that beautiful lenses...
I would plan a new CL F for film, and a CL D for a decent size sensor (full?), good high ISO performance, a true optical finder, etc., but a decent acceptable price. I think that it would be reasonable to think about the price level of Zeiss / Ikon.
Probably that could turn me on to a digital Leica. Not the M8 for such high price and dubious performance (here I speak for what I hear and read, I have never tried, but the price is enough to drive me away).
Dreaming a little, I would also apprecciate that talked-about digital back for normal M's. I think that could really produce a Leica revival!
By the way. That digital Leica (as my digital Canon) would NEVER substitute my film M's! Or my large format, or my medium format...
About the coments on TLR's, plates, etc.:
Don't go confusing things. Just because you can print a good image on a inkjet printer, it doesn't make a master printer out of you. Just because you can make a nice photograph with your auto-everything camera and correct it in your computer, doesn't make you a master photographer!
How many of you can claim to be in the level of a Brett Weston, a Paul Caponigro, a Ezra Stoller, a Eugene Smith?
(Wish I could, but I have a LONG, LONG way to learn...)
Greetings.
Rui
I don't believe very much in the future of the S system. Not in the economic situation we are living. "Normal" Leicas are already expensive enough!
Leica R's may be fine, but add nothing more to the competition, except better lenses. Lots of money for just a 35mm.
So, I think that the only solution is keeping the M system. It is something people own and use because they LOVE it, because it is DIFFERENT and has not much competition in the maket. You don't necessarly use M cameras because they make better photographs, but because they are a kind of camera that you like to handle. You ENJOY it! I am talking about FEELING here.
I think Leica should dig again the concept of the CL and rethink it, just doing it better. A cheaper well-made rangefinder camera that uses ALL M lenses. I would give all the priority to make it with M bayonet! That is what we all love most, or? We already have lots of that beautiful lenses...
I would plan a new CL F for film, and a CL D for a decent size sensor (full?), good high ISO performance, a true optical finder, etc., but a decent acceptable price. I think that it would be reasonable to think about the price level of Zeiss / Ikon.
Probably that could turn me on to a digital Leica. Not the M8 for such high price and dubious performance (here I speak for what I hear and read, I have never tried, but the price is enough to drive me away).
Dreaming a little, I would also apprecciate that talked-about digital back for normal M's. I think that could really produce a Leica revival!
By the way. That digital Leica (as my digital Canon) would NEVER substitute my film M's! Or my large format, or my medium format...
About the coments on TLR's, plates, etc.:
Don't go confusing things. Just because you can print a good image on a inkjet printer, it doesn't make a master printer out of you. Just because you can make a nice photograph with your auto-everything camera and correct it in your computer, doesn't make you a master photographer!
How many of you can claim to be in the level of a Brett Weston, a Paul Caponigro, a Ezra Stoller, a Eugene Smith?
(Wish I could, but I have a LONG, LONG way to learn...)
Greetings.
Rui
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
Do you really think there is a future in producing new models of film Leicas? Heck, digital still cameras are probably going the way of the Dodo bird. Leica isn't going to produce a new film camera, no matter how much we would like it to happen. Just sounds like the wet dreams of old photographers to me, and I'm an old photographer.
DougFord
on the good foot
Crotchety old guy sez - I want a ¾ sized zeiss ikon zm with motor advance. Now get the hell off my lawn! 
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I think HD's case was very different ... they lost their customer base because they were producing bikes that were rubbish mechanically with inferior materials, poor machining and bad quality control. In the early eighties they designed a new engine with different materials and tighter tolerances (the Evolution) changed their production line methods and suddenly had a motorcycle that held together and gave virtually no problems. They haven't looked back since but prior to this were in danger of disappearing off the market totally because even their loyal customers were beginning to lose faith.
I suppose Leica is similar in some ways but it's nothing to do with their quality control ... they're just a bit out of step with what the majority of people actually want.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Bill, I take it you're saying that film will diminish but not disappear totally, correct? There are companies who are working hard to make sure that's the case in the future. Leica can choose to be part of it or not.
I think, they can be a big influence if they decided to be part of it.
In other words, stick to what they know best (producing the world's best film RF) instead to hedging their bets on a young, highly competitive arena vying for fickle public affection; in which, big muscles and propaganda work better than "special qualities."
I think the analogy with Harley-Davidson is quite apt. They are both specialty niche producer, don't try to be just another big commodity seller.
jalLee2001
jallee55
There is one more analogy out there as well-Porsche. I find many similarities with both Porsche and H-D. Both almost went out of business, niche manufactures, and intelligent use of 3rd party technology to survive. In the case of Porsche, they used VW technology much more than people know.
Leica can not go down market; they must do better at the serious photographer. The collectors do nothing for the brand (think SAAB). The people who love Saab did nothing for the brand because they didn’t buy that many new ones and they had to have their “SAABS” designed a certain way. Of course GM’s incompetence did not help.
They have to get the serious or professional photographer back in the fold and produce cameras that they can use.
1) Partner with a major mgf to get a world class DSLR out, with the leica lenses on it.
2) Get the M8 or 9, make sure that it is absolutely world class
3) Produce a cheaper smaller M 7 so people can use it as a back up (once again partnership)
Leica can not go down market; they must do better at the serious photographer. The collectors do nothing for the brand (think SAAB). The people who love Saab did nothing for the brand because they didn’t buy that many new ones and they had to have their “SAABS” designed a certain way. Of course GM’s incompetence did not help.
They have to get the serious or professional photographer back in the fold and produce cameras that they can use.
1) Partner with a major mgf to get a world class DSLR out, with the leica lenses on it.
2) Get the M8 or 9, make sure that it is absolutely world class
3) Produce a cheaper smaller M 7 so people can use it as a back up (once again partnership)
Eric T
Well-known
Leica should remember what made them famous - the production of a small camera of high quality. It introduced a new format that expanded the use of photography worldwide. The trouble is, they did not adapt to changing times. The film RF concept should never have been expected to sustain a profitable company on this concept for this long. Very loyal Leica fans have managed to keep this a niche market.
Leica should have been the inventors of something like the micro four thirds system. A new camera system that was very compact and capable of producing high quality images - both still and video. And naturally, the product must be digital (HD for video).
The mass market for film is forever dead. New products for film don't make sense for anything other than a niche market.
Leica's R10 should be a small non-RF camera that takes fantastic images. Improving on the micro four thirds concept would not be bad. Improvements could be a better sensor, better EVF, faster turn on time, and faster AF. With the micro four thirds concept, old M and R lenses can fit with adapter. Leica could make money on new adapters. I just can't imagine that Leica should attempt to compete with Canon or Nikon on a typical dSLR.
And of course, some smart engineer at Leica has probably figured out something better than micro four thirds. But the concept of a small R camera should be in play.
I like the S2 but I don't see how Leica can survive selling a dSLR for $20k. There are already cheaper alternatives out there for that market such as new products from Mamiya.
Leica should have been the inventors of something like the micro four thirds system. A new camera system that was very compact and capable of producing high quality images - both still and video. And naturally, the product must be digital (HD for video).
The mass market for film is forever dead. New products for film don't make sense for anything other than a niche market.
Leica's R10 should be a small non-RF camera that takes fantastic images. Improving on the micro four thirds concept would not be bad. Improvements could be a better sensor, better EVF, faster turn on time, and faster AF. With the micro four thirds concept, old M and R lenses can fit with adapter. Leica could make money on new adapters. I just can't imagine that Leica should attempt to compete with Canon or Nikon on a typical dSLR.
And of course, some smart engineer at Leica has probably figured out something better than micro four thirds. But the concept of a small R camera should be in play.
I like the S2 but I don't see how Leica can survive selling a dSLR for $20k. There are already cheaper alternatives out there for that market such as new products from Mamiya.
Bill Pierce
Well-known
Yes. My professional work often has to be digital. And, as digital gear has improved and I've learned to use it better, much more of my personal work has become digital.
I'm lucky in that I came into the newsmagazines when they were switching to color - color transparency because it was quick to edit. While I'm a Tri-X fan, I grew up in slide land and learned every trick in the book to keep highlight detail from turning into clear cellophane, a skill that serves you well today when you are shooting digitally, something that is much closer to slide than negative film in many ways.
Still, there are pieces of gear that are unique to the film world. To quote Charleton Heston - they are going to have to rip my 8x10 view from my dying hands. The tiny Contax and Minilux film cameras are ideal for street shooting, quiet and smaller than some small digitals, but still delivering a full frame and beating the quality of the digital pocket cameras at higher ISO's.
Oddly enough, while I consider the film M's unique and useful, I am still undecided about the M8. Even though the rangefinder and brightline finder is the way to go in dim, low contrast with high speed wides and normals and slow shutter speeds, unlike it's film bretheren, the M8 doesn't do well at high ISO's. If the only problem is low light, I tend to use one of the new DSLR's. If quiet and small is necessary, I tend to use one of the pocket digitals that produce excellent results at low ISO's. The problem is finding something small and quiet that does well in available darkness. I had hoped the M8 would be that camera. Right now I'm not sure there is any digital camera that does that.
Harry Lime
Practitioner
I believe the concept of the M still is very good and desirable. There are many reason in favor of this kind of camera. We all know what they are, so I'm not going to waste bandwidth listing them.
If Leica could manage to make a technically improved and reliable M9, at half the cost of an M8x, they would sell them by the truck load.
If Leica could manage to make a technically improved and reliable M9, at half the cost of an M8x, they would sell them by the truck load.
Harry Lime
Practitioner
Bill, have you upgraded the framelines on your M8 to M8.2 spec? I shot with an M8.2
recently and the improvement in framing accuracy is like day and night...
recently and the improvement in framing accuracy is like day and night...
Bill Pierce
Well-known
Not yet, but it certainly is at the top of the upgrade list. The first thing that I want to inquire about is how long the camera will be gone. I think the most accurate answer would be from other folks who have had it done in the States.
What are other folks experiences?
Last edited:
Harry Lime
Practitioner
I think turnaround time for Leica New Jersey is 4-6 weeks.
or at least that is what I am hearing on the internets.
But I would call them to be on the safe side.
Can you get pro service from them? Do they even still offer that?
dseelig
David
leica upgrade
leica upgrade
Well Bill call shirley de silva at leica and let her know who you are and that you are a pro and you should get a 2 week turn around time. David
leica upgrade
Well Bill call shirley de silva at leica and let her know who you are and that you are a pro and you should get a 2 week turn around time. David